Talk:Introduction to quantum mechanics: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger
imported>Chris Day
(Redirecting to Talk:Quantum mechanics)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
#redirect [[Talk:Quantum mechanics]]
 
== Proposal ==
 
I propose that people that are knowledgeable about quantum mechanics list here topics that should be included in an article on quantum mechanics for the layperson. (Maybe that would be a better title of this article?).  I hope that skilled (possibly, or even preferably, non-science) writers pick this up and make a readable, consistent, article out of it. If they slip or misunderstand something don't  worry, that has happened to every learner of QM. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 12:19, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
:Recall we have a Student Level subpage that has not been utilized much yet. Such an article would live at [[Quantum mechanics/Student Level]].  One problem is I'm not sure we have really defined the role of this subpage, although I would think aiming it at the layperson should be the target.  [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 12:31, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
::I was not thinking of students, but of journalists and of other interested adults that want to widen their horizon, but it could be useful to (non-physics) students as well. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 12:38, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
:::Maybe we need to rename that subpage.  It might be used more if it was more of an outreach article rather than aimed at students.  After all what does student mean, it could refer to many different levels of expertise. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 12:43, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
::::Yes, I agree, "student" reminds one of college and exams.  I was thinking of general education (more along the the ideals of Enlightenment). --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 12:51, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
:::::Maybe it should be called something like, "Introductory" or "Prequisite".  "Fundamentals"? Just tossing out ideas here. --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 12:54, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
:::::: "Introductory" is OK, "prequisite" smacks too much of school. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 13:02, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
I'm going to disagree with you all and claim that since we are an encyclopaedia aimed at a ''general'' readership, [[Quantum mechanics]] ''itself'' should be the introductory article, and more specialist material should be elsewhere. [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 12:58, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
:I disagree strongly, there is space for all of us under the sun, graduate level articles can be very useful, not only for grad students but also for undergrads, if only to show them that there is more to know. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 13:02, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
:: I '''didn't''' say we ''shouldn't'' have a grad-level article ("more specialist material should be elsewhere"). [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 13:07, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
:Perhaps we're doing it backwards?  Maybe we need a [[Quantum mechanics]] and an [[Advanced Quantum mechanics]]? --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 12:59, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
 
Well, please consider that there are no other "introduction to" type articles in CZ, as far as I know, at least as main namespace articles.  Also consider that CZ articles are supposed to be ''as accessible as a competent article on a topic can be made'' to our audience, i.e., university undergraduates.  Therefore, our basic rules dictate that the article that lives at [[quantum mechanics]] should be an introductory-type article, if such an article is possible (I have no opinion on that).
 
Variant versions of articles, and other reference material, are supposed to be grouped together in clusters; that is the whole purpose of the [[CZ:Subpages|Subpages]] system.  Now, it's true that we have a tutorial type article planned for subpages; but an introductory article would not, I assume, be a "tutorial," it would be an introductory article.  Moreover, it is unacceptable to me as Editor-in-Chief that we make an advanced article as the main article on this ''one'' topic, ''if'' a simpler, more undergrad-accessible article is possible.
 
Given all this, the solution seems simple to me: we invent a new subpage type: "Advanced" pages.  These give an ''advanced'' or graduate-level (or postgrad-level) treatment of particularly complex topics.  Then, if I understand correctly, the current [[quantum mechanics]] article would live at [[Quantum mechanics/Advanced]], and the planned (but misnamed) "Introduction to quantum mechanics" article would live at [[quantum mechanics]].  Then, if anyone wants to introduce QM with problems, "tutorial"-style, that could live at [[Quantum mechanics/Tutorial]].  The latter is not necessary, of course. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 13:14, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
==Content==
Here we go again, talk, talk, talk. You guys, give rather your opinion about '''CONTENT''' --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 13:05, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
==Historical approach?==
An approach could be historical (I write this from memory, I'm without books):
 
#Around 1890 physics is "finished", minor detail: UV catastrophe.
#1900 Planck solves UV catastrophe by quantizing the energy of harmonic oscillator (Insert here: explanation harmonic oscillator and its use in physical models).
#1905 Einstein proposes that light consists of virtual quantized oscillators to explain photoelectric effect
#Around 1910 quantization lattice vibrations (Einstein Debye crystal)
#1913 Bohr atom
#1915 Old Bohr-Sommerfeld quantum theory
#1924 de Broglie: (very very light) particle shows wave properties (insert about waves)
#1925 Heisenberg, Born, Jordan: matrix mechanics (insert about matrices)
#1926 Schroedinger wave equations (time-independent, time-dependent), relation with matrix mechanics
#1926 Spin
#1927 Pauli exclusion principle, Heisenberg uncertainty relation. Non-relativistic QM essentially finished at this point in time.
 
--[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 12:38, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
: Sounds like a topic for another article to me: [[history of theory of quantum mechanics]] or something like that. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 13:03, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
: Could be used in a timeline! --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 13:04, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
: If we had a lot of room and/or reader's time, I might agree with you. I love to read about science in a chronological fashion, because the growth in the minds of scientists, in understanding of the field, over time, is matched nicely (and produces) an equally growing understanding in my own mind.
: However, we don't have that luxury - although I think such a time-oriented piece would be wonderful, perhaps at [[Development of quantum mechanics]], or some such location.
: I will go off and try to create the text of the intro paragraphs, and you can see if my goal of 'quantum mechanics for the masses in 3 minutes' is reachable. (I'm something of a believer in Vonnegut's aphorism in ''Cat's Cradle'' - although I think he's a bit too hard, because some people have a hard time explaining in words things they understand in non-verbal ways.) [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 13:06, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
::I accept that, how about starting with an explanation of wave and particle behavior in classical physics and the shock it gave when it appeared that electromagnetic '''waves'''  and very light '''particles''' (electrons) share many properties?  --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 13:11, 1 April 2008 (CDT)
 
Sounds like a topic for another article to me: [[history of theory of quantum mechanics]] or something like that.  A timeline would work too, if all the info you wanted to include was timeline-type info. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 13:03, 1 April 2008 (CDT)

Latest revision as of 12:43, 1 April 2008

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics&oldid=440822"