When are isomorphic Hilbert spaces physically different?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of isomorphic Hilbert spaces in quantum mechanics and their potential physical differences, particularly in relation to classical limits and representations. Participants explore the implications of Hilbert spaces for one or more particles and the relationship between quantum and classical mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that two Hilbert spaces are considered physically different if their irreducible unitary representations are non-isomorphic, linking this to the kinematics defined by a Lie algebra.
  • Another participant expresses uncertainty about the classical limit of Hilbert spaces, suggesting that classical limits pertain to linear operators rather than the spaces themselves.
  • A quote from Asher Peres is introduced, implying that quantum phenomena extend beyond the confines of Hilbert spaces, suggesting a distinction between mathematical formalism and physical reality.
  • Discussion includes the Wigner phase space formulation and its relation to the Koopman-von Neumann formulation of classical mechanics, with participants noting that both formulations involve Hilbert space concepts but question their connections to quantum mechanics.
  • One participant describes the Heisenberg picture and contrasts it with the Wigner representation, emphasizing that classical limits occur at the operator level rather than within the Hilbert space itself.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between quantum and classical Hilbert spaces, with some asserting that isomorphic spaces may not be physically equivalent, while others question the existence of classical limits for Hilbert spaces. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding the relationship between quantum and classical frameworks, particularly regarding the dependence on representations and the nature of classical limits. There is an acknowledgment that the discussion involves complex interpretations of mathematical structures and physical phenomena.

A. Neumaier
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
8,723
Reaction score
4,833
martinbn said:
What is a classical limit of a Hilbert space? And these Hilbert spaces, for one or two or many particles, are all isomorphic.

In quantum mechanics, a Hilbert space always means (in mathematical terms) a Hilbert space together with a distinguished irreducible unitary representation of a given Lie algebra of preferred observables on a common dense domain. Two Hilbert spaces are considered (physically) different if this representation is different (in the sense of non-isomorphic). The Lie algebra defines the kinematics of the system of interest. The semidirect product of ##(2dN+1)##-dimensional Heisenberg algebra with ##N## copies of ##so(d)## has a unique irreducible unitary representation, which defines the Hilbert space of ##N## particles in ##d##-dimensional Euclidean space.

Hilbert spaces don't have a classical limit. The latter is restricted to linear operators, which may have one. To have a classical limit, the above representation must depend on Planck's constant hbar in such a way that ##i[A,B]/\hbar## tends (at least for ##A## and ##B## in the Lie algebra of preferred observables) to a finite limit ##\{B,A\}##, which represents a Poisson bracket.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
A. Neumaier said:
Hilbert spaces don't have a classical limit. The latter is restricted to linear operators, which may have one. To have a classical limit, the above representation must depend on Planck's constant hbar in such a way that i[A,B]/hbar tends (at least for A and B in the Lie algebra of preferred observables) to a finite limit {B,A}, which represents a Poisson bracket.

Uhm, I suppose you are right, but I'm not so sure.

The wigner phase space formulation of classical mechanics goes in the classical limits to the Koopman- von neumann formulation of classical mechanics, which is a Hilbert space formalism for classical mechanics where there are linear operators associated to the dynamical variables.

I don't know what could be the relation between the quantum Hilbert space and the classical Hilbert space though.
 
“Quantum phenomena do not occur in a Hilbert space. They occur in a laboratory.”
Asher Peres, Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods

In my own words, isomorphic Hilbert spaces may not be equivalent physically. Or even more directly, quantum physics is not only about states in Hilbert spaces.
 
Last edited:
andresB said:
The wigner phase space formulation of classical mechanics goes in the classical limits to the Koopman- von neumann formulation of classical mechanics, which is a Hilbert space formalism for classical mechanics where there are linear operators associated to the dynamical variables.

I don't know what could be the relation between the quantum Hilbert space and the classical Hilbert space though.

I described the Heisenberg picture, while the Wigner representation describes the Schroedinger picture. There the Hilbert space has no classical limit either. Instead, the classical limit again happens on the operator level. The states are the density matrices, and the classical limit that takes ##\hbar## to zero (essentially corresponding to infinitely fast decoherence) replaces these by diagonal operators. These are essentially the density functions of classical stochastic processes, corresponding to the Koopman formulation.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
417
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K