Relation between commutation and quantization

osturk
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
relation between "commutation" and "quantization"

Hi people;

Over the several texts I have read, I got the impression that position-momentum commutation relations is the cause of "quantization" of the system. Or, they are somehow fundamentally related.

The only relation I know of, is to derive the momentum operator in position space, -i\hbar\frac{d}{dx}, from the commutation relation [x,p]=i\hbar, and then find the position and momentum eigenfunctions which turn out to be oscillating functions of x and p. Then, eigenvalue spectrum of these operators are then naturally "quantized", BUT only if the potential is bounding, like box, harmonic oscillator etc..

Now this demonstration of relation between commutation and quantization looks quite "indirect" to me, and also it is conditional (a bounding potential required to get quantized eigenvalues).

So my question is; is there a more fundamental demonstration of the relation between commutation relations and quantization of a system.

Thanks in advance for the answers.

Deniz
 
Physics news on Phys.org


But, the commutation relation still holds between x and p when x and p are not quantized, for a free particle wave packet.
 


Khashishi said:
But, the commutation relation still holds between x and p when x and p are not quantized, for a free particle wave packet.

Exactly.. I want to know if the notion that I've got, that commutation and quantization is fundamentally related to each other, is true or not.

If it is true; then, is there a mathematical way to show that in a more general way than the example that I gave above.
 


Quantization means replacing classical functions on phase space, here x and p by, QM operators; in position space p becomes an operator -id/dx.

The commutation relation for the operators x and p can derived from this position space representation, i.e.

[x, -id/dx] f(x) = (id/dx x) f(x) = i f(x) for all f(x), so [x, -id/dx] = i
 
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...
Back
Top