Possible to derive geodesics from the wavefunction?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion explores the possibility of deriving the geodesic equation from the time-dependent Schrödinger equation by incorporating a position-dependent time dilation factor. The modified equation includes a dilation factor, D(x), which accounts for the relative clock rates influenced by a constant acceleration field. The conclusion asserts that applying time dilation to the wave function does not lead to acceleration consistent with gravitational effects. For a deeper understanding of the relationship between relativity and quantum mechanics, readers are directed to quantum field theory textbooks such as Srednicki and Lancaster & Blundell.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation
  • Familiarity with concepts of time dilation in general relativity
  • Basic knowledge of quantum field theory
  • Mathematical proficiency in handling differential equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Schwarzschild metric in general relativity
  • Learn about quantum field theory using Srednicki's textbook
  • Explore the implications of time dilation on quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the relationship between gravity and quantum mechanics in advanced literature
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics students, and researchers interested in the intersection of general relativity and quantum field theory.

Gotbread
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Does time dilation applied to the wave function lead to acceleration?
Background

While watching Does time cause gravity? from PBS Spacetime, i wondered if its possible to "derive" the geodesic equation
not from GR alone, but by assuming each particle is described by an extended wave function and the time evolution
of this wave is not constant but the rate varies depending on position, based on the time dilation.

Mathematical attempt

We start with the time dependent schrödinger equation for a free particle:

$$i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t} \Psi(x, t) = \frac{-\hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} \Psi(x, t)$$

Now we add a dilation factor in. As a simple approximation we assume a constant acceleration field
which would result in a linear dilation factor:

$$D(x) = \frac{1}{1+kx\epsilon }$$

Where ##k## is a vector pointing along the acceleration field and ##\epsilon ## is the linearized factor
which describes the strength of the field. The result ##D(x)## describes the relative clock rate
of something at the position ##x## as seen from the perspective of someone sitting at ##x=0##.
If you are "higher up" in the field you would have a higher clock rate ##(>1)## as seen by our observer,
if you are "lower" you would have a lower clock rate ##(<1)## as seen by the observer.
For a more accurate model one would have to derive the position dependent clock rate from e.g. the schwarzschild
metric, but as a linear approximation for small scales (size of a particle) it should be good enough. Since on
e.g. Earth the time dilation effect is very small, ##\epsilon## will be very small as well.

Now we modify our original equation to include the dilation rate:

$$i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t} \Psi(x, t) = D(x)\frac{-\hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} \Psi(x, t)$$

Now we plug in the initial state of a single particle at rest and see what happens. Of course it will initially
spread out, but will it pick up momentum?

And if so, is this acceleration experienced consistent with the same acceleration we would get from "normal"
gravity?
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
Gotbread said:
Summary:: Does time dilation applied to the wave function lead to acceleration?
No. PBS Spacetime is fun, but it’s not a real textbook and it oversimplifies so much that it can’t be used as a basis for developing a deeper understanding or new concepts. If you want to explore the relationship between relativity and quantum mechanics you’ll need a textbook on quantum field theory. Srednicki is one of the few that is available online. Lancaster and Blundell “Quantum field theory for the gifted amateur” isn’t free but is an easier read; anything that simplifies beyond that probably isn’t worth reading,

Please do respect the forum rule about not allowing personal theories and speculation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K