Interval in Quantum Mechanics?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of intervals in Quantum Mechanics (QM) and Quantum Field Theory (QFT) compared to their significance in Special and General Relativity. Participants explore the role of conserved intervals, metrics in Hilbert spaces, and the implications of Lorentz invariance in these theories.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that there is no conserved interval in QM/QFT, unlike in Special/General Relativity.
  • Others argue that in non-relativistic QM, the spacetime interval does not play a role due to its non-relativistic nature.
  • In QFT, some claim that everything is Lorentz invariant and that the interval plays a similar role to distance in non-relativistic QM.
  • One participant points out that the inner product in Hilbert spaces may serve a similar function to a metric interval in relativity.
  • There is a discussion about the mathematical representations of intervals in relativity and QM, with some participants providing equations to illustrate their points.
  • Some participants note that not all QFTs are relativistic, which raises questions about the applicability of Lorentz invariance to all QFTs.
  • There is a concern that the statement regarding QFT having a Lorentz invariant space-time interval may confuse the original poster.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the role of intervals in QM and QFT, and the discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on the parallels between these theories and relativity.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding the relationship between intervals in QM/QFT and those in relativity, particularly regarding the assumptions about Lorentz invariance and the nature of QFTs discussed.

kent davidge
Messages
931
Reaction score
56
In Special/General Relativity invariance of a space-time interval is just so important. But in Quantum Mechanics, be it non-relativistic or QFT, there seems to be no such parallel. I have always noticed this.
I have some ideas about the reason:

1 - it's not part of the theory to have a conserved interval
2 - there's no way to have a metric in a complex Hilbert space

On the other hand, in QM / QFT conservation of probability seems to be as important as a metric interval is in Special/ General Relativity. So that confuses me.

Probably the answer is that as QM/QFT are worked out in Hilbert Spaces, there's an inner product, which plays the role of a "metric interval" as we know in Special/General Relativity?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
kent davidge said:
be it non-relativistic or QFT, there seems to be no such parallel

In NRQM, there is no role for the spacetime interval because it's non-relativistic. In QFT, everything is Lorentz invariant and interval plays exactly the same role as distance does in non-relativistic QM.

Have you had a course in QFT? Can you work any of the problems?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba and kent davidge
@kent davidge you are right about the last statement.
In relativity
$$A\cdot B=\sum_{\mu,\nu} g_{\mu\nu}A^{\mu}B^{\nu}, \;\;\; \mu,\nu=0,1,2,3.$$
In QM
$$\langle A| B\rangle=\sum_{i,j} \delta_{ij}A^{i*}B^j, \;\;\; i,j=1,\ldots, {\rm dim}{\cal H}$$
where ##A^i=\langle i|A\rangle##, ##B^j=\langle j|B\rangle##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kent davidge
Vanadium 50 said:
Have you had a course in QFT?
I've been going through Weinberg's first of his three volumes in QFT. But it has been some time since I last read the book.
Vanadium 50 said:
In QFT, everything is Lorentz invariant and interval plays exactly the same role as distance does in non-relativistic QM
But in Special / General Relativity everything can be made Lorentz invariant and space-time interval comes in very explicitaly. :frown:
 
Demystifier said:
@kent davidge you are right about the last statement.
In relativity
$$A\cdot B=\sum_{\mu,\nu} g_{\mu\nu}A^{\mu}B^{\nu}, \;\;\; \mu,\nu=0,1,2,3.$$
In QM
$$\langle A| B\rangle=\sum_{i,j} \delta_{ij}A^{i*}B^j, \;\;\; i,j=1,\ldots, {\rm dim}{\cal H}$$
where ##A^i=\langle i|A\rangle##, ##B^j=\langle j|B\rangle##.
Perhaps it is more illuminating to write this as
$$A\cdot B=\sum_k A_kB^k$$
in both relativity and QM. The difference is that in relativity
$$A_k=\sum_l g_{kl}A^l$$
while in QM
$$A_k=(A^{k})^*$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kent davidge
kent davidge said:
But in Special / General Relativity everything can be made Lorentz invariant and space-time interval comes in very explicitaly.

It also does in QFT, since QFT requires a Lorentzian background spacetime.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba, kent davidge and dextercioby
PeterDonis said:
It also does in QFT, since QFT requires a Lorentzian background spacetime.
No it doesn't. Not all QFT's are relativistic QFT's.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kent davidge
While that's true, I don't think those are the kinds of theories the OP is talking about.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kent davidge
Vanadium 50 said:
While that's true, I don't think those are the kinds of theories the OP is talking about.
Perhaps, but the statement that QFT has Lorentz invariant space-time interval may further confuse the OP.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kent davidge
  • #10
Thank you to everyone.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K