The basis of statistical quantum mechanics

1929 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. A. M. Dirac
Keyword(s):  
Dynamical System ◽  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Degrees Of Freedom ◽  
Present Note ◽  
Classical Mechanics ◽  
The Other ◽  
Statistical Nature ◽  
Actual System ◽  
Quantum Treatment

In classical mechanics the state of a dynamical system at any particular time can be described by the values of a set of coordinates and their conjugate momenta, thus, if the system has n degrees of freedom, by 2n numbers. In quantum mechanics, on the other hand, we have to describe a state of the system by a wave function involving a set of coordinates, thus by a function of n variables. The quantum description is, therefore, much more complicated than the classical one. Let us consider, however, an ensemble of systems in Gibbs' sense, i.e. not a large number of actual systems which could, perhaps, interact with one another, but a large number of hypothetical systems which are introduced to describe one actual system of which our knowledge is only of a statistical nature. The basis of the quantum treatment of such an ensemble has been given by Neumann. The description obtained by Neumann of an ensemble on the quantum theory is no more complicated than the corresponding classical description. Thus the quantum theory, which appears to such a disadvantage on the score of complication when applied to individual systems, recovers its own when applied to an ensemble. It is the object of the present note to examine this question more closely and to show how complete the analogy is between the quantum and classical treatments of an ensemble.

Subsequent and Subsidiary? Rethinking the Role of Applications in Establishing Quantum Mechanics

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 641-702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremiah James ◽  
Christian Joas
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Structure ◽  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Classical Mechanics ◽  
Theory Construction ◽  
Science Pedagogy ◽  
Old Quantum Theory ◽  
The Common ◽  
Complete Quantum

As part of an attempt to establish a new understanding of the earliest applications of quantum mechanics and their importance to the overall development of quantum theory, this paper reexamines the role of research on molecular structure in the transition from the so-called old quantum theory to quantum mechanics and in the two years immediately following this shift (1926–1928). We argue on two bases against the common tendency to marginalize the contribution of these researches. First, because these applications addressed issues of longstanding interest to physicists, which they hoped, if not expected, a complete quantum theory to address, and for which they had already developed methods under the old quantum theory that would remain valid under the new mechanics. Second, because generating these applications was one of, if not the, principal means by which physicists clarified the unity, generality, and physical meaning of quantum mechanics, thereby reworking the theory into its now commonly recognized form, as well as developing an understanding of the kinds of predictions it generated and the ways in which these differed from those of the earlier classical mechanics. More broadly, we hope with this article to provide a new viewpoint on the importance of problem solving to scientific research and theory construction, one that might complement recent work on its role in science pedagogy.

scholarly journals Relativistic quantum mechanics

1932 ◽  
Vol 136 (829) ◽  
pp. 453-464 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Classical Theory ◽  
Correspondence Principle ◽  
Relativistic Quantum ◽  
Classical Mechanics ◽  
Hamiltonian Function ◽  
Relativistic Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Classical Electrodynamics ◽  
Quantum Phenomena

The steady development of the quantum theory that has taken place during the present century was made possible only by continual reference to the Correspondence Principle of Bohr, according to which, classical theory can give valuable information about quantum phenomena in spite of the essential differences in the fundamental ideas of the two theories. A masterful advance was made by Heisenberg in 1925, who showed how equations of classical physics could be taken over in a formal way and made to apply to quantities of importance in quantum theory, thereby establishing the Correspondence Principle on a quantitative basis and laying the foundations of the new Quantum Mechanics. Heisenberg’s scheme was found to fit wonderfully well with the Hamiltonian theory of classical mechanics and enabled one to apply to quantum theory all the information that classical theory supplies, in so far as this information is consistent with the Hamiltonian form. Thus one was able to build up a satisfactory quantum mechanics for dealing with any dynamical system composed of interacting particles, provided the interaction could be expressed by means of an energy term to be added to the Hamiltonian function. This does not exhaust the sphere of usefulness of the classical theory. Classical electrodynamics, in its accurate (restricted) relativistic form, teaches us that the idea of an interaction energy between particles is only an approxi­mation and should be replaced by the idea of each particle emitting waves which travel outward with a finite velocity and influence the other particles in passing over them. We must find a way of taking over this new information into the quantum theory and must set up a relativistic quantum mechanics, before we can dispense with the Correspondence Principle.

scholarly journals A QUANTUM IS A COMPLEX STRUCTURE ON CLASSICAL PHASE SPACE

2005 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. 633-655
Author(s):  
JOSÉ M. ISIDRO
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Phase Space ◽  
Degrees Of Freedom ◽  
Complex Structure ◽  
Classical Mechanics ◽  
Elementary Excitation ◽  
Differentiable Structure ◽  
Duality Transformations ◽  
Kähler Potential ◽  
Classical Phase Space

Duality transformations within the quantum mechanics of a finite number of degrees of freedom can be regarded as the dependence of the notion of a quantum, i.e., an elementary excitation of the vacuum, on the observer on classical phase space. Under an observer we understand, as in general relativity, a local coordinate chart. While classical mechanics can be formulated using a symplectic structure on classical phase space, quantum mechanics requires a complex-differentiable structure on that same space. Complex-differentiable structures on a given real manifold are often not unique. This article is devoted to analysing the dependence of the notion of a quantum on the complex-differentiable structure chosen on classical phase space. For that purpose we consider Kähler phase spaces, endowed with a dynamics whose Hamiltonian equals the local Kähler potential.

INTERPRETATION AND PREDICTABILITY OF QUANTUM MECHANICS AND QUANTUM COSMOLOGY

1988 ◽  
Vol 03 (07) ◽  
pp. 645-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
SUMIO WADA
Keyword(s):  
Wave Function ◽  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Physical Meaning ◽  
Quantum Cosmology ◽  
Degrees Of Freedom ◽  
Interpretation Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Probabilistic Interpretation ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Classical Picture

A non-probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics asserts that we get a prediction only when a wave function has a peak. Taking this interpretation seriously, we discuss how to find a peak in the wave function of the universe, by using some minisuperspace models with homogeneous degrees of freedom and also a model with cosmological perturbations. Then we show how to recover our classical picture of the universe from the quantum theory, and comment on the physical meaning of the backreaction equation.

scholarly journals Observability, Unobservability and the Copenhagen Interpretation in Dirac's Methodology of Physics

Quanta ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Oldofredi ◽  
Michael Esfeld
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Copenhagen Interpretation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Interpretation Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Present Essay ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Methodological Principles ◽  
The One

Paul Dirac has been undoubtedly one of the central figures of the last century physics, contributing in several and remarkable ways to the development of quantum mechanics; he was also at the centre of an active community of physicists, with whom he had extensive interactions and correspondence. In particular, Dirac was in close contact with Bohr, Heisenberg and Pauli. For this reason, among others, Dirac is generally considered a supporter of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Similarly, he was considered a physicist sympathetic with the positivistic attitude which shaped the development of quantum theory in the 1920s. Against this background, the aim of the present essay is twofold: on the one hand, we will argue that, analyzing specific examples taken from Dirac's published works, he can neither be considered a positivist nor a physicist methodologically guided by the observability doctrine. On the other hand, we will try to disentangle Dirac's figure from the mentioned Copenhagen interpretation, since in his long career he employed remarkably different—and often contradicting—methodological principles and philosophical perspectives with respect to those followed by the supporters of that interpretation.Quanta 2019; 8: 68–87.

XX.—Aristotle, Newton, Einstein

1943 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 231-246
Author(s):  
E. T. Whittaker
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
External World ◽  
The Other ◽  
Isaac Newton ◽  
Hundredth Anniversary ◽  
Essential Nature ◽  
Great Discovery ◽  
Eighteenth And Nineteenth Centuries ◽  
Almost All

IT falls to us this year to commemorate the greatest of men of science, Isaac Newton, on the occasion of the three-hundredth anniversary of his birth. The centuries have not dimmed his fame, and the passage of time is unlikely ever to displace him from the supreme position. His discoveries, however—and this is part of their glory—have not persisted unchanged, but in the hands of his successors have been continually unfolding into fresh evolutions. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries there was an immense expansion of knowledge, springing directly from his work, and forming ultimately a vast superstructure based on the Newtonian concepts of space, mass, and force. Since 1900 the progress of science has continued, but the development of physics has changed in character: it has become subversive and radical, questioning the traditional assumptions and uprooting the old foundations. In 1915 the Newtonian doctrine of gravitation was superseded by that of Einstein: the divergence between the results of the two theories, so far as concerns the calculation of the movements of the planets, is extremely slight, and indeed, in almost all cases, too small to be detected by observation; but on the question of the essential nature of gravitation, the two conceptions differ completely and are associated with opposite philosophies of the external world. The other great discovery of the present century is the quantum theory, which in its perfected form of quantum-mechanics appeared in 1925: this also is completely irreconcilable with the postulates of Newtonian science.

WHY IRREVERSIBILITY? THE FORMULATION OF CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS FOR NONINTEGRABLE SYSTEMS

1995 ◽  
Vol 05 (01) ◽  
pp. 3-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
ILYA PRIGOGINE
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Quantum Dynamics ◽  
Probability Distributions ◽  
Classical Trajectory ◽  
Wave Functions ◽  
The Other ◽  
Density Matrices ◽  
The One ◽  
Classical And Quantum Mechanics

Nonintegrable Poincaré systems with continuous spectrum (so-called Large Poincaré Systems, LPS) lead to the appearance of diffusive terms in the framework of dynamics. These terms break time symmetry. They lead, therefore, to limitations to classical trajectory dynamics and of wave functions. These diffusive terms correspond to well-defined classes of dynamical processes (i.e., so-called “vacuum-vacuum” transitions). The diffusive effects are amplified in situations corresponding to persistent interactions. As a result, we have to include already in the fundamental dynamical description the two aspects, probability and irreversibility, which are so conspicuous on the macroscopic level. We have to formulate both classical and quantum mechanics on the Liouville level of probability distributions (or density matrices). For integrable systems, we recover the usual formulations of classical or quantum mechanics. Instead of being irreducible concepts, which cannot be further analyzed, trajectories and wave functions appear as special solutions of the Liouville-von Neumann equations. This extension of classical and quantum dynamics permits us to unify the two concepts of nature we inherited from the 19th century, based on the one hand on dynamical time-reversible laws and on the other on an evolutionary view associated to entropy. It leads also to a unified formulation of quantum theory avoiding the conventional dual structure based on Schrödinger’s equation on the one hand, and on the “collapse” of the wave function on the other. A dynamical interpretation is given to processes such as decoherence or approach to equilibrium without any appeal to extra dynamic considerations (such as the many-world theory, coarse graining or averaging over the environment). There is a striking parallelism between classical and quantum theory. For LPS we have, in general, both a “collapse” of trajectories and of wave functions for LPS. In both cases, we need a generalized formulation of dynamics in terms of probability distributions or density matrices. Since the beginning of this century, we know that classical mechanics had to be generalized to take into account the existence of universal constants. We now see that classical as well as quantum mechanics also have to be extended to include unstable dynamical systems such as LPS. As a result, we achieve a new formulation of "laws of physics" dealing no more with certitudes but with probabilities. The formulation is appropriate to describe an open, evolving universe.

scholarly journals The Statistical Origins of Quantum Mechanics

2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. Klein
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Classical Mechanics ◽  
Statistical Interpretation ◽  
Interpretation Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Local Conservation ◽  
Expectation Values ◽  
Strong Argument ◽  
Probability Current ◽  
The Mean

It is shown that Schrödinger's equation may be derived from three postulates. The first is a kind of statistical metamorphosis of classical mechanics, a set of two relations which are obtained from the canonical equations of particle mechanics by replacing all observables by statistical averages. The second is a local conservation law of probability with a probability current which takes the form of a gradient. The third is a principle of maximal disorder as realized by the requirement of minimal Fisher information. The rule for calculating expectation values is obtained from a fourth postulate, the requirement of energy conservation in the mean. The fact that all these basic relations of quantum theory may be derived from premises which are statistical in character is interpreted as a strong argument in favor of the statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics. The structures of quantum theory and classical statistical theories are compared, and some fundamental differences are identified.

scholarly journals Relaxed uncertainty relations and information processing

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (9&10) ◽  
pp. 801-832 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Ver Steeg ◽  
S. Wehner
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Uncertainty Relation ◽  
Random Access ◽  
The Other ◽  
Uncertainty Relations ◽  
Expectation Values ◽  
Chsh Inequality ◽  
Local Correlations ◽  
Non Local

We consider a range of "theories'' that violate the uncertainty relation for anti-commuting observables derived. We first show that Tsirelson's bound for the CHSH inequality can be derived from this uncertainty relation, and that relaxing this relation allows for non-local correlations that are stronger than what can be obtained in quantum mechanics. We continue to construct a hierarchy of related non-signaling theories, and show that on one hand they admit superstrong random access encodings and exponential savings for a particular communication problem, while on the other hand it becomes much harder in these theories to learn a state. We show that the existence of these effects stems from the absence of certain constraints on the expectation values of commuting measurements from our non-signaling theories that are present in quantum theory.

scholarly journals Complex Covariance

10.14311/1809 ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Frieder Kleefeld
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Phase Space ◽  
Special Relativity ◽  
Degrees Of Freedom ◽  
Classical Mechanics ◽  
Space Time ◽  
Complex Phase ◽  
Dirac Equations ◽  
Klein Gordon ◽  
Complex Valued

According to some generalized correspondence principle the classical limit of a non-Hermitian quantum theory describing quantum degrees of freedom is expected to be the well known classical mechanics of classical degrees of freedom in the complex phase space, i.e., some phase space spanned by complex-valued space and momentum coordinates. As special relativity was developed by Einstein merely for real-valued space-time and four-momentum, we will try to understand how special relativity and covariance can be extended to complex-valued space-time and four-momentum. Our considerations will lead us not only to some unconventional derivation of Lorentz transformations for complex-valued velocities, but also to the non-Hermitian Klein-Gordon and Dirac equations, which are to lay the foundations of a non-Hermitian quantum theory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document