I Two Identical non-entangled Particle System

TimeRip496
Messages
249
Reaction score
5
$$|\psi(x_1,x_2)|^2=|\psi(x_2,x_1)|^2$$
$$\psi(x_1,x_2)=+/-\psi(x_2,x_1)$$
How do they convert they former into the latter one? Is it due to the modulus?

I know the latter can also be written as $$\psi(x_1,x_2)=e^{i\alpha}\psi(x_2,x_1)$$ where the exponential is the phase used to replace +/-.

$$\psi(x_1,x_2)=A[\psi_a(x_1)\psi_b(x_2)\pm\psi_a(x_2)\psi_b(x_1)]$$
As for this, isn't $$\Psi(x_1,x_2)=\Psi_a(x_1) \Psi_b(x_2)$$? Why do we need to add the additional one?

Is it because, the particles are indistinguishable and thus we can add $$\psi_a(x_2)\psi_b(x_1)$$?

If that is the case, won't $$(A\psi_a(x_1)\psi_b(x_2))^2$$ or $$(A\psi_a(x_2)\psi_b(x_1))^2$$ be 0.5(probability) each?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In three dimensions, the phase ##e^{i \alpha}## reduces to ##\pm 1## by asserting that swapping two particles twice should be the same as doing nothing. So the swapping operator must have eigenvalues ##\pm 1##. In two dimensions, you can get anyons besides bosons and fermions. For more than two particles, you can get states that are not symmetric nor antisymmetric.

TimeRip496 said:
isn't $$\Psi(x_1,x_2)=\Psi_a(x_1) \Psi_b(x_2)$$? Why do we need to add the additional one?

Is it because, the particles are indistinguishable and thus we can add $$\psi_a(x_2)\psi_b(x_1)$$?

If there is no external label such as location (e.g. one particle is in D.C. while another is in Moscow) you can't distinguish between the first and the second terms.
 
Last edited:
Truecrimson said:
In three dimensions, the phase ##e^{i \alpha}## reduces to ##\pm 1## by asserting that swapping two particles twice should be the same as doing nothing. So the swapping operator must have eigenvalues ##\pm 1##. In two dimensions, you can get anyons besides bosons and fermions. For more than two particles, you can get states that are not symmetric nor antisymmetric.
If there is no external label such as location (e.g. one particle is in D.C. while another is in Moscow) you can't distinguish between the first and the second terms.
But how do you get $$\psi(x_1,x_2)=+/-\psi(x_2,x_1)$$ from
$$|\psi(x_1,x_2)|^2=|\psi(x_2,x_1)|^2$$?
 
TimeRip496 said:
But how do you get $$\psi(x_1,x_2)=+/-\psi(x_2,x_1)$$ from
$$|\psi(x_1,x_2)|^2=|\psi(x_2,x_1)|^2$$?

Without simply asserting it, I don't think there is a satisfactory justification for the first line other than the spin-statistics theorem in 3+1 (or higher)-dimensional quantum field theories. That's why anyons are possible in 2+1 dimensions.

Edit: Source
 
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