Is There a Superluminal Signal When Turning Off a Harmonic Potential?

In summary, the conversation discusses the behavior of a ground state particle in a harmonic oscillator and how it changes when the harmonic potential is suddenly turned off. It is noted that the nonrelativistic quantum mechanics allows particles to travel arbitrarily fast, but this is just a low-energy approximation and a more accurate understanding requires quantum field theory. It is also mentioned that the wave function can spread faster than light if the initial localization is sharp enough, but in a relativistic theory this is not possible due to the relationship between momentum and speed. The discussion also touches on the use of propagators and commutators in determining causality in quantum field theory.
  • #1
kof9595995
679
2
Consider we initially have a ground state particle of a harmonic oscillator:
[tex]\psi = \exp ( - a{x^2})[/tex] (neglecting nomalization)
And we have a detector far in space monitoring the local probability of finding a particle. Now if we suddenly turn off the harmonic potential, the wavefunction will evolve as free particle, and
[tex]\Psi (x,t) = \frac{{\exp (\frac{{ - a{x^2}}}{{1 + 2iat/m}})}}{{\sqrt {1 + 2iat/m} }}[/tex].
We see no matter how far the detector is, the local probability will start to change immediately after we turn off the potential. So will the detector record a change in number of particles detected? If so, it seems there's a superluminal signal transmitted since the detector could be very far from the origin .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Nonrelativistic quantum mechanics does indeed allow particles to travel arbitrarily fast. This tells you that it's just a low-energy approximation. To account for relativistic effects completely you need quantum field theory.
 
  • #3
True, but in my thought experiment the group velocity is 0, so I don't think it's the crux of the problem.
 
  • #4
Note that the mere fact that the wavefunction changes everywhere isn't surprising. What would clearly violate relativity is if, say, the expectation value of the absolute value of position increase faster than light. This would indicate that the particle, initially localized around the origin, heads away from it faster than light.

This can indeed happen if "a" is large enough, meaning that the wave function is initially localized very sharply around the origin. Then by the uncertainty principle there is a very high uncertainty in momentum, and the wave function will spread out extremely rapidly--even faster than light, if you take the nonrelativistic Schrodinger equation at face value, since it doesn't know about relativity.

You can expand the wave function in momentum eigenstates. Though they average out to an expectation value of zero momentum, some of them have arbitrarily high momenta and thus arbitrarily high speeds. It's the presence of these impossibly high-speed modes that allows the particle to flee the origin faster than light. In a relativistic theory, by contrast, momentum is not proportional to speed but rather high-momentum particles have speeds approaching that of light. In a relativistic theory, the presence of the high-momentum modes does not allow the wave function to spread faster than light.
 
  • #5
But it seems the relativistic, let say Klein-Gordon propagator, is also non-zero outside the light cone. Then if I modify my argument with KG propagator would it still be a paradox?
 
  • #6
Emm, I know in QFT to discuss causality they use commutator instead of propagator itself. However in my thought experiment I can't see how commutator of propagator is involved, it seems only propagator itself matters.
 
  • #7
I see where I was wrong, the propagator is indeed 0 in spacelike region. I was thinking
[tex] < 0|\phi (x)\phi (y)|0 > [/tex] as the propagator, but it should be
[tex] < 0|[\phi (x),\phi (y)]|0 > [/tex], which is 0 for spacelike separation.
 

1. What is a superluminal paradox?

A superluminal paradox is a thought experiment that explores the implications of faster-than-light travel, which is theoretically possible according to general relativity. It involves scenarios where an object or information travels faster than the speed of light, which is believed to be the universal speed limit.

2. Can faster-than-light travel really occur?

According to our current understanding of physics, faster-than-light travel is not possible. The theory of relativity states that the speed of light is the fastest possible speed in the universe. However, there are some theoretical concepts, such as wormholes and Alcubierre drive, that could potentially allow for faster-than-light travel. These ideas are still highly speculative and have not been proven to be feasible.

3. How does a superluminal paradox challenge our understanding of physics?

The concept of a superluminal paradox challenges our understanding of physics by raising questions about the laws of physics, causality, and the nature of space and time. It also forces us to consider the possibility of phenomena that are currently thought to be impossible, such as time travel.

4. What are some examples of superluminal paradoxes?

One example of a superluminal paradox is the "Tachyonic Antitelephone" thought experiment, where a message is sent from a person on Earth to a person on a spaceship traveling at faster-than-light speeds. Another example is the "Twin Paradox," which explores the consequences of one twin traveling at near-light speeds while the other stays on Earth.

5. How do scientists approach the study of superluminal paradoxes?

Scientists approach the study of superluminal paradoxes by using thought experiments, mathematical models, and theoretical physics. They also perform experiments and observations to test the limits of our understanding and to gather more data for further analysis. Additionally, scientists are constantly revising and updating our current understanding of the laws of physics, which may one day lead to a better understanding of superluminal paradoxes.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
19
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
421
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
733
Back
Top