Direct products in quantum mechanics

RedX
Messages
963
Reaction score
3
Not every state can be represented by a direct product. Do states that can be written as a direct product have anything special about them?

It seems that states that can be written as a direct product lose correlation between between each individual state. More specifically, stronger than losing correlation, they become independent.

As an example, take two protons with angular momentum zero:

\psi(r_1,r_2) (|+->-|-+>)

which is a direct product of a function of position, and an antisymmetric spin state. By writing the wavefunction as a direct product, you seem to have lost information on whether the spin up proton is near r1 or r2.

Indeed, measurement of position is independent of measurement of spin, and:

<f(r_1,r_2)g(s_1,s_2)>=<f(r_1,r_2)><g(s_1,s_2)>

Going back to the two protons with angular momentum zero, why is it that the ground state is:


\psi_S(r_1,r_2) (|+->-|-+>)

where S stands for symmetric in position. This total expression is definitely antisymmetric which is required for identical fermions. But does the ground state have to be written in a way such that the spin and positions are uncorrelated?

And why is the next excited state:

\psi_A(r_1,r_2) (spin \;1\; triplet)

again uncorrelated?

Does this have to do with the fact that naturally, position doesn't care about spin, that it's not more likely for spin to like the negative x-axis than the positive x axis?

Anyways, are there anymore special properties about states that can be written as direct products?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yeah so this seems right. Take one particle in 2-dimensions, and say you want the two dimensions to be uncorrelated, say:

(|x_1>+\pi|x_2>)\otimes (|y_1>+\lambda|y_2>)

The amplitude to be in x2 is pi times more likely than to be in x1, and y2 lambda times more likely than to be in y1.

Multiplying it out:

(|x_1 y_1>+\lambda|x_1 y_2>+\pi |x_2 y_1>+ \pi \lambda |x_2 y_2>

So it doesn't matter if you measure x or y first. If you measure x then the wavefunction collapses and finding y2 is still lambda times more likely than finding y1 no matter what you got for x, and if you measure y first then finding x2 is still pi times more likely than x1.

Of course such a direct product state is silly, because usually in an experiment if you know where the particle is in the x-direction, then you have some idea of where it is in the y-direction.

What's interesting is that multi-particle states of identical particles are in general never totally uncorrelated, so you can get weirdness, such as:

<\psi|X_1|\psi> <\psi|X_2|\psi> \neq <\psi|X_1X_2|\psi>

where |\psi> is say |x_1>\otimes|x_2>+ |x_2>\otimes|x_1>

where here X1 measures the x-position of the first particle, and X2 measures the x-position of the second particle. Intuitively they should multiply, and they do, but only if they're distinct particles so that the state can be written as a direct product that is not symmetrized: |x_1>\otimes|x_2>, or in general |\psi_1>\otimes|\psi_2>
 
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!
Back
Top