Appropriate Concepts in the Formulation of Quantum Mechanics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the appropriateness of concepts such as position and momentum in the formulation of quantum mechanics, particularly in relation to their macroscopic interpretations. Participants explore the implications of these concepts in the quantum domain, questioning their validity and seeking more fundamental alternatives. The scope includes theoretical reflections, analogies with special relativity, and the nature of quantum mechanical amplitudes.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that position and momentum are idealizations from macroscopic experience that do not translate well into the quantum domain, leading to confusion.
  • Others argue that the use of the same terminology for quantum concepts as for classical ones creates an illusion of counterintuitiveness, suggesting that these terms should not be used interchangeably.
  • A participant draws an analogy with special relativity, stating that concepts of absolute space and time are approximations to a more fundamental spacetime interval, questioning if a similar framework exists in quantum mechanics.
  • Another participant challenges the analogy, asserting that while space and time exist, they are not as fundamental as the spacetime interval, and questions whether concepts like position can exist in quantum mechanics.
  • Concerns are raised about the classical treatment of quantum mechanical amplitudes, particularly in the context of the double-slit experiment, suggesting that this presupposes a classical substratum that may not hold true.
  • One participant reflects on the choice of variables and parametrization in quantum mechanics, questioning the fundamental nature of observer-invariant versus observer-specific views.
  • There is a suggestion that the loss of observer invariance in quantization may need to be recovered with another symmetry, indicating a potential area for further exploration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the appropriateness of classical concepts in quantum mechanics and the nature of quantum amplitudes. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on the fundamental concepts that should replace classical terminology.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the current understanding of quantum mechanics, particularly regarding the definitions and assumptions underlying the concepts of position and momentum. The discussion also reflects on the implications of observer perspectives in quantum theory.

  • #31
It should be clear that the atoms/molecules in the ball are in a bound state. If you use a spherical well coinciding with the ball, then you are virtually home free in determining the wave function -- forget atom-atom interactions. A crude model to be sure, but it will capture the basic structure of the interior and provide a physically reasonable wave function.
Regards,
Reilly Atkinson


lightarrow said:
Sorry, I was probably not clear, I didn't mean to compare the ball's dimension with the wavepacket's spreading; I simply intended to ask how to describe the wavepacket of a macroscopic classical object like that ball; I didn't intentionally use the word "macroscopic" or "classical" just because there exists many macroscopic systems which have a quantistic behaviour and microscopic systems which have a classical one.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K