Pauli Principle: Exploring Its Deeper Basis & Photon Emission

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tsunami
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pauli Principle
Tsunami
Messages
88
Reaction score
0
I only have applied courses of quantum physics, so in my textbook fundamentals are only briefly mentioned.

In my textbook the following is said of the Pauli principle:

Atkins&Friedman said:
The principle should be regarded as one more fundamental postulate of quantum mechanics in addition to those presented in Chapter 1. However, it does have a deeper basis, for it can be rationalized to some extent by using relativistic arguments and the requirement that the total energy of the universe be positive.

I was wondering if someone can tip the veil of these arguments a little bit. Obviously, spin has a lot to do with it. I was wondering if, with similar arguments, it is possible to explain why photon emission is a common occurence in energy exchange. I mean, what makes photons so special; the fact that they have spin 1?
I was wondering whether people are getting any further in making something similar to Mendelejew's table, but for subatomic particles : that is, to show how behavior can be derived based on the number of types of fermions, bosons, etc. in a system.

I haven't had any subatomic physics yet, so please don't overquark me with your input. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think what you're basically talking about is the "spin-statistics-theorem". I think it says that fermions obey the Pauli principle, while bosons do not.
 
arcnets said:
I think what you're basically talking about is the "spin-statistics-theorem". I think it says that fermions obey the Pauli principle, while bosons do not.

Before making such claims, you should document yourself. So make a search about the "spin-statistics theorem" and see what it really says.
 
The principle should be regarded as one more fundamental postulate of quantum mechanics in addition to those presented in Chapter 1. However, it does have a deeper basis, for it can be rationalized to some extent by using relativistic arguments and the requirement that the total energy of the universe be positive.

what i have seen in textbooks is the following: they start with the Dirac lagrangian and then express the Hamiltonian in terms of this and the field. The Hamiltonian is then rewritten such that formal operators pop out (similar to the solution for the quantum harmonic oscillator), in particular a "d" operator. If this "d" operator is not anti-commutative, then particles with negative energy could be created - this is rejected on physical grounds. therefore, the anti-commutation property (which is really just another way of writing the pauli principle) is a direct consequence of applying special relativity to a quantized field.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
101
Views
15K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
38
Views
6K
Back
Top