Limit of quantum mechanics as h -> 0

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the transition from quantum mechanics to classical mechanics as the limit of Planck's constant approaches zero, specifically through the Heisenberg equation of motion. The participants clarify that the classical limit is achieved by approximating quantum averages, leading to classical equations of motion. The Ehrenfest theorem is highlighted as a key concept that bridges quantum and classical mechanics. The confusion arises from the application of the limit of Planck's constant in the derivation of classical equations from quantum operators.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Heisenberg equation of motion
  • Familiarity with quantum operators such as ##\hat{p}## and ##\hat{x}##
  • Knowledge of the Ehrenfest theorem
  • Concept of classical Poisson brackets and their relation to quantum commutators
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Ehrenfest theorem in detail to understand its implications for quantum-classical transitions
  • Explore the derivation of classical mechanics from quantum mechanics using the limit of Planck's constant
  • Investigate the role of wave packets in quantum mechanics and their classical analogs
  • Read about the relationship between quantum commutators and classical Poisson brackets
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and researchers interested in the foundations of quantum theory and its classical limits.

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
3K