Skip to main content

Quantum core · institution-dependent · Interactive lesson

Fourier conjugacy and the bandwidth theorem

Every student meets Δx Δp ≥ ħ/2 as the strangest inequality in physics. It is really a theorem of Fourier analysis, one every signal engineer lives with, wearing a new unit. Prove it once in k, then learn to point at the one line that is quantum and the several that are not.

UPV-08.06 · Lesson 6 of 9 in this unit. Position is not a completion score.
Starting model: Fourier conjugacy and the bandwidth theoremTwo panels, one ket. Left: |⟨x|ψ⟩|² across a ±2 nm window; right: |⟨k|ψ⟩|² across ±2 nm⁻¹, both scaled to the same peak height so only widths are compared, each chord marking ±1σ. The state is a chirped Gaussian exp(−x²/4σ²)⋅exp(icx²/2): σx = 0.60 nm, σk = 0.833 nm⁻¹, and their product is 0.500 against a floor of 0.500.ψ(x) ∝ exp(−x²/4σ²)⋅exp(icx²/2)σ = 0.60 nm c = 0.0 nm⁻²chord = ±1σ, drawn at the 0.607 height; peaks scaled alike|⟨x|ψ⟩|² window ±2 nm|⟨k|ψ⟩|² window ±2 nm⁻¹σx = 0.60 nmσk = 0.833 nm⁻¹σx σk = 0.500 floor 0.500
Start with a picture. Change the model in the lab below.

Quantum core · institution-dependent. Your university determines the required depth of these quantum topics, including the use of operators, differential equations and computation. Institution-dependent does not automatically mean optional.

1

Build the model

The inequality is a theorem about Fourier pairs. ħ is only the exchange rate.

The key idea

Fourier conjugacy is the statement that ⟨x|ψ⟩ and ⟨k|ψ⟩ are a Fourier-transform pair, so their widths obey the bandwidth theorem σx σk ≥ 1/2 for every normalisable state, with no reference to Planck's constant.

Example. A Gaussian packet with σx = 0.50 nm saturates it: σk = 1/(2 × 0.50 nm) = 1.0 nm⁻¹. Only the last step is physics — σp = ħσk = 1.05 × 10⁻²⁵ kg m s⁻¹.

The complete physical model and assumptions

The momentum amplitude φ(p) = ⟨p|ψ⟩ is not a second wavefunction; it is the same ket resolved in the eigenbasis of p̂, and since ⟨x|p⟩ = e(ipx/ħ)/√(2πħ), that change of basis is exactly a Fourier transform. This drains the mystery out of the uncertainty relation. For any square-integrable f and its transform F, Cauchy–Schwarz applied to the mean-shifted x and −i d/dx returns σx σk ≥ 1/2 — a statement containing no physical constant, which binds anyone designing a radio filter or deconvolving a seismic trace exactly as it binds an electron. Quantum mechanics enters in exactly two places, neither of them the inequality: the Born rule, which promotes |ψ(x)|² from an intensity profile to the probability density for where one particle is found, and de Broglie's p = ħk, which converts the k-bound into σx σp ≥ ħ/2. The cost of the argument is that σ is a fragile ruler. It weights tails by x², so a state as ordinary as a hard-edged slit has σk = ∞ and the bound tells you nothing at all; for those states the entropic relation h(x) + h(k) ≥ ln(πe) stays finite, still bites, and implies the variance form rather than the other way round.

1⟨p|ψ⟩ is the same ket, read in another basis

Momentum eigenstates are not normalisable, but they are complete: ∫|p⟩⟨p| dp = 1̂, with ⟨x|p⟩ = e(ipx/ħ)/√(2πħ) fixed by p̂ = −iħ ∂ₓ acting on it together with the δ normalisation ⟨p|p′⟩ = δ(p − p′). Insert that identity into ψ(x) = ⟨x|ψ⟩ and you get ψ(x) = ∫⟨x|p⟩⟨p|ψ⟩ dp, so φ(p) = ⟨p|ψ⟩ is the Fourier coefficient of ψ and nothing more. Two consequences you should never re-derive by hand. The transform is unitary, so Plancherel gives ∫|φ|² dp = ∫|ψ|² dx = 1 automatically — you never renormalise after transforming. And the operators swap roles: p̂ multiplies in the p basis while x̂ = +iħ ∂ₚ, the sign flip coming straight from e(−ipx/ħ) in one direction against e(+ipx/ħ) in the other. Work in k = p/ħ with ⟨x|k⟩ = e(ikx)/√(2π) and the constant disappears from the kernel entirely, which is the right basis for everything that follows.

2The bandwidth theorem, proved without a physical constant

Take any f ∈ L²(ℝ) normalised to 1, with its mean position and mean wavenumber shifted to zero. Set A = x (multiplication) and B = −i d/dx, both Hermitian on the domain where f and xf are square-integrable and f decays at infinity; the product rule gives [A, B] = i, with no ħ because none was put in. Robertson's route is then three lines: σA²σB² = ⟨Af|Af⟩⟨Bf|Bf⟩ ≥ |⟨Af|Bf⟩|² by Cauchy–Schwarz, and ⟨Af|Bf⟩ = ⟨AB⟩ splits into a real anticommutator half and an imaginary half ½⟨[A, B]⟩ = i/2, so |⟨AB⟩| ≥ 1/2 and σx σk ≥ 1/2. Notice what the derivation quietly assumed: the integration by parts that makes B Hermitian discards a boundary term, and the commutator step needs x|f(x)|² → 0 at ±∞. Remove that and the argument dies — which is why the same manipulation gives nonsense for an angle on a circle, where an Lz eigenstate has ΔLz = 0 while Δφ = 2π/√12.

3Where the physics actually enters

The theorem above constrains a classical field just as hard. A radar chirp, a seismic wavelet, the free-induction decay in an NMR probe: every one obeys Δt Δω ≥ 1/2, and there it is read as a property of the transform, not a law of nature. Two separate postulates turn it into quantum mechanics. First the Born rule: |ψ(x)|² is not an intensity spread across a beam, it is the probability density for where a single particle is found, so σx is the spread of an outcome distribution over identically prepared copies, not the size of anything. Second de Broglie, p = ħk — the only place a constant enters. Multiply through and σx σp ≥ ħ/2 = 5.27 × 10⁻³⁵ J s. Now the consequences are physical rather than mathematical: confine an electron to σx = 0.10 nm and σp ≥ (1.0546 × 10⁻³⁴)/(2 × 1.0 × 10⁻¹⁰) = 5.27 × 10⁻²⁵ kg m s⁻¹, so with ⟨p⟩ = 0 the mean kinetic energy is at least σp²/2mₑ = 1.53 × 10⁻¹⁹ J = 0.95 eV. A classical wave squeezed into 0.1 nm has a broad spectrum too; only the Born rule makes that a claim about an electron's energy.

4Scaling cannot beat the bound — only reshaping can

Ask what the product does under a dilation. Put ψₐ(x) = √a ψ(ax), still normalised. Then σx → σx/a, and since the transform of ψ(ax) is (1/a)φ(k/a), the momentum amplitude becomes (1/√a)φ(k/a) and σk → aσk. The product σx σk is invariant under every dilation. That is a one-line proof that squeezing a packet never changes how close it sits to the floor; only its shape does. So the equality case must be a shape condition: the previous topic shows that Cauchy–Schwarz equality with zero covariance forces (x − ⟨x⟩)f = λ(d/dx − i⟨k⟩)f with λ real and negative, whose only normalisable solutions are Gaussians times a linear phase. That the Gaussian is its own Fourier transform is not the reason: every Hermite function shares that property, yet the nth has σx σk = n + 1/2. Check it numerically: build ψ on a grid, take np.fft.fft, compute both variances from |ψ|² and |φ|², and the product returns 0.5000 for a Gaussian and never less for anything else.

5The same theorem under laboratory names: pulses and chirp

When the conjugate pair is (t, ω) the result is called the time–bandwidth product. Converting both standard deviations to FWHM with the factor 2√(2 ln 2) = 2.355, and using ω = 2πν, turns σt σω ≥ 1/2 into Δt Δν ≥ (2.355)² × (1/2)/(2π) = 2 ln 2/π = 0.441 for a Gaussian. Run it backwards to size a laser: a 10 fs Gaussian pulse needs Δν ≥ 0.441/(10 fs) = 44.1 THz, which at 800 nm is Δλ = λ²Δν/c = (6.40 × 10⁻¹³)(4.41 × 10¹³)/(2.998 × 10⁸) = 94 nm of spectrum, one reason few-cycle oscillators are built on a gain medium as broad as Ti:sapphire. A measured pulse longer than its transform limit carries the same spectrum with a non-flat spectral phase: it is chirped, and chirped mirrors or a prism pair can strip the quadratic part while |φ(ω)|² is untouched. That is the working content of the theorem — the two amplitude widths cannot both be small, and anything above the floor is phase you may be able to remove.

6When σ is the wrong ruler, and what replaces it

σ² = ∫x²ρ dx weights the tails by x², so it is not robust. Prepare a hard slit: ψ(x) = w(−1/2) on |x| ≤ w/2, zero outside. Then σx = w/√12 is finite, but φ(k) = √(w/2π)⋅sin(kw/2)/(kw/2), so |φ(k)|² falls only as k⁻², ∫k²|φ|² dk = (2/πw)∫sin²(kw/2) dk diverges linearly, and σk = ∞. The inequality is satisfied vacuously. The divergence is physical: ⟨p²⟩ = ∞ means infinite kinetic energy, the price of a ψ whose derivative is a pair of deltas at the edges. NumPy cannot escape it — np.fft cuts k off at the Nyquist value π/dx, so the truncated ⟨k²⟩ grows as 1/(w dx) and σk as dx(−1/2). What survives is the entropic bound h(x) + h(k) ≥ ln(πe) = 2.145, with h = −∫ρ ln ρ. For the slit h(x) = ln w, so the entropy width e(h(k)) ≥ πe/w — for w = 2.0 μm, at least 4.27 μm⁻¹, a finite number where the variance form gave none.

2

Key equations

Read the units, assumptions and limits before substituting.

Momentum amplitude as a change of basis

φ(p) = ⟨p|ψ⟩ = (2πħ)(−1/2) ∫ e(−ipx/ħ) ψ(x) dx

One ket in two bases. In the p basis p̂ multiplies and x̂ = +iħ ∂ₚ.

ψ in m(−1/2), φ in (kg m s⁻¹)(−1/2); kernel ⟨x|p⟩ = e(ipx/ħ)/√(2πħ)

Plancherel: the transform is unitary

∫|ψ(x)|² dx = ∫|φ(p)|² dp = ⟨ψ|ψ⟩ = 1

This is why |φ(p)|² is a probability density at all — you never renormalise twice.

Holds for every ψ ∈ L²; the two integrals carry different measures.

Bandwidth theorem — no ħ anywhere in it

σx σk ≥ 1/2, with equality iff ψ is an unchirped Gaussian times e(ik₀x)

The same Cauchy–Schwarz proof serves radar, NMR and seismics. It is not quantum.

σx in m, σk in rad m⁻¹; needs x|ψ|² → 0 at ±∞ for the boundary term

de Broglie converts the bound

p = ħk ⟹ σp = ħ σk ⟹ σx σp ≥ ħ/2

The only physical input is a unit conversion. Set ħ = 1 and the theorem is untouched.

ħ = 1.0546 × 10⁻³⁴ J s, so the floor is ħ/2 = 5.27 × 10⁻³⁵ J s

Time–bandwidth product of a pulse

Δt Δν ≥ 2 ln 2 / π = 0.441 (Gaussian, FWHM)

Any excess over the floor is spectral phase — chirp, which a compressor can remove.

FWHM = 2√(2 ln 2) σ = 2.355 σ on both axes; a sech² pulse gives 0.315

Entropic bound, for when σ diverges

h(x) + h(k) ≥ ln(πe) = 2.1447 nats

Stays finite for the slit and typical heavy-tailed states where σ diverges, and it implies σx σk ≥ 1/2 by the Gaussian maximum.

h = −∫ρ ln ρ; the sum is scale-invariant since x and k rescale inversely
3

Interactive lab

Predict first. Explore the model. Compare the result.

Explore the model

0.60 nm
0.3 to 1.2 nm; steps of 0.05.
0.0 nm⁻²
0 to 1.6 nm⁻²; steps of 0.1.

Try this. Sweep σ with c = 0: one panel narrows exactly as fast as the other widens and the product stays pinned at 0.500 — Fourier scaling, no ħ in sight. Then raise c and only the right panel spreads, because the extra width lives in the phase, which |ψ(x)|² cannot see.

Live results

POSITION WIDTH σx
0.60 nm
WAVENUMBER WIDTH σk
0.833 nm⁻¹
PRODUCT σx σk
0.500
MOMENTUM WIDTH ħσk
0.879 ×10⁻²⁵ kg m s⁻¹

Results follow this lesson’s model and assumptions. Displayed values are rounded.

Interactive Physics V modelTwo panels, one ket. Left: |⟨x|ψ⟩|² across a ±2 nm window; right: |⟨k|ψ⟩|² across ±2 nm⁻¹, both scaled to the same peak height so only widths are compared, each chord marking ±1σ. The state is a chirped Gaussian exp(−x²/4σ²)⋅exp(icx²/2): σx = 0.60 nm, σk = 0.833 nm⁻¹, and their product is 0.500 against a floor of 0.500.ψ(x) ∝ exp(−x²/4σ²)⋅exp(icx²/2)σ = 0.60 nm c = 0.0 nm⁻²chord = ±1σ, drawn at the 0.607 height; peaks scaled alike|⟨x|ψ⟩|² window ±2 nm|⟨k|ψ⟩|² window ±2 nm⁻¹σx = 0.60 nmσk = 0.833 nm⁻¹σx σk = 0.500 floor 0.500
Two panels, one ket. Left: |⟨x|ψ⟩|² across a ±2 nm window; right: |⟨k|ψ⟩|² across ±2 nm⁻¹, both scaled to the same peak height so only widths are compared, each chord marking ±1σ. The state is a chirped Gaussian exp(−x²/4σ²)⋅exp(icx²/2): σx = 0.60 nm, σk = 0.833 nm⁻¹, and their product is 0.500 against a floor of 0.500.

Predict → change one variable → check

Plan a change before running it. Every other input stays at the saved baseline.

Saved baseline. Gaussian width σ: 0.60 nm; Chirp rate c: 0.0 nm⁻²

Baseline 0.60; choose 0.3 to 1.2, in steps of 0.05.
4. Compared with the saved baseline, this result will…

This experiment is kept only while this page is open. It does not change saved course progress.

4

Catch the common trap

The error is believing ħ is what makes the inequality true — that Δx Δp ≥ ħ/2 encodes a granularity of nature, and that a smaller ħ would let a wave be narrow in both x and k at once. Set ħ = 1 and the theorem is unchanged; it was never about ħ. The content is σx σk ≥ 1/2, a fact about any function and its Fourier transform, and it constrains a radar pulse and a seismic wavelet as tightly as an electron. What ħ supplies is the exchange rate between k and p, so it fixes the scale on which the constraint bites: ħ/2 = 5.27 × 10⁻³⁵ J s is tiny, which is why the bound is invisible for a thrown ball and decisive for an electron in an atom. Do not over-correct either — 'so it is just classical waves' is equally wrong. The quantum content is the Born rule reading |ψ|² as one particle's outcome statistics, and x̂ and p̂ being non-commuting observables of one system rather than two descriptions of one field.

5

Practice & worked examples

3 authored examples. Make an attempt, then reveal the reasoning one step at a time.

EasyExample 1

A free electron is prepared in a minimum-uncertainty Gaussian with σx = 0.50 nm and ⟨p⟩ = 0. Find σk, σp and the mean kinetic energy, and name the single step at which ħ enters.

Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.

0 of 4 steps revealed.

MediumExample 2

A Ti:sapphire oscillator at 800 nm emits Gaussian pulses whose spectrum is 60 nm wide (FWHM), and the autocorrelator reports a 22 fs pulse. Find the shortest duration this spectrum can support, the time–bandwidth product actually achieved, and state what a compressor can and cannot fix.

Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.

0 of 5 steps revealed.

HardExample 3

A slit of full width w = 2.0 μm prepares ψ(x) = w(−1/2) on |x| ≤ w/2. Find σx, decide what σk is, predict what an np.fft estimate of σk does as the grid step dx shrinks, and extract a finite width statement from the entropic relation.

Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.

0 of 5 steps revealed.

6

Quick check

Select an answer and explain it before checking.

A slit of full width 2a = 20 μm prepares ψ(x) = (2a)(−1/2) for |x| ≤ a and zero outside. What are σx and σk for this state, and what does σx σk ≥ 1/2 then tell you about it?
7

Review & continue

Fourier conjugacy is the statement that ⟨x|ψ⟩ and ⟨k|ψ⟩ are a Fourier-transform pair, so their widths obey the bandwidth theorem σx σk ≥ 1/2 for every normalisable state, with no reference to Planck's constant.

  • Explain the relationship without looking at the equation.
  • Check a sign, a unit and a model assumption in your working.
  • Return to the lab or worked example if a step is still unclear.

Extra challenging questions

Connect several ideas, explore supplied data, and compare your reasoning with a worked solution.