Is possible to prove that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is incorrect by somehow doing an experiment without light, i.e. in total darkness? If such an experiment could be performed, would we be able to disprove this principle?

Let's put it this way: if you can't see anything, you can't acknowledge the existence of the observables (position, momentum, energy, etc of an electron, for instance).

Since you need to observe something to perform an experiment on that something, it is an invalid test.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states that there is a fundamental uncertainty associated with observing something.

#\mathbf(DeltavecxDeltavecp_x >= h/(4pi))#

where:

• #Deltavecx# is the uncertainty in the position of an observable object.
• #Deltavecp_x# is the uncertainty in the momentum of an observable object.
• #h# is Planck's constant, #6.626xx10^(-34) "J"cdot"s"#.

The less uncertainty you have about position, the more uncertainty you have about momentum, and vice versa. That's just how the inequality works.

Generally, we know the momentum of an electron to greater precision (less uncertainty, i.e. #Deltavecp_x# is lower) than the position of the electron, so we had to determine its position as a radial density distribution within each orbital:

![)

It doesn't make physical sense to do an experiment without light and hope to prove this principle incorrect.

If you can't observe an object that you need to observe in order to discuss your observations about it (i.e. articulate the connection Reason has made to the sense-objects witnessed), you can't say anything about that object that requires being able to observe it (especially if you're talking about the position or momentum of a miniscule electron...).

It's just how your senses work.