Deriving the Quantum Properties of a General Configuration Space

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving quantum properties from a general configuration space defined by second-order equations of motion, specifically q'(t) = v(t) and v'(t) = a(q(t),v(t)). It establishes that if the matrix W^{ij} approaches a non-singular matrix as h-bar approaches zero, the system yields a Hamiltonian framework in the classical limit. The analysis further distinguishes between classical and quantum sectors based on the nature of the W matrix, concluding that a closed canonical sector splits into classical and quantum components, with the latter being canonically quantized.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hamiltonian mechanics
  • Familiarity with quantum mechanics principles, including the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
  • Knowledge of matrix theory and tensor transformations
  • Proficiency in differential equations, particularly second-order equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Hamiltonian dynamics in classical mechanics
  • Explore the implications of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the mathematical foundations of matrix representations in physics
  • Investigate the role of closed canonical sectors in quantum field theory
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, mathematicians specializing in quantum mechanics, and researchers exploring the intersection of classical and quantum systems.

siddhartha04
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
[tex]The requirements, posed on a system given<br /> by the configuration coordinates<br /> q(t) = (q^1(t), q^2(t), ...)<br /> that<br /> (1) they be subject to 2nd-order equations of motion:<br /> q'(t) = v(t), v'(t) = a(q(t),v(t))<br /> and<br /> (2) have a classical configuration space at each time:<br /> [q^i(t), q^j(t)] =<br /> is nearly enough, alone, to derive the key properties of<br /> quantum mechanics, such as the Heisenberg Uncertainty<br /> Principle and Heisenberg equations of motion.<br /> <br /> This feature was first discovered in the early 1990's,<br /> where it was shown that if the matrix<br /> W^{ij} = [q^i, v^j]/(i h-bar)<br /> approaches a non-singular matrix as h-bar -> 0, then<br /> the equations of motion must be so constrained that<br /> the equations of motion yield a Hamiltonian system in<br /> the classical limit, with W^{ij} being the inverse<br /> mass matrix (i.e., the hessian d^{2H}/d(p_i)d(p_j)).<br /> <br /> If the W's, instead, are assumed to be c-numbers,<br /> allowing the matrix to be singular, then the result<br /> is that the system splits into the direct sum of a<br /> classical sector, given by c-number coordinates and<br /> velocities, and a quantum sector which is canonically<br /> quantized with respect to a Hamiltonian which is<br /> constrained to be of a form as a polynomial of order 2<br /> in the conjugate momenta, reducible to the form:<br /> H = sum (1/2 W^{ij}(q) p_i p_j) + U(q).<br /> <br /> The requirement that (1) and (2) be compatible with one<br /> another is actually quite strong. For general<br /> functions A(q), B(q), ... of the configuration coordinates,<br /> define<br /> W^{AB} = [A, dB/dt]/(i h-bar)<br /> S^{AB} = [dA/dt, dB/dt]/(i h-bar)<br /> note then that<br /> S^{AB} = -S^{BA}.<br /> For general coordinate functions, given the commutativity<br /> of the q's, it also follows that [A,B] = .<br /> <br /> Consistency with time derivatives already implies<br /> >From d/dt [A,B]: W^{AB} = W^{BA}<br /> >From d/dt [A,B']:<br /> i h-bar dW^{AB}/dt = 1/2 ([A,B''] + [B,A''])<br /> i h-bar S^{AB} = 1/2 ([B,A''] - [A,B''])<br /> >From d/dt [A',B']:<br /> i h-bar dS^{AB}/dt = [A',B''] - [B',A''],<br /> using primes to denote time derivatives.<br /> <br /> The Jacobi identities imply:<br /> >From [q,[q,q]]: Nothing new<br /> >From [q,[q,v]]: [A,W^{BC}] = [B,W^{AC}]<br /> >From [q,[v,v]]: [A,S^{BC}] = [B',W^{AC}] - [C',W^{AB}]<br /> >From [v,[v,v]]: [A',S^{BC}] + [B',S^{CA}] + [C',S^{AB}] = .<br /> <br /> So, with these preliminaries, we'll show how the result<br /> follows.<br /> <br /> For functions A(q), B(q), ... over configuration space,<br /> define the following:<br /> <br /> A is a classical coordinate if [A,A'] =<br /> A is a quantum coordinate if [A,A'] is not .<br /> A is canonical if [A,A'] is a c-number.<br /> <br /> A classical sector S is a linear space of functions over<br /> Q whose members are all classical. S is called a quantum<br /> sector if all of its members are quantum. It is called<br /> canonical, they are all canonical.<br /> <br /> Since the sector S is to be closed under linear<br /> combinations, then consider the case of the combination<br /> (A + zB) with A, B in S. If S is classical, one has<br /> = [A+zB,A'+z'B+zB'] = z (W^{AB} + W^{BA}).<br /> Taking z = 1/2, noting that W^{BA} = W^{AB}, it follows<br /> that W^{AB} = . The W matrix is over a classical<br /> sector.<br /> <br /> If S is quantum, or canonical, then by similar arguments<br /> it follows that W is respectively non-singular over S<br /> or comprises a matrix of c-numbers over S.<br /> <br /> Finally, a sector S is called closed if its coordinates<br /> have accelerations given as functions of the other<br /> members of S. For the case of a finite dimensional<br /> sector S with basis (A1,...,An), the functions would<br /> be of the form:<br /> A'' = a^{A}(A1,...,An,A1',...,An').<br /> <br /> The result is: a closed canonical sector splits up into<br /> a classical sector and a quantum sector with the latter<br /> canonically quantized with respect to a Hamiltonian that<br /> is a polynomial of order 2 in the conjugate momenta.<br /> <br /> ---------<br /> <br /> First, consider the effect of an invertible linear<br /> transformation on the coordinates<br /> Q^a = sum Z^{a_i} q^i.<br /> We'll adopt the summation convention here and below and<br /> write this more simply, also in matrix form, as:<br /> Q = Z q.<br /> Then<br /> V = Z v + Z' qV' = Z a(q,v) + 2 Z' v + Z'' q = A(Q,V)<br /> where<br /> A(Q,V) = Z a(Z^{-1}Q,Z^{-1}V)+ 2 Z' Z^{-1} V+ (Z'' Z^{-1} - 2 Z' Z^{-1} Z' Z^{-1}) Q<br /> Writing the commutators in matrix form, we get:<br /> [Q,Q] = [Zq,Zq] = Z [q,q] Z^T = W -> [Q,V] = [Zq, Zv + Z'q] = Z W Z^TS -> [V,V] = [Zv + Z'q, Zv + Z'q]<br /> = Z S Z^T + (Z' W Z^T - Z W Z'^T)<br /> using ()^T to denote transpose.<br /> <br /> A closed sector thus transforms linearly to a closed<br /> sector, with the W's behaving as 2nd order tensors<br /> under the transformation.<br /> <br /> ---------<br /> <br /> For canonical sectors, since one has:<br /> [A,W^{BC}] == [A',W^{BC}],<br /> then the Jacobi conditions substantially reduce to the<br /> form:<br /> [A,S^{BC}] = .<br /> and differentiating:<br /> [A',S^{BC}] = -[A,S^{BC}'].<br /> Additionally, one has (after differentiating):<br /> [A',W^{BC}] + [A,W^{BC}'] = -> [A,W^{BC}'] =<br /> and, if the sector is closed:<br /> [A'',W^{BC}] + [A',W^{BC}'] = -> [A',W^{BC}'] = .<br /> <br /> Consider the general case, now, where the coordinates<br /> themselves (q^1,...,q^n) form a closed canonical sector,<br /> with equations of motion as given above.<br /> <br /> We'll see how this works out in detail in the remainder<br /> of the discussion, which will follow in a later article.[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have the tex box around the text of your message instead of just around the formulas. And this message doesn't belong in this subforum anyway.
 
You can use preview post to see how your post is going to look, and if your latex images are going to come out correctly.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K