Is Geometric Quantum Mechanics a Viable Alternative to Hilbert Space?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the viability of Geometric Quantum Mechanics (GQM) as an alternative to traditional Hilbert space formulations. Two key papers are referenced: one proposing that quantum phase space can be represented as a complex projective space for finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces, and another discussing the manifold of pure quantum states with unitary-invariant geometry. The consensus indicates that while GQM is mathematically valid, its practical utility for physicists remains questionable, as it may not provide significant insights or simplifications compared to conventional methods.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly Hilbert space theory
  • Familiarity with complex projective spaces and their geometrical properties
  • Knowledge of the superposition principle in quantum systems
  • Basic grasp of Fubini-Study geometry and its applications in quantum state representation
NEXT STEPS
  • Read the paper "Geometric Quantum Mechanics" available at arXiv
  • Explore the implications of complex projective spaces in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the role of geometrical features in spin-1/2 systems
  • Examine the relationship between abstract mathematics and practical physics applications
USEFUL FOR

Researchers in quantum mechanics, mathematicians exploring geometric formulations, and physicists interested in alternative mathematical frameworks for quantum theory.

Quadratrix
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I ran across a paper today that I found rather interesting. The idea is that "there exists a geometry description other than the conventional description in a Hilbert space...". The gist of the paper is that the quantum phase space can be viewed as a complex projective space if the dimensions of the Hilbert space is finite. The paper can be found here:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/math-ph/papers/0701/0701011.pdf

There is another paper I found that makes roughly the same argument, stating that "the manifold of pure quantum states is a complex projective space with the unitary-invariant geometry of Fubini and Study...the detailed physical characteristics of a given quantum system can be represented by specific geometrical features that are selected and preferentially identified in this complex manifold."

The first paper gives an example with the superposition principle. The second paper gives examples of geometrical features that arise in the state spaces for spin -1/2 systems. There are many other papers that talk about this idea, which could be called geometric QM. The argument that there is a corresponding relation between quantum states and points of complex projective space that is a sort of alternative to the conventional description of quantum mechanics in a Hilbert space. What do you think of this idea? Do you think it is valid?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is purely an equivalent mathematical description, nothing physical in it. As to whether it provides deeper insights or cleaner calculations depends on how familiar users are with it. As such, it is clearly correct, but of questionable use to a physicist. Mathematicians are, of course, not constrained by usefulness.
 
Yes. My question was more along the lines of if physicists found this formulation useful. You have to admit that while mathematicians may not be constrained by usefulness, physics is largely dependent on abstract mathematics, while mathematics holds no such tie to physics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
875
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K