Limit of quantum mechanics as h -> 0

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the limit of quantum mechanics as Planck's constant approaches zero, particularly focusing on the Heisenberg equation of motion and its implications for transitioning from quantum to classical mechanics. Participants explore the mathematical derivations and conceptual understanding of how quantum equations relate to classical mechanics.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the Heisenberg equation of motion and expresses confusion about the role of Planck's constant in the derivation.
  • Another participant corrects the simplification of the equation, stating that it results in a different form than initially presented.
  • A third participant discusses the relationship between quantum commutators and classical Poisson brackets, suggesting that the classical limit can be derived from this correspondence.
  • Further elaboration is provided on the Ehrenfest theorem, indicating that quantum operators must be averaged to approach classical equations, with a specific approximation requiring a small Planck's constant.
  • One participant summarizes their confusion regarding the transition from quantum to classical mechanics and references their own insight on the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the derivation and implications of the equations discussed. There are multiple competing views regarding the correct interpretation and simplification of the equations, as well as the role of Planck's constant in the transition to classical mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Some participants' statements rely on assumptions about the behavior of quantum systems and the definitions of operators, which may not be universally accepted. The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and varying interpretations of the equations involved.

offscene
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
I recently saw an explanation for how quantum mechanics approaches classical mechanics at the limit of Planck's constant becoming 0 using the Heisenberg equation of motion but am confused about what it is about this limit that reduces the equation of motion to its classical limit.
Starting from the Heisenberg equation of motion, we have

$$ih \frac{\partial p}{\partial t} = [p, H]$$
which simplifies to $$ih \frac{\partial p}{\partial t} = -ih\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}$$
but this just results in ## \frac{\partial p}{\partial t} = -ih\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}## and I'm not sure where the limit of the Planck's constant was even used. Can anyone point out my mistake or help me understand?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
offscene said:
I recently saw an explanation f

where?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and topsquark
offscene said:
but this just results in ## \frac{\partial p}{\partial t} = -ih\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}##
No, it results in ## \frac{\partial p}{\partial t} = -\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd, topsquark and malawi_glenn
Classical Poisson bracket { } , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisson_bracket, corresponds with quantum commutator [ ] with
\frac{[\ \ ]}{i\hbar} \rightarrow \{\ \ \}
in classical limit. ##\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}## comes from classical Poisson bracket.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark
The equation you attempted to derive is actually
$$\frac{d\hat{p}}{dt}=F(\hat{x})$$
where
$$F(x)=-\frac{\partial V(x)}{\partial x}$$
Note that ##\hat{p}## and ##\hat{x}## are quantum operators, so the first equation is not yet classical. To get something classical-like you have to take the quantum average of it
$$\frac{d\langle\psi|\hat{p}|\psi\rangle}{dt}=\langle\psi|F(\hat{x})|\psi\rangle$$
which is called the Ehrenfest theorem. But this is still not the classical equation. The classical equation is obtained if the right-hand side can be approximated as
$$\langle\psi|F(\hat{x})|\psi\rangle \approx F(\langle\psi|\hat{x}|\psi\rangle)$$
It is this last approximation that requires the small ##\hbar## limit, which I leave as an exercise for you. (Hint: Assume that ##\langle x|\psi(t)\rangle=\psi(x,t)## is a narrow wave packet, thus resembling a classical particle with well defined position.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark and malawi_glenn
offscene said:
TL;DR Summary: I recently saw an explanation for how quantum mechanics approaches classical mechanics at the limit of Planck's constant becoming 0 using the Heisenberg equation of motion but am confused about what it is about this limit that reduces the equation of motion to its classical limit.

Starting from the Heisenberg equation of motion, we have

$$ih \frac{\partial p}{\partial t} = [p, H]$$
which simplifies to $$ih \frac{\partial p}{\partial t} = -ih\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}$$
but this just results in ## \frac{\partial p}{\partial t} = -ih\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}## and I'm not sure where the limit of the Planck's constant was even used. Can anyone point out my mistake or help me understand?
I wrote an insight about it. I believe I called it: The classical limit of commutators, or something similar
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: offscene, anuttarasammyak and malawi_glenn

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K