The measurement problem is the more you know about a particle's position, the less you know about it's momentum. Also, the more you know about it's momentum, the less you know about it's position. Due to the limitations of the speed of light the ability to measure a particle's position and momentum creates havoc trying to predict exactly where it's going and where it's destination will be.

Then I suddenly thought of something. It's hard to explain it all in words so I made a chart.

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w25/SquealOfDeath/HCExperiment.jpg

Any thought or ideas? Perhaps a student in physics can help with their knowledge of the mathematics involved to utilize the method of collecting data as described in the chart.

I think I kinda see what you're saying. If you can record how far it traveled within a set time, and where it was going, then you could use that info to predict where it will go next. I don't really see any issues with this, but then again i'm only a freshman in high-school :sadvaultboy:

The main purpose of the 'on-paper' experiment is to find where the particle is going next (you are correct), and if it is somehow figured out it will take us one step closer to something say like a teleportation device.

I'm no physicist, but why is particle physics so darn fascinating? :bonk:

Your a bit glib when you say 'detector'. What are these detectors doing? How are they detecting?

The sideways detector uses gamma ray to bounce off a particle then the gamma ray comes back registering a measurement. The speed of light (delay) will have to be factored into the final math.

The upper detector would work the same way astronomers measure the Doppler effect of stars (redshifts). Once again, delay will have to be factored into the final math.

How would you calculate the doppler shift of a single particle at that distance? To do that you'd need to measure the particle's momentum, which would increase the uncertainty of its position.

Which is exactly why I'm presenting my idea in hopes somebody more knowledgeable than myself can anolyze the proposed method of collecting data.

Well the first problem I see is that, since you'll be using high-energy photons to measure position, they'll have a high momentum (Momentum = Planck constant/wavelength, HE photons = short wavelength, thus high momentum). The photons will thusly knock the electron off its course.

You'll know the position, but getting the actual momentum of the electron gets even more problematic. IIRC, the Doppler effect (blue-/redshift) requires the source to be emitting waves. An electron doesn't do that, nor do any particles. The only exception are charged ones, but they only do that while accelerated (and when it's not interpreted as a standing wave). Even then, the EM radiation is emitted in any direction except in the direction of the movement of the particle, all due to Maxwell's laws of electromagnetism.

The EM waves themselves consists of photons, which gain an uncertain amount of momentum when emitted from the particle, thusly decreasing the momentum of the particle an uncertain amount.

In short, you'll only be getting the position. You still haven't circumvented Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.

I'm just a physics student, though. Not a professor, nor a major (yet).

How do you time the position particle detector to use its gamma ray method without knowing the velocity of the particle first?

Also, as stated in the post above me, you can know only the position.

Thanks for clarifying. I guess it's back to the drawing boards.

All particles can be represented as waves by the de Broglie equivalence, but it doesn't solve the problems mentioned before.