Is there a probability in QM that an event happens at time t?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Heidi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability Qm Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of probability in quantum mechanics (QM), specifically addressing whether QM can provide a probability amplitude for an event occurring at a specific time. Participants explore theoretical frameworks, implications of measurements, and the mathematical constructs involved in calculating such probabilities.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the probability amplitude A(x,t) describes the likelihood of a particle being at position x at time t, questioning if a similar amplitude B(y,t) can be defined for impacts at a screen over time.
  • There are references to the Wightman axioms and their implications for defining probabilities in compact regions of spacetime, suggesting that measurements are limited to specific intervals.
  • One participant discusses a mathematical approach to compute probabilities using Hilbert spaces and traces, referencing a book by F. Laloe.
  • Another participant describes a particle decay scenario and proposes a method to calculate decay probabilities over time intervals using projectors.
  • There are mentions of published papers related to arrival time distributions and the flux of probability currents, indicating ongoing research in this area.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of using non-self-adjoint Hamiltonians and the physical meaning of expectation values derived from them.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the definitions and implications of probability in QM, with no clear consensus reached. Some agree on the mathematical frameworks while others challenge the interpretations and applications of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in the definitions and assumptions underlying the discussed models, particularly regarding the treatment of measurements and the mathematical rigor required for self-adjoint operators.

  • #61
Our new paper on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.01501
In particular, the mathematical peculiarities that bothered @vanhees71 are in this approach avoided.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK and vanhees71
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Closing this thread since the OPs question has been answered.

Jedi
 
  • Sad
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 225 ·
8
Replies
225
Views
15K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K