- [Instructor] So when people first showed
that matter particles like electrons
can have wavelengths and when DeBroglie showed
that the wavelength is Planck's constant
over the momentum, people were like cool,
it's pretty sweet.
But you know someone was like wait a minute,
if this particle has wavelike properties
and it has a wavelength,
what exactly is waving?
What is this wave we're even talking about?
Conceptually it's a little strange.
I mean a water wave, we know what that is.
It's a bunch of water that's oscillating up and down.
A wave on a string, we know what that is.
This string itself is moving up and down
and it extends through space.
But it's hard to imagine,
how is this electron having a wavelength
and what is the actual wave itself?
So physicists were grappling with this issue,
trying to conceptually understand
how to describe the wave of the electron.
They wanted to do two things.
They wanted a mathematical description
for the shape of that wave,
and that's called the wave function.
So this wave function gives you a mathematical description
for what the shape of the wave is.
So different electron systems are gonna have
different wave functions,
and this is psi,
it's the symbol for the wave function.
So this is psi, the psi symbol.
It's a function of x.
So at different points in x,
it may have a large value, it may have a small value.
This function would give you the mathematical shape
of this wave.
So that was one of the things they were trying to determine.
But they also wanted to interpret it.
Like what does this wave function even mean?
So we've got two problems.
We want a mathematical description of the wave
and we wanna interpret what does this wave even mean.
Now the person that gave us the mathematical description
of this wave function was Erwin Schrodinger.
So Schrodinger is this guy right here.
Schrodinger's right here.
He wrote down Schrodinger's Equation,
and his name now is basically synonymous
with quantum mechanics because this is arguably
the most important equation in all of quantum mechanics.
There's a bunch of partial derivatives in here
and Planck's constants,
but the important thing is that it's got
the wave function in here.
Now if you've never seen partial derivatives
or calculus, it's okay.
All you need to know for our purposes today in this video
is that this equation is a way to crank out
the mathematical wave function.
What is this function that gives us the shape of the wave
as a function of x?
And you could imagine plotting this on some graph.
So once you solve for this psi as a function of x,
you could plot what this looks like.
Maybe it looks something like this,
and who knows, it could do all kinds of stuff.
Maybe it looks like that.
But Schrodinger's Equation is the way
you can get this wave function.
So Schrodinger gave us a way to get
the mathematical wave function,
but we also wanted to interpret it.
What does this even mean?
To say that this wave function represents the electrons
is still strange.
What does that mean?
Schrodinger tried to interpret it this way.
He said, okay maybe this electron really is like smudged out
in space and its charge is kinda distributed
in different places.
Schrodinger wanted to interpret this wave function
as charge density,
and I mean it's kind of a reasonable thing to do.
The way you get a water wave is by having water
spread out through space.
So maybe the way you get an electron wave
is to have the charge of the electron
spread out through space.
But this description didn't work so well,
which is kinda strange.
Schrodinger invented this equation.
He came up with this equation,
but he couldn't even interpret
what he was describing correctly.
It took someone else.
It took a guy named Max Born to give us
the interpretation we go with now for this wave function.
Max Born said no, don't interpret it as the charge density.
What you should do is interpret this psi
is giving you a way to get the probability
of finding the electron at a given point in space.
So Max Born said this,
if you find your psi, like he said go ahead
and use Schrodinger's equation, use it, get psi.
Once you have psi, what you do is you square this function.
So take the absolute value, square it,
and what that's gonna give you is the probability
of finding the electron at a given point.
Now technically it's the probability density,
but for our purposes,
you can pretty much just think about this
as the probability of finding the electron
at a given point.
So if this was our wave function in other words,
Max Born would tell us that points where it's zero,
these points right here where the value is zero,
there is a zero percent chance you're gonna find
the electron there.
Points where there's a large value of psi,
be it positive or negative,
there's gonna be a large probability
of finding the electron at that point.
And we could say the odds of finding the electron
at a given point here are gonna be largest
for this value of x right here
because that's the point for which the wave function
has the greatest magnitude.
But you won't necessarily find the electron there.
If you repeat this experiment over and over,
you may find the electron here once,
you may find it over here, you may find it there next time.
You have to keep taking measurements,
and if you keep taking measurements,
you'll get this distribution where you find
a lot of 'em here, a lot of 'em there,
a lot of 'em here, and a lot of 'em here,
always where there's these peaks you get more of them
than you would have at other points
where the values are smaller.
You build up a distribution that's represented
by this wave function.
So the wave function does not tell you
where the electron's gonna be.
It just gives you the probability,
and technically the square of it
gives you the probability of finding the electron somewhere.
So even at points down here where the wave function
has a negative value,
I mean you can't have a negative probability.
You square that value.
That gives you the probability of finding the electron
in that region.
So in other words,
let's get rid of all this.
Let's say we solved some Schrodinger equation
or we were just handed a wave function
and we were told it looks like this and we were asked,
where are you most likely to find the electron?
Well the value of the wave function is greatest
at this point here,
so you'd be most likely to find the electron
in this region right here.
You'd have no shot of finding it right there.
You'd have pretty good odds of finding it right here
or right here,
but you'd have the greatest chance of finding it
in this region right here.
So you'd have to repeat this measurement many times.
In quantum mechanics,
one measurement doesn't verify that you've got
the right wave function.
Because if I do one experiment
and measure one electron,
boop I might find the electron right there.
That doesn't really tell me anything.
I have to repeat this over and over to make sure
the relative frequency of where I'm finding electrons
matches the wave function I'm using to model
that electron system.
So that's what the wave function is.
That's what it can do for you,
although if I were you,
I'd still be unsatisfied.
I'd be like, wait a minute, okay, that's fine and good.
Wave function can give us the probability
or the probability density of finding the electron
in a given region,
but we haven't answered the question,
what is waving here and what exactly
is this wave function?
Is this a physical object sort of like a water wave
or even an electromagnetic wave?
Or is this just some mathematical trickery
that we're using that has no physical interpretation
other than giving us information about where
the electron's gonna be?
And I've got good news and bad news.
The bad news is that people still don't agree
on how to interpret this wave function.
Yes they know that the square of it gives you
the probability of finding the electron in some region,
but people differ on how they're supposed to interpret it
past that point.
For instance, is this wave function
the wave function of a single electron
or is this wave function really the wave function
of a system, an ensemble of electrons,
all similarly prepared that you're gonna do
the experiment on?
In other words, does it describe one electron
or only describe a system of electrons?
Does it not describe the electron at all
but only our measurement of the electron?
And what happens to this wave function
when you actually measure the electron?
When you measure the electron you find it somewhere,
and at that moment there's no chance
of finding it over here at all.
So does the act of measuring the electron
cause some catastrophic collapse in this wave function
that's not described by Schrodinger's Equation?
These and many more questions are still debated
and not completely understood.
That's the bad news.
The good news is that we don't really need
to understand that to make progress.
Everyone knows how to use the wave function
to get the probabilities of measurements.
You can have your favorite interpretation,
but luckily pretty much regardless of how you interpret
this wave function,
as long as you're using it correctly
to get the probabilities of measurements,
you can continue making progress,
testing different models,
and correlating data to the measurements
that people make in the lab.
Now I'm not saying that interpretations
of this wave function are not important.
People have tried cracking this nut for over 100 years,
and it's resisted.
Maybe that's because it's a waste of time
or maybe it's because the difficulty of figuring this out
is so great that whoever does it will go down
in history as one of the great physicists of all time.
It's hard to tell right now,
but what's undebatable is for about 100 years now,
we've been able to make progress with quantum mechanics
even though we differ on how exactly to interpret
what this wave function really represents.
So recapping the wave function gives you
the probability of finding a particle
in that region of space,
specifically the square of the wave function
gives you the probability density
of finding a particle at that point in space.
This almost everyone has agreed upon.
Whether the wave function has deeper implications
besides this, people differ,
but that hasn't yet stopped us from applying
quantum mechanics correctly in a variety
of different scenarios.