A What are local and non-local operators in QM?

cristianbahena
Messages
16
Reaction score
1
In Hartree-Fock method, I saw the Fock operator has two integrals: Coulomb integral and exchange integral. One can define two operator. "The exchange operator is no local operator" why? Whats de diference: local and no local operator?

And why do the operators have singularities?

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A general one-particle operator ##A## can be defined via it's action on a wavefunction in position representation
##\{A\psi\}(r)=\int d^3r' \alpha(r,r') \psi(r')##.
The function ##\alpha(r,r')## is called the kernel of the operator.
When ##\alpha(r,r')=f(r)\delta^3(r-r')##, with Dirac's delta function, we say that the operator is local.
Obviously, the position operator is local with f(r)=r, while for example, the momentum operator is not local as
##\alpha(r,r') =-i\hbar \partial_r \delta(r-r')##.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba, Tio Barnabe, dextercioby and 1 other person
DrDu said:
A general one-particle operator ##A## can be defined via it's action on a wavefunction in position representation
##\{A\psi\}(r)=\int d^3r' \alpha(r,r') \psi(r')##.
The function ##\alpha(r,r')## is called the kernel of the operator.
When ##\alpha(r,r')=f(r)\delta^3(r-r')##, with Dirac's delta function, we say that the operator is local.
Obviously, the position operator is local with f(r)=r, while for example, the momentum operator is not local as
##\alpha(r,r') =-i\hbar \partial_r \delta(r-r')##.
Sorry my ignorance, but what should result application of the position operator into the wavefunction as given above?
 
Tio Barnabe said:
Sorry my ignorance, but what should result application of the position operator into the wavefunction as given above?
The wavefunction gets multiplied at each point with the respective value of r.
 
  • Like
Likes Tio Barnabe
cristianbahena said:
In Hartree-Fock method, I saw the Fock operator has two integrals: Coulomb integral and exchange integral. One can define two operator. "The exchange operator is no local operator" why? Whats de diference: local and no local operator?

And why do the operators have singularities?

thanks

When F(r)= r
One get:

$${A \phi}(r)= r \phi{r}(r)$$ its a eigenvalue equation
when $$f(r)= -i \hbar \partial_r$$

One get:

$${A \phi}(r)= -i \hbar \partial_r \phi{r}(r)$$ it has no sense.
is the why is local or no local
am i right?

Note: i´m using $$A\phi (r)= \int dr´\phi(r) \alpha(r-r´) \phi(r´)$$
 
The exchange term favors electrons of the same spin to be separated and comes directly from the Pauli exclusion principle. This comes from the anticommutation of fermions (i.e. the antisymmetry of the wavefunction). The exchange process is inherently non local since exchanging any two electrons changes the sign of the entire many body wavefunction.

More generally, you can say that fermions in general are non local because they anticommutate. In a sense they carry a string of minus signs. Another thing is that Fermion parity (even or odd) is always conserved which comes from this. There are a lot very deep consequences of this beyond this discussion.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby
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