B Wavefunction and Lorentz Invariance

Click For Summary
The wavefunction's lack of Lorentz invariance indicates that non-relativistic quantum mechanics is being utilized, which is typically the focus in undergraduate education. This non-invariance suggests that the framework is an approximation, suitable for scenarios where relativistic effects are minimal. Consequently, it remains a practical and effective tool for understanding quantum systems at low energies. However, for high-energy scenarios, the limitations of this approach become significant. Understanding these implications is crucial for advancing to more complex quantum theories that incorporate relativity.
cosmanino2050
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
What are the implications that the wavefunction is not Lorentz invariant?
What are the implications that the wavefunction is not Lorentz invariant?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cosmanino2050 said:
TL;DR Summary: What are the implications that the wavefunction is not Lorentz invariant?

What are the implications that the wavefunction is not Lorentz invariant?
Mostly it means that we’re doing non-relativistic quantum mechanics, the only kind we’re likely to encounter in undergraduate classes. This is an approximation that is valid, accurate, and very useful as long as we’re dealing with energies small enough that relativistic effects are negligible.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes DrChinese, Vanadium 50, Dale and 2 others

Thread 'The Power of QM and QFT'

We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
View full post »

Thread 'Importance of Hanbury Brown and Twiss experiment'

I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
View full post »

Thread 'Entanglement might be the result of an underlying law?'

This is still a great mystery, Einstein called it ""spooky action at a distance" But science and mathematics are full of concepts which at first cause great bafflement but in due course are just accepted. In the case of Quantum Mechanics this gave rise to the saying "Shut up and calculate". In other words, don't try to "understand it" just accept that the mathematics works. The square root of minus one is another example - it does not exist and yet electrical engineers use it to do...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Does the Wavefunction of an Electron Collapse When Captured by a Proton?
Replies
13
Views
2K
B Is Bell's inequality Lorentz invariant?
Replies
2
Views
1K
A Representation of Z2 acting on wavefunctions
Replies
3
Views
1K
I Lorentz invariance and equation of motion for a scalar field
Replies
10
Views
3K
A Many-Particle Wavefunction Question
Replies
13
Views
2K
A Show Lagrangian is invariant under a Lorentz transformation without using generators
Replies
3
Views
1K
B A stupidly basic question about expectation value
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Does Bell's theorem imply other Lorentz transformations?
Replies
13
Views
2K
I Wavefunction in polar coordinates and its bra ket notation
Replies
14
Views
2K
I Momentum cut-off regularisation & Lorentz invariance
Replies
5
Views
2K