How Can a Single Vector Represent Multi-Dimensional Quantum Information?

  • Thread starter Thread starter snoopies622
  • Start date Start date
snoopies622
Messages
852
Reaction score
29
I see how a vector in an infinite-dimensional space can be thought of as a function of one continuous variable in that both are a list of numbers (complex numbers in the case of quantum mechanics) that is infinitely long. But since wave functions in the position basis are functions of three dimensions (three continuous variables), how is all that information represented with only one vector?

Thanks.

(Edit) Afterthought: since momentum in three-dimensional space has three components, I guess this applies to the momentum basis too.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cheating: In 2D, discretize each space dimension into n pieces, then a region of space will have nXn indices, and the wavefunction is a an nXn matrix To make them in a row, just take all the first row of the matrix, then string the second row after it, then the third row ...

More correctly, a vectors of a vector space are just things that obey some formal rules like http://mathworld.wolfram.com/VectorSpace.html . In their notation X,Y,Z are vectors, but you will see that functions obey those rules just as well, and so are vectors by that definition. The one thing to note is that a scalar product is not part of the vector space definition, and is considered an additional structure. For functions, the scalar product is the overlap integral of the two functions (for complex functions, there's complex conjugation somewhere too, but the basic idea is the same).
 
Oh yes, the more correct thing I said above is actually still cheating. If you hunt around these forums, you can see what George Jones says about rigged Hilbert spaces or something very very correct.
 
Thanks atyy. I forgot that there was a more general definition of vectors and vector spaces of which the familiar R^n Euclidean kind was only one class. (And I took two linear algebra classes in college! Of course that was a some time ago..)

atyy said:
...functions obey those rules just as well, and so are vectors by that definition.

Wow, that's neat!
 
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