Path integral of Richard Feynman

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Richard Feynman's path integral formulation of quantum mechanics, specifically the definition of the integral measures Dx and Dp in the propagator formula. Reilly Atkinson references Kiyosi Ito's resolution of the measure problem for the Feynman integral in 1960, applicable to non-relativistic Hamiltonians for free particles and particles in constant force fields. Additionally, the conversation highlights contributions from M. Kac, Gelfand, and Yaglom, as well as the transformation of integrals into Wiener integrals through Wick rotation, as detailed in Glimm's work.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Feynman's path integral formulation
  • Familiarity with quantum mechanics and Hamiltonian mechanics
  • Knowledge of stochastic processes, particularly Wiener integrals
  • Basic grasp of measure theory and probability densities
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Kiyosi Ito's work on the measure problem in Feynman integrals
  • Explore the implications of Wick rotation in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the contributions of M. Kac and Gelfand to path integrals
  • Learn about Cameron's theorem and its relevance to measure theory
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and researchers in quantum mechanics and stochastic processes will benefit from this discussion, particularly those interested in the mathematical foundations of Feynman's path integral formulation.

Feynman
Messages
152
Reaction score
0
Good morning,
After Feynman formulation's of quantum mechanics, he expressed the propagator in function of path integral by this formula:

$G(x,t;x_i,t_i)=\int\int exp{\frac{i}{\hbar}\int_{t_i}^{t}L(x,\dot{x},P)dt'}DxDp$
the question is how we can define the integral measure Dx and Dp?
thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually, Kiyosi Ito solved the measure problem for the Feynman integral in 1960 (see Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Volume II, U. Cal Press, 1961. pp 227-238) He solves the problem for a non-relativistic H for a free particle and for a particle in a constant force field. He also solves the measure problem for the Weiner Integral, essentiall the Feynman integral after a Wick rotation ( t-> it), which describes brownian motion/heat flow.

The idea is to build a sequence of probability densities (measures) for absolutely continuous trajectories, x(t), and take the appropriate limits. Very heavy math.

Ito also points out that M. Kac, and Gelfand and Yaglom had worked out rigorous approaches the Feynman's path integral. I would suspect that more has been done since that time.

Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
 
The most successful effort is detailed in glimm's big book wherein he converts the integrals into Wiener interals (which are properly defined) by means of what a physicist would call a"wick rotation" as mentioned above. My understading is that "cameron's thm" shows that there are no appropriate measures in the general case.

Streater has the following interesting things to say on the subject:

http://www.mth.kcl.ac.uk/~streater/lostcauses.html#IX
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K