Number of possible wavefunctions only countably infinite?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of wavefunctions in quantum mechanics and their relationship to quantum numbers and black hole entropy. It raises the question of whether the set of possible wavefunctions is countably infinite, given that quantum numbers are discrete, leading to the implication that uncountable probabilities may be excluded. Participants clarify that while eigenfunctions of certain operators are countable, the broader set of admissible wavefunctions is uncountable due to the ability to expand any function in Hilbert space. The conversation also touches on the concept of Rigged Hilbert Spaces, which provide a rigorous mathematical framework for dealing with unbound operators in quantum mechanics. Overall, the thread highlights the complexities and nuances in understanding quantum states and their mathematical representations.
  • #31
physwizard said:
this is not true for all cases. for eg., the free particle energy eigenfunctions form a continuous spectrum.
e^{i\frac{\sqrt{2mE}}{\hbar}x}


These functions are not modulus square integrable. His integration in ℝ is ∞
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Physwizard, your wrote:
I see. As per google, rigged has two meanings:
rigged past participle, past tense of rig (Verb)
Verb
1) Make (a sailing ship or boat) ready for sailing by providing it with sails and rigging.
2) Manage or conduct (something) fraudulently so as to produce an advantageous result.
It appears you are interpreting it as per the first meaning, while I was interpreting as per the second which was why I took objection to it.
I do believe mathematical and physical quantities ought to be properly named.

It was named correctly, without ambiguity, in the original Russian (оснащенное гильбертово пространство). Here, this refers to (1), and not to (2). The problem was not in the naming, it is in the problems of translation.
 
  • #33
nomadreid said:
Physwizard, your wrote:It was named correctly, without ambiguity, in the original Russian (оснащенное гильбертово пространство). Here, this refers to (1), and not to (2). The problem was not in the naming, it is in the problems of translation.

oh. didn't know there was a russian angle!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
67
Views
7K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 128 ·
5
Replies
128
Views
13K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K