Path Integral Basics (Why dimension increases in the integrals?)

Elwin.Martin
Messages
202
Reaction score
0
Alright, I have a kind of dumb question:

Why do I distinguish between dq and dqi when considering the propagation from qi to q to qf?

For example, if we want the wave function at some qf and tf given qi and ti, we may write:
ψ(qf,tf)=∫K(qftf;qiti)ψ(qi,ti)dqi

Why do we distinguish between dqi and say, dq, of an intermediate point q?

I understand that a second integration arises, naturally, since another propagator is defined. I just don't get the need to distinguish? I feel like it's almost book-keeping, like we write out (or don't since we use product notation followed by a script D) our dq's so we don't have to write out more integrals...

I know that's not right though, because we treat q and qi as different things...

Some direction would be great...I feel kind of dumb for whatever I'm missing.

edit:
I think I mis-titled this a little, but it's close enough, I hope.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Elwin.Martin said:
Alright, I have a kind of dumb question:

Why do I distinguish between dq and dqi when considering the propagation from qi to q to qf?

For example, if we want the wave function at some qf and tf given qi and ti, we may write:
ψ(qf,tf)=∫K(qftf;qiti)ψ(qi,ti)dqi

Why do we distinguish between dqi and say, dq, of an intermediate point q?

I understand that a second integration arises, naturally, since another propagator is defined. I just don't get the need to distinguish? I feel like it's almost book-keeping, like we write out (or don't since we use product notation followed by a script D) our dq's so we don't have to write out more integrals...

I know that's not right though, because we treat q and qi as different things...

Some direction would be great...I feel kind of dumb for whatever I'm missing.

edit:
I think I mis-titled this a little, but it's close enough, I hope.

I'm not quite sure what you're asking but when deriving path integrals one takes the propagation (or the sum of all propagations) between states i and f and subdivides them, and then subdivides them again, and again until the path between two states has been turned from a finite path in phase space to an infinite sum of infinitesimal paths.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top