What Happens to the Momentum Operator as Planck's Constant Approaches Zero?

  • Thread starter Thread starter the_pulp
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Momentum Operator
the_pulp
Messages
206
Reaction score
9
I have a doubt making a little of thinking of basic notions of QM and I think that the answer should be very simple but I can't make up my mind. So, here I go:
I usually hear that when we want to go from to Quantum Mechanics to Classical Mechanics, one have to make h go to 0 and then the magic happens. However, when I think of the momentum operator:
p=i*h*nabla

when we make h go to 0, p goes to 0. What does "p operator equal to zero" means?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello the_pulp,

the question how and whether wave mechanics reduces to classical mechanics is very interesting indeed.

The reason why your example doesn't work is that the momentum operator is not momentum "quantity". The operator is just an additional mathematical concept that has no use in classical mechanics.

When this operator acts on the wave function of free particle e^{i\frac{p_x x}{\hbar}}, it gives the same function multiplied by p_x, which we interpret as momentum quantity, and this need not go to zero with h -> 0.

More generally, the statement of reduction of wave mechanics into classical mechanics is usually understood in following sense:

By means of substitution \psi = e^{iS/\hbar}, Schroedinger's equation can be written as

<br /> -\partial_t S = \frac{-i\hbar}{2m} \Delta S + \frac{(\nabla S)^2}{2m} + V.<br />

When h - > 0, the term with the imaginary unit and h goes to zero and the equation approaches the Hamilton-Jacobi equation for the action S from classical mechanics.
 
the_pulp said:
I have a doubt making a little of thinking of basic notions of QM and I think that the answer should be very simple but I can't make up my mind. So, here I go:
I usually hear that when we want to go from to Quantum Mechanics to Classical Mechanics, one have to make h go to 0 and then the magic happens. However, when I think of the momentum operator:
p=i*h*nabla

when we make h go to 0, p goes to 0. What does "p operator equal to zero" means?

Note that taking the limit as h goes to zero is not the same as setting h to zero in all equations. We should look at what changes when we make the value of h smaller, and extrapolate these changes to their limit as h goes to zero. What we find is that if we make h smaller, things get "more classical."

We can look at what happens to the momentum operator as h gets smaller. Suppose h is very small. Then for a particle to have a reasonably large momentum it must have an extremely short wavelength. As we make h smaller, the wavelength of a particle with a given momentum becomes smaller, because this wavelength is given by h/p. Then for instance wave interference effects, which happen in regions whose size is comparable to one wavelength, become confined to very small regions. If we make h small enough that the momentum we care about corresponds to an extremely tiny length that is way below anything we can detect, then we no longer observe interference effects and recover classical mechanics.
 
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...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top