I Common features of set theory and wave functions?

Hallucinogen
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
I would like to know if any of you think there's any sort of connection, analogy, or common features between, sets in set theory and wave functions in QT?

Wave functions lack trajectories, so do sets. Wave functions also distribute over areas, as sets can do. To my understanding, wave functions are also subject to decomposition; for example, an atom has an associated wave function, and this can decompose into the associated wave functions of the particles atoms are believed to be composed of. In exactly the same way, we can view the atom as a set, containing subatomic particles as its elements.

As such sets of objects may correspond to unique superpositions.

I would like to know if I am correct in my analysis and if anyone knows of any explicit common features or properties of mathematical sets and wave functions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The only common feature is that you can define any function by sets. I think your comparison is too far-fetched to make any sense.
 
  • Like
Likes Hallucinogen
Hallucinogen said:
I would like to know if any of you think there's any sort of connection, analogy, or common features between, sets in set theory and wave functions in QT?
In this lecture at 1:17:20 and forwards (Lecture 1 | Modern Physics: Quantum Mechanics (Stanford)) Leonard Susskind describes the differences between the states in classical mechanics and quantum mechanics. Basically, states in classical mechanics are points in a set (phase space). In quantum mechanics states do not form sets. Instead, states are vectors in vector spaces over the complex numbers.
 
  • Like
Likes Hallucinogen
A vector space is a set of elements together with a field (like the real or complex numbers) called vectors with some algebraic operations defined on these sets. Today nearly everything in math is based on set theory.
 
  • Like
Likes Hallucinogen and Klystron
DennisN said:
In this lecture at 1:17:20 and forwards (Lecture 1 | Modern Physics: Quantum Mechanics (Stanford)) Leonard Susskind describes the differences between the states in classical mechanics and quantum mechanics. Basically, states in classical mechanics are points in a set (phase space). In quantum mechanics states do not form sets. Instead, states are vectors in vector spaces over the complex numbers.

thanks
 
I am not sure if this falls under classical physics or quantum physics or somewhere else (so feel free to put it in the right section), but is there any micro state of the universe one can think of which if evolved under the current laws of nature, inevitably results in outcomes such as a table levitating? That example is just a random one I decided to choose but I'm really asking about any event that would seem like a "miracle" to the ordinary person (i.e. any event that doesn't seem to...
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Back
Top