アインシュタインとボーアの思考実験を分子レベルで実現！
2014年11月28日 13:30 | プレスリリース , 受賞・成果等 , 研究成果
東北大学多元物質科学研究所の上田潔教授、フランスのソレイユシンクロトロン放射光施設のCatalin Miron研究員のグループ、スウェーデン王立工科大学のFaris Gel'mukhanov教授らの合同チームは、アインシュタインとボーアの論争で思考実験として提案された2重スリット実験を、酸素分子の2個の酸素原子を2重スリットに置き換えることによって、初めて、実現しました。
アインシュタインとボーアは、 20世紀前半、光や電子があわせ持つ波としての性質と粒子としての性質の2重性の解釈について、論争を繰り広げました。彼らが論争の際に用いた手法は思考実験です。実際には実験を行うことなく、理論的思考によって実験結果を演繹するものでした。彼らの思考実験は、当時、実現できないものばかりでしたが、のちの研究者の想像力を大いに掻き立てました。現在も様々な実験的検証が行われています。合同チームは、アインシュタインとボーアの論争でも主要な位置を占める2重スリット実験を分子レベルで実現しました。そして、ボーアの反論を裏付けるように、一方のスリット（原子）だけが受ける電子の反跳運動量を観測した場合には干渉縞が消え、これが観測できない場合には干渉縞が現れることを、初めて、実証することに成功しました。
この結果は、英国の科学雑誌『Nature Photonics』オンライン版（12月1日付け：日本時間12月2日）に掲載されます。
図1
(a)と(c)、アインシュタインとボーアの2重スリット思考実験の模式図；２個のスリットが固定された場合(a)とそれぞれ独立して動くことができる場合(c)。(b)と(d)、2重スリットを2個の酸素原子に置き換えた本実験の模式図；2個の原子が結合している場合(b)と独立している場合（d）。
詳細（プレスリリース本文）PDF
問い合わせ先
東北大学多元物質科学研究所
教授 上田 潔
秘書 生井 淳子
電話番号：022-217-5381 / 5380
FAX: 022-217-5380
E-mail: ueda*tagen.tohoku.ac.jp / namai*tagen.tohoku.ac.jp
ゼロ除算100/0=0, 0/0=0の意義:
１）西暦６２８年インドでゼロが記録されて以来 ゼロで割るの問題 に 決定的な解をもたらしたこと。
２）ゼロ除算の導入で、四則演算 加減乗除において ゼロで割れないの例外から、例外なく四則演算が可能である という 美しい構造が確立された。
３）２千年以上前に ユークリッドによって確立した、平面の概念に対して、おおよそ２００年前に非ユークリッド幾何学が出現し、特に楕円型非ユークリッド幾何学ではユークリッド平面に対して、無限遠点の概念がうまれ、特に立体射影で、原点上に球をおけば、 原点ゼロが 南極に、無限遠点が 北極に対応する点として 複素解析学では １００年以上も定説とされてきた(注参照)。それが、無限遠点は数では、無限ではなくて、実はゼロであったという驚嘆すべき世界観をもたらした。
４）ゼロ除算は ニュートンの万有引力の法則における、２点間の距離がゼロの場合における新しい解釈、 独楽の中心における角速度の不連続性の解釈、衝突などの不連続性を説明する数学になっている。ゼロ除算は アイシュタインの理論でも重要な問題になっていたとされている。
５）複素解析学では、１次変換の美しい性質が、ゼロ除算の導入によって、任意の１次変換は全複素平面を一対一onto に写すと美しい性質に変わるが、 極である１点における不連続性が現れ、ゼロ除算は、無限遠点を 数から排除する数学になっている。
６）ゼロ除算は、不可能であるという立場であったから、ゼロで割る事を 本質的考えてこなかったので、ゼロ除算で、分母がゼロである場合も考えるという、未知の新世界、研究課題が出現した。
７）複素解析学への影響は 未知の分野で、専門家の分野になるが、解析関数の孤立特異点での性質について新しいことが導かれる。典型的な定理は、どんな解析関数の孤立特異点でも、解析関数は 孤立特異点て、有限な確定値を取る である。佐藤の超関数の理論などへの応用がある。
８）特異積分におけるアダマールの有限部分や、コーシーの主値積分は、弾性体やクラック、破壊理論など広い世界で、自然現象を記述するのに用いられている。面白いのは 積分が、もともと有限部分と発散部分に分けられ、 極限は 無限たす、有限量の形になっていて、積分は 実は、普通の積分ではなく、そこに現れる有限量を便宜的に表わしている。ところが、その有限量が実は、 ゼロ除算にいう、 解析関数の孤立特異点での 確定値に成っていること。いわゆる、主値に対する解釈を与えている。これはゼロ除算の結果が、広く、自然現象を記述していることを示している。
９）中学生や高校生にも十分理解できる基本的な結果をもたらした：
基本的な関数 y = 1/x のグラフは、原点で ゼロである
すなわち、 1/0=0 である。
１０）既に述べてきたように 道脇方式は ゼロ除算の結果100/0=0, 0/0=0および分数の定義、割り算の定義に、小学生でも理解できる新しい概念を与えている。多くの教科書、学術書を変更させる大きな影響を与える。
Announcement 179: Division by zero is clear as z/0=0 and it is fundamental in mathematics
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{latexsym,amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,amstext,amsthm}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\begin{document}
\title{\bf Announcement 179: Division by zero is clear as z/0=0 and it is fundamental in mathematics\\
}
\author{{\it Institute of Reproducing Kernels}\\
Kawauchi-cho, 5-1648-16,\\
Kiryu 376-0041, Japan\\
E-mail: kbdmm360@yahoo.co.jp\\
}
\date{\today}
\maketitle
{\bf Abstract: } In this announcement, we shall introduce the zero division $z/0=0$. The result is a definite one and it is fundamental in mathematics.
\bigskip
\section{Introduction}
%\label{sect1}
By a natural extension of the fractions
\begin{equation}
\frac{b}{a}
\end{equation}
for any complex numbers $a$ and $b$, we, recently, found the surprising result, for any complex number $b$
\begin{equation}
\frac{b}{0}=0,
\end{equation}
incidentally in \cite{s} by the Tikhonov regularization for the Hadamard product inversions for matrices, and we discussed their properties and gave several physical interpretations on the general fractions in \cite{kmsy} for the case of real numbers. The result is a very special case for general fractional functions in \cite{cs}.
The division by zero has a long and mysterious story over the world (see, for example, google site with division by zero) with its physical viewpoints since the document of zero in India on AD 628, however,
Sin-Ei, Takahasi (\cite{taka}) (see also \cite{kmsy}) established a simple and decisive interpretation (1.2) by analyzing some full extensions of fractions and by showing the complete characterization for the property (1.2). His result will show that our mathematics says that the result (1.2) should be accepted as a natural one:
\bigskip
{\bf Proposition. }{\it Let F be a function from ${\bf C }\times {\bf C }$ to ${\bf C }$ such that
$$
F (b, a)F (c, d)= F (bc, ad)
$$
for all
$$
a, b, c, d \in {\bf C }
$$
and
$$
F (b, a) = \frac {b}{a }, \quad a, b \in {\bf C }, a \ne 0.
$$
Then, we obtain, for any $b \in {\bf C } $
$$
F (b, 0) = 0.
$$
}
\medskip
\section{What are the fractions $ b/a$?}
For many mathematicians, the division $b/a$ will be considered as the inverse of product;
that is, the fraction
\begin{equation}
\frac{b}{a}
\end{equation}
is defined as the solution of the equation
\begin{equation}
a\cdot x= b.
\end{equation}
The idea and the equation (2.2) show that the division by zero is impossible, with a strong conclusion. Meanwhile, the problem has been a long and old question:
As a typical example of the division by zero, we shall recall the fundamental law by Newton:
\begin{equation}
F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}
\end{equation}
for two masses $m_1, m_2$ with a distance $r$ and for a constant $G$. Of course,
\begin{equation}
\lim_{r \to +0} F =\infty,
\end{equation}
however, in our fraction
\begin{equation}
F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{0} = 0.
\end{equation}
\medskip
Now, we shall introduce an another approach. The division $b/a$ may be defined {\bf independently of the product}. Indeed, in Japan, the division $b/a$ ; $b$ {\bf raru} $a$ ({\bf jozan}) is defined as how many $a$ exists in $b$, this idea comes from subtraction $a$ repeatedly. (Meanwhile, product comes from addition).
In Japanese language for "division", there exists such a concept independently of product.
H. Michiwaki and his 6 years old girl said for the result $ 100/0=0$ that the result is clear, from the meaning of the fractions independently the concept of product and they said:
$100/0=0$ does not mean that $100= 0 \times 0$. Meanwhile, many mathematicians had a confusion for the result.
Her understanding is reasonable and may be acceptable:
$100/2=50 \quad$ will mean that we divide 100 by 2, then each will have 50.
$100/10=10 \quad$ will mean that we divide 100 by10, then each will have 10.
$100/0=0 \quad$ will mean that we do not divide 100, and then nobody will have at all and so 0.
Furthermore, she said then the rest is 100; that is, mathematically;
$$
100 = 0\cdot 0 + 100.
$$
Now, all the mathematicians may accept the division by zero $100/0=0$ with natural feelings as a trivial one?
\medskip
For simplicity, we shall consider the numbers on non-negative real numbers. We wish to define the division (or fraction) $b/a$ following the usual procedure for its calculation, however, we have to take care for the division by zero:
The first principle, for example, for $100/2 $ we shall consider it as follows:
$$
100-2-2-2-,...,-2.
$$
How may times can we subtract $2$? At this case, it is 50 times and so, the fraction is $50$.
The second case, for example, for $3/2$ we shall consider it as follows:
$$
3 - 2 = 1
$$
and the rest (remainder) is $1$, and for the rest $1$, we multiple $10$,
then we consider similarly as follows:
$$
10-2-2-2-2-2=0.
$$
Therefore $10/2=5$ and so we define as follows:
$$
\frac{3}{2} =1 + 0.5 = 1.5.
$$
By these procedures, for $a \ne 0$ we can define the fraction $b/a$, usually. Here we do not need the concept of product. Except the zero division, all the results for fractions are valid and accepted.
Now, we shall consider the zero division, for example, $100/0$. Since
$$
100 - 0 = 100,
$$
that is, by the subtraction $100 - 0$, 100 does not decrease, so we can not say we subtract any from $100$. Therefore, the subtract number should be understood as zero; that is,
$$
\frac{100}{0} = 0.
$$
We can understand this: the division by $0$ means that it does not divide $100$ and so, the result is $0$.
Similarly, we can see that
$$
\frac{0}{0} =0.
$$
As a conclusion, we should define the zero divison as, for any $b$
$$
\frac{b}{0} =0.
$$
See \cite{kmsy} for the details.
\medskip
\section{In complex analysis}
We thus should consider, for any complex number $b$, as (1.2);
that is, for the mapping
\begin{equation}
w = \frac{1}{z},
\end{equation}
the image of $z=0$ is $w=0$. This fact seems to be a curious one in connection with our well-established popular image for the point at infinity on the Riemann sphere.
However, we shall recall the elementary function
\begin{equation}
W(z) = \exp \frac{1}{z}
\end{equation}
$$
= 1 + \frac{1}{1! z} + \frac{1}{2! z^2} + \frac{1}{3! z^3} + \cdot \cdot \cdot .
$$
The function has an essential singularity around the origin. When we consider (1.2), meanwhile, surprisingly enough, we have:
\begin{equation}
W(0) = 1.
\end{equation}
{\bf The point at infinity is not a number} and so we will not be able to consider the function (3.2) at the zero point $z = 0$, meanwhile, we can consider the value $1$ as in (3.3) at the zero point $z = 0$. How do we consider these situations?
In the famous standard textbook on Complex Analysis, L. V. Ahlfors (\cite{ahlfors}) introduced the point at infinity as a number and the Riemann sphere model as well known, however, our interpretation will be suitable as a number. We will not be able to accept the point at infinity as a number.
As a typical result, we can derive the surprising result: {\it At an isolated singular point of an analytic function, it takes a definite value }{\bf with a natural meaning.} As the important applications for this result, the extension formula of functions with analytic parameters may be obtained and singular integrals may be interpretated with the division by zero, naturally (\cite{msty}).
\bigskip
\section{Conclusion}
The division by zero $b/0=0$ is possible and the result is naturally determined, uniquely.
The result does not contradict with the present mathematics - however, in complex analysis, we need only to change a little presentation for the pole; not essentially, because we did not consider the division by zero, essentially.
The common understanding that the division by zero is impossible should be changed with many text books and mathematical science books. The definition of the fractions may be introduced by {\it the method of Michiwaki} in the elementary school, even.
Should we teach the beautiful fact, widely?:
For the elementary graph of the fundamental function
$$
y = f(x) = \frac{1}{x},
$$
$$
f(0) = 0.
$$
The result is applicable widely and will give a new understanding for the universe ({\bf Announcement 166}).
\medskip
If the division by zero $b/0=0$ is not introduced, then it seems that mathematics is incomplete in a sense, and by the intoduction of the division by zero, mathematics will become complete in a sense and perfectly beautiful.
\bigskip
section{Remarks}
For the procedure of the developing of the division by zero and for some general ideas on the division by zero, we presented the following announcements in Japanese:
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 148} (2014.2.12): $100/0=0, 0/0=0$ -- by a natural extension of fractions -- A wish of the God
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 154} (2014.4.22): A new world: division by zero, a curious world, a new idea
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 157} (2014.5.8): We wish to know the idea of the God for the division by zero; why the infinity and zero point are coincident?
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 161} (2014.5.30): Learning from the division by zero, sprits of mathematics and of looking for the truth
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 163} (2014.6.17): The division by zero, an extremely pleasant mathematics - shall we look for the pleasant division by zero: a proposal for a fun club looking for the division by zero.
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 166} (2014.6.29): New general ideas for the universe from the viewpoint of the division by zero
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 171} (2014.7.30): The meanings of product and division -- The division by zero is trivial from the own sense of the division independently of the concept of product
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 176} (2014.8.9): Should be changed the education of the division by zero
\bigskip
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\begin{thebibliography}{10}
\bibitem{ahlfors}
L. V. Ahlfors, Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1966.
\bibitem{cs}
L. P. Castro and S.Saitoh, Fractional functions and their representations, Complex Anal. Oper. Theory {\bf7} (2013), no. 4, 1049-1063.
\bibitem{kmsy}
S. Koshiba, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh and M. Yamane,
An interpretation of the division by zero z/0=0 without the concept of product
(note).
\bibitem{kmsy}
M. Kuroda, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, and M. Yamane,
New meanings of the division by zero and interpretations on $100/0=0$ and on $0/0=0$,
Int. J. Appl. Math. Vol. 27, No 2 (2014), pp. 191-198, DOI: 10.12732/ijam.v27i2.9.
\bibitem{msty}
H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, M. Takagi and M. Yamada,
A new concept for the point at infinity and the division by zero z/0=0
(note).
\bibitem{s}
S. Saitoh, Generalized inversions of Hadamard and tensor products for matrices, Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory. Vol.4 No.2 (2014), 87-95.http://www.scirp.org/journal/ALAMT/
\bibitem{taka}
S.-E. Takahasi,
{On the identities $100/0=0$ and $ 0/0=0$}
(note).
\bibitem{ttk}
S.-E. Takahasi, M. Tsukada and Y. Kobayashi, Classification of continuous fractional binary operators on the real and complex fields. (submitted)
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
アインシュタインも解決できなかった「ゼロで割る」問題
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿