Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Physics

ISSN 2095-0462

ISSN 2095-0470(Online)

CN 11-5994/O4

邮发代号 80-965

2019 Impact Factor: 2.502

Frontiers of Physics  2012, Vol. 7 Issue (2): 218-222   https://doi.org/10.1007/s11467-012-0246-z
  PERSPECTIVE 本期目录
Heisenberg, uncertainty, and the scanning tunneling microscope
Heisenberg, uncertainty, and the scanning tunneling microscope
Werner A. Hofer()
Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, L69 3BX Liverpool, UK
 全文: PDF(273 KB)   HTML
Abstract

We show by a statistical analysis of high-resolution scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) experiments, that the interpretation of the density of electron charge as a statistical quantity leads to a conflict with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Given the precision in these experiments we find that the uncertainty principle would be violated by close to two orders of magnitude, if this interpretation were correct. We are thus forced to conclude that the density of electron charge is a physically real, i.e., in principle precisely measurable quantity.

Key wordsscanning tunneling microscope    electron charge    density functional theory    uncertainty relations
收稿日期: 2012-01-09      出版日期: 2012-04-01
Corresponding Author(s): Hofer Werner A.,Email:whofer@liverpool.ac.uk   
 引用本文:   
. Heisenberg, uncertainty, and the scanning tunneling microscope[J]. Frontiers of Physics, 2012, 7(2): 218-222.
Werner A. Hofer. Heisenberg, uncertainty, and the scanning tunneling microscope. Front. Phys. , 2012, 7(2): 218-222.
 链接本文:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fop/CN/10.1007/s11467-012-0246-z
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fop/CN/Y2012/V7/I2/218
1 G. Binnig, H. Rohrer, Ch. Gerber, and E. Weibel, Phys. Rev. Lett. , 1982, 49(1): 57
doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.57
2 G. Binnig and H. Rohrer, Rev. Mod. Phys. , 1987, 59(3): 615
doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.59.615
3 E. J. Heller, M. F. Crommie, C. P. Lutz, and D. M. Eigler, Nature , 1994, 394(6480): 464
doi: 10.1038/369464a0
4 H. Gawronski, M. Mehlhorn, and K. Morgenstern, Science , 2008, 319(5865): 930
doi: 10.1126/science.1152473
5 N. Néel, J. Kr?ger, L. Limot, K. Palotas, W. A. Hofer, and R. Berndt, Phys. Rev. Lett. , 2007, 98(1): 016801
doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.016801
6 K. R. Harikumar, T. Lim, I. R. McNab, J. C. Polanyi, L. Zotti, S. Ayissi, and W. A. Hofer, Nat. Nanotechnol. , 2008, 3(4): 222
doi: 10.1038/nnano.2008.65
7 W. A. Hofer, A. S. Foster, and A. L. Shluger, Rev. Mod. Phys. , 2003, 75(4): 1287
doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.75.1287
8 Z. T. Deng, H. Lin, W. Ji, L. Gao, X. Lin, Z. H. Cheng, X. B. He, J. L. Lu, D. X. Shi, W. A. Hofer, and H. J. Gao, Phys. Rev. Lett. , 2006, 96(15): 156102
doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.156102
9 J. Tersoff and D. R. Hamann, Phys. Rev. B , 1985, 31(2): 805
doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.31.805
10 . K. H. Rieder, G. Meyer, S.W. Hla, F. Moresco, K. F. Braun, K. Morgenstern, J. Repp, S. Foelsch, and L. Bartels, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A , 2004, 362(1819): 1207
11 P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Phys. Rev. , 1964, 136(3B): B864
doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.136.B864
12 W. Kohn and L. J. Sham, Phys. Rev. , 1965, 140(4A): A1133
doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.140.A1133
13 M. Born, Zeitschr. F. Phys. , 1926, 37(12): 863
doi: 10.1007/BF01397477
14 M. Born, Zeitschr. F. Phys. , 1926, 38: 803
doi: 10.1007/BF01397184
15 W. Heisenberg, Zeitschr. F. Phys. , 1927, 43: 172
doi: 10.1007/BF01397280
16 W. A. Hofer, Found. Phys. , 2011, 41(4): 754
doi: 10.1007/s10701-010-9517-0
17 E. Schr?dinger, Phys. Rev. , 1926, 28(6): 1049
doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.28.1049
18 W. Heisenberg, Zeitschr. F. Phys. , 1925, 33: 879
doi: 10.1007/BF01328377
19 J. L. Park and H. Margenau, Int. J. Theor. Phys. , 1968, 3(3): 211 See in particular page 213, “Many gedankenexperiments have been designed to illustrate Heisenberg’s famous law; unfortunately, the false impression is often conveyed that his principle, which is actually a theorem about standard deviations in collectives of measurement results, imposes restrictions on measur-ability.” italics in the original text.
20 A. J. Heinrich, J. A. Gupta, C. P. Lutz, and D. M. Eigler, Science , 2004, 306(5695): 466
doi: 10.1126/science.1101077
21 D. Bohm, Phys. Rev. , 1952, 85(2): 166
doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.85.166
22 D. Bohm, Phys. Rev. , 1952, 85(2): 180
doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.85.180
23 L. De Broglie, Non-linear Wave Mechanics: A Causal Interpretation, Amsterdam: Elsevier , 1960
24 D. Hestenes, Found. Phys. , 2010, 40(1): 1
doi: 10.1007/s10701-009-9360-3
25 J. C. Lian, Z. H. Cheng, Y. H. Jiang, Y. Y. Zhang, L. W. Liu, W. Ji, W. D. Xiao, S. X. Du, W. A. Hofer, and H. J. Gao, Phys. Rev. B , 2010, 81(19): 195411
doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.81.195411
26 A. Khrennikov, Europhys. Lett. , 2009, 90(4): 40004
doi: 10.1209/0295-5075/90/40004
27 G. Gr?essing, S. Fussy, J. Mesa Pascasio, and H. Schwabl, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. , 2011, 306: 012040
doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/306/1/012040
28 H. T. Elze, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. , 2009, 171: 012034
doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/171/1/012034
29 G. t’Hooft, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. , 2007, 67: U166
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed