Do you use QM in Conjunction With QED/QCD?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Drakkith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qm
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between quantum mechanics (QM) and quantum field theories, specifically quantum electrodynamics (QED) and quantum chromodynamics (QCD). Participants explore whether QM serves as a foundational theory for these advanced frameworks and the applicability of standard QM rules within QED and QCD.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire if QM is a foundational theory that underpins QED and QCD.
  • One participant states that QED and QCD are subsets of quantum mechanics, specifically addressing the quantum mechanics of fields.
  • A question is raised about the applicability of standard QM rules to QED and QCD.
  • Another participant affirms that standard QM rules apply but seeks clarification on what is meant by "all the standard QM rules."
  • It is proposed that QED represents a fully quantum-mechanical approach to electrodynamics, suggesting that standard QM rules are applicable in this context.
  • A caveat is introduced regarding the Born interpretation of the wavefunction, noting that it becomes uncertain in QFT due to non-conservation of particle number.
  • One participant explains that quantum field theory involves many degrees of freedom and emphasizes the role of field operators over single particle wavefunctions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the foundational role of QM in relation to QED and QCD, and while some agree on the applicability of standard QM rules, the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these rules in the context of quantum field theories.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the definitions of terms such as "standard QM rules" and the implications of the Born interpretation in quantum field theory, which remain unresolved in the discussion.

Drakkith
Mentor
Messages
23,205
Reaction score
7,687
Do you still use QM in conjunction with the other theories? Is QM kind of like the basic theory that the others rely on? (Hopefully those questions make sense)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
QED and QCD are specific quantum field theories. As a subject, quantum field theory is a subset of quantum mechanics: quantum field theory is the quantum mechanics of fields. QED is the quantum mechanics of the electromagnetic field. QCD is the quantum mechanics of the color field.
 
Do all the standard QM rules apply to QED and QCD?
 
Yes. But what in particular are you thinking of as "all the standard QM rules"?
 
If you define electrodynamics to be the study of matter with the electromagnetic field (i.e. with photons), then QED is simply a fully quantum-mechanical approach to that study. In that sense, the "standard QM rules" apply since what you're doing is simply applying QM to yet another problem.

One caveat to this discussion is that the Born interpretation of the wavefunction becomes a bit shaky. The reason is that in quantum field theory (QFT), particle number is not necessarily conserved. This is of little concern because what we would normally call a wavefunction function in single-particle QM yields calculable results in QFT for things we actually measure like scattering experiments, etc.
 
Quantum mechanics deals with single particle systems, which have a small number of degrees of freedom (think observables.) For example, a single particle has associated observables x and p. A quantum field is the quantum mechanical version of the classical field, which describes (maybe infinitely) many degrees of freedom. What makes the quantum field quantum is that these observables are quantized. The observables are particles, making quantum field theory a multiparticle theory: the field describes the creation and destruction of quanta as a function of spacetime.

In QFT, the field operator becomes the dynamical quantity of interest, rather than the single particle wavefunction.
 
Awesome, thanks guys.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
481
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 115 ·
4
Replies
115
Views
10K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 225 ·
8
Replies
225
Views
15K