Is the Hamilton-Jacobi Formalism a Classical Analogue to Quantum Wave Functions?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter fanieh
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Hamilton-Jacobi formalism is a classical method used to solve Hamiltonian systems, providing a framework for understanding classical mechanics through wavefronts in phase space. It is distinct from quantum mechanics, where the Schrödinger wave function resides in Hilbert space. The Hamiltonian represents the total energy of a system, combining kinetic and potential energies, while the Hamilton-Jacobi equation facilitates the derivation of conserved quantities through canonical transformations. This formalism can be related to quantum theory via the WKB method and Feynman path integrals, illustrating the connection between classical and quantum mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hamiltonian mechanics
  • Familiarity with Hilbert space concepts
  • Knowledge of the Schrödinger equation
  • Basic grasp of wave functions and their properties
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the WKB method in detail for quantum mechanics applications
  • Explore the Feynman path integral formulation of quantum mechanics
  • Investigate canonical transformations in Hamiltonian systems
  • Examine the role of action-angle variables in classical mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in classical mechanics, quantum mechanics, and mathematical physics, will benefit from this discussion. It is also relevant for students and researchers interested in the foundational aspects of quantum theory and its classical analogues.

  • #61
Demystifier said:
@fanieh you are so fast in making questions. Do you ever try to answer them by yourself?

Ive been thinking of this for months. Schlosshauer only mentioned about the theme about "nothing happens in many worlds" indirectly only in 2 pages.. in page 337 "Everett Branches and the Preferred-Basis Problem". The book doesn't mention at all how the initial environment and system got decomposed in MWI. It didn't mention about the Factorization problem. It is only in PF archives that I can read about it.

Anyway. You sure there is no fatal flaw in the concept that a 5th fundamental force created the position preferred basis in MWI to become BM. Well. I'd lecture this to thousand of students so hope it's not illogical or false.. lol.. thanks..
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
fanieh said:
Oh. I wrote the reply before I saw you asked it.. Again..

Schlosshauer only mentioned about the theme about "nothing happens in many worlds" indirectly only in 2 pages.. in page 337 "Everett Branches and the Preferred-Basis Problem". The book doesn't mention at all how the initial environment and system got decomposed in MWI. It didn't mention about the Factorization problem. It is only in PF archives that I can read about it.

Anyway. You sure there is no fatal flaw in the concept that a 5th fundamental force created the position preferred basis in MWI to become BM. Well. I'd lecture this to thousand of students so hope it's not illogical or false.. lol.. thanks..

The Schlosshauer book didn't mention about the Factorization Problem that's why I was kinda confused about it. Well.. the mere fact our universe has environment and system splitted in the Big Bang means there is already position chosen.. and it doesn't mean there is BM, right? so it appears BM is just alternative way of looking at it or addition to preferred basis chosen in the initial environment-system decomposition isn't it? Schlosshaer nearly talked about this when he mentioned Stapp paper in page 337.. but he stopped short and so readers would not be aware of the problem. That's why I'm confused about this.
 
  • #63
fanieh said:
Ive been thinking of this for months. Schlosshauer only mentioned about the theme about "nothing happens in many worlds" indirectly only in 2 pages.. in page 337 "Everett Branches and the Preferred-Basis Problem". The book doesn't mention at all how the initial environment and system got decomposed in MWI. It didn't mention about the Factorization problem. It is only in PF archives that I can read about it.
You can read https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.08341 Sec. 3.3 Refs. [22,23,24].
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fanieh

Similar threads

  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K