Hamiltonian: The Key to Understanding Total Energy in Quantum Mechanics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between the Hamiltonian and total energy in quantum mechanics (QM), exploring whether the Hamiltonian can always be considered a representation of total energy, particularly in light of classical mechanics examples where this may not hold true.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the Hamiltonian is always representative of total energy in quantum systems, as stated by a lecturer.
  • Others, including Barny, challenge this view by citing classical mechanics examples where the Hamiltonian is conserved but total energy is not, questioning the applicability of the Hamiltonian in QM.
  • Barny proposes that if the Hamiltonian is derived from classical mechanics, the same constraints should apply in QM, suggesting potential instances where the Hamiltonian may not represent total energy accurately.
  • Another participant mentions that certain terms in the quantum Hamiltonian, such as spin, do not have classical counterparts, complicating the direct application of classical Hamiltonian principles to QM.
  • A later reply suggests that while the Hamiltonian may not always represent total energy in classical mechanics, it is essential for describing physical systems, implying that a Hamiltonian can be found that does represent total energy under certain conditions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between the Hamiltonian and total energy, with no consensus reached. Some believe the Hamiltonian is always representative of total energy, while others argue that this is not universally applicable, particularly in classical mechanics contexts.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of applying classical mechanics principles to quantum mechanics, including unresolved assumptions about system isolation and the nature of energy representation.

Barny
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Hello!

I've just finished a discussion with my peers and lecturer on some of the postulates of QM,

My lecturer said that "the total energy of any quantum mechanical system is always given by the Hamiltonian, which may be obtained by appropraite application of the classical Hamiltonian"

I took issue with this, there are examples within classical mechanics where the Hamiltonian is conserved but the total energy of a system isn't. I therefore fail to see how the Hamiltonian can always represent the total energy of QM system.

Am I completely off the mark here?

Kind regards
Barny
 
Physics news on Phys.org
well i had thought that the hamiltonian always depicted the energy of the system and one of the fundamental postulates of the classical mechanics is conservation of energy. I don't understand what u mean by hamiltonian is conserved but not the energy
 
Hi, thanks for replying.

It's possible to construct systems in classical mechanics where the Hamiltonian is conserved but the total energy of the system is not. In this instance the Hamiltonian no longer represents the total energy of the system.

For example on Section 6.4, page 18 of http://www.hep.phys.soton.ac.uk/~trmorris/teaching/undergrad/PHYS3007.html discusses this.

My argument is that if you use the same construct of the Hamiltonian in quantum mechanics as you do classical mechanics i.e

H=\sum\frac{\partial L}{\partial q^{.}}q^{.}-L

Then surely the same constraints apply to it, as in the example posted above. Does this not mean that there may be an instance within QM where the Hamiltonian is not the true representation of the total energy? Or have I missed the point?

Kind regards
Barny
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Barny said:
Hello!

I've just finished a discussion with my peers and lecturer on some of the postulates of QM,

My lecturer said that "the total energy of any quantum mechanical system is always given by the Hamiltonian, which may be obtained by appropraite application of the classical Hamiltonian"

Another interesting issue is the existence of terms in the quantum hamiltonian that vanish in the classical limit. For example, spin. Obviously these can not be obtained in any reasonable way from just the classical hamiltonian.

I took issue with this, there are examples within classical mechanics where the Hamiltonian is conserved but the total energy of a system isn't. I therefore fail to see how the Hamiltonian can always represent the total energy of QM system.

Am I completely off the mark here?

Kind regards
Barny
 
Barny said:
Hello!

I've just finished a discussion with my peers and lecturer on some of the postulates of QM,

My lecturer said that "the total energy of any quantum mechanical system is always given by the Hamiltonian, which may be obtained by appropraite application of the classical Hamiltonian"

I took issue with this, there are examples within classical mechanics where the Hamiltonian is conserved but the total energy of a system isn't. I therefore fail to see how the Hamiltonian can always represent the total energy of QM system.

Am I completely off the mark here?

Kind regards
Barny

well, i think they are both right.
but the first statement, in my opinion, should better be related as follows: if we want to describe a physical system, we HAVE TO find its hamiltonian,which represents the total energy of the system, besides this method, no others exits.
in classical mechanics,hamiltonian do not allways represents the total energy, but it is the case that the system are not isolated or closed.In another words,the system we observed is in fact part of a more biger one. so in classical mechanics,we can allways (in principle)find the hamiltonian(representing the total energy) of a system,or find a system whose hamiltonian represents it total energy.
hope this will be helpful to you.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
9K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
677
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K