# wavicle: an old topic

#### neila9876

Below is a story in a report many years ago:
A professor asked a student: why a (moving) glass seems to have no wavicle character?
The student answered: because the Duck de Brogile wavelength is too short, people is not easy to perceive it. (λ = h / p, for a glass, p is big enough to render λ very small)
The professor kept silent.
Why? Maybe he was thinking: why we can't see the train jumping on the trails before it stops? (p trends 0, λ trends to ∞ )

#### Woody

What is the amplitude of the wavicle?

#### neila9876

Who knows? It's not mechanic wave...

#### neila9876

Education in fundametal = forging ability in mathematical calculation, no thinking.
It's seems that the student deal with it as mechanic wave. The logic is wrong first.

Last edited:

#### Woody

Who knows? It's not mechanic wave...
Agreed, its a probability function.

I am guessing that the positional probability function for a train will drop to truly miniscule levels, beyond practically measurable distances of its Newtonian position.

When does truly miniscule probability become impossibility?

Last edited:

#### neila9876

Modern physics

Woody:
Excuse me... In fact, I also don’t know what’s the professor thinking at that time. Haha…
The test question is the glass. If I’m that student, below is my answer.
ATHENTIC QM: the glass is a neutral big free particle, so︱A︱² is a constant. It has nothing to do with λ, even xyz or t. It means that the probability of presentation of the glass at any space point is the same. That’s to say I can see the glass everywhere. Sir, a Woody glass of beer please? And then you will see it too…

#### neila9876

man vs ghost

The most funny event might be that some physicist are still trying to seek the border between classical physics and QM.

#### neila9876

a game of coins

The semi - tramp still got some coins. He spreads them on a paper. The coins stuff the paper,,,can't move.
He piles the coins up one by one to be a pillar. From the angle of the paper (2D space) it's one coin. From the angle perpendicular to the paper (3D space), the coins are "everywhere". But from the angle of the paper, people can't see them.
And station is just a special situation.
...

#### neila9876

work vs energy

The classical concepts about work, kinematic energy, gravitional potential energy, and electric potential energy are all descriptions in 3D space, or say are all description about particle character. They are things people can measure.
But the " tunnel effect" in QM has implied that the classical desciption about "energy", perhaps especially the electric potential energy, is inadequate (insufficient).
That might lead people to consider that there is erro in classic, or consider QM is irrelevant, and more seriously "wrong"...
We are what we measure, but nature is not us.

Last edited:

#### neila9876

black cat vs white cat

Black cat white cat, which cat is able to catch mouse is the good cat.
Physical or mathematical methods could be different, the method which is able to solve more physical/astronomical problems is the good cat.
1D, 2D, 3D, people often talk about is spacial length dimension while superpositioning in QM implys a "state" dimension.
People could simplified the 3D length dimension to 1D, then 1D length dimsion + 1D state dimension = 2D, It's not so big a deal...but it's physical bottom line.
The big deal in physics is when 3D era is pretty over, what will physics go? It's 4D...not 5D, logically...If physics keep going ramdomly, too fast, it will flip...
"A coin has two aspects" should mean "the certain aspect/particle character" vs "the uncertain aspect/ wave character".
Classical physics (and even traditonal Relativity) describe the former, QM the latter...