In non-relativistic QM, you assume that energy and momentum are related by non-relativistic equations. In relativistic QM, you assume that energy and momentum are related by relativistic equations.
#3
M. next
380
0
but what are non-relativistic equations?
and why does energy and momentum stand out in this definition? why not other physical quantities?
$$-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \nabla^2 \Psi + V \Psi = i \hbar \frac {\partial \Psi}{\partial t}$$
The terms correspond (via the QM operators for momentum and energy) to the non-relativistic
$$\frac{p^2}{2m} + V = E$$
$$K + V = E$$
i.e. kinetic energy plus potential energy equals total energy. ##K = \frac{p^2}{2m}## comes from the familiar ##K = \frac{1}{2}mv^2## for kinetic energy and ##p = mv## for momentum.
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles.
Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated...
Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/
by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
The wavefunction of an atomic orbital like ##p_x##-orbital is generally in the form ##f(\theta)e^{i\phi}## so the probability of the presence of particle is identical at all the directional angles ##\phi##. However, it is dumbbell-shape along the x direction which shows ##\phi##-dependence!