What is the connection between Feynman's arrow and Schrödinger's psi?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter eb227
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Psi Relationship
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between Feynman's concept of probability amplitudes, represented as arrows, and Schrödinger's wave function, denoted as psi. Participants explore the implications of these concepts within quantum mechanics and quantum electrodynamics (QED), examining their mathematical representations and foundational roles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that Schrödinger's wave function "psi" is a specific representation of Feynman's probability amplitude arrow in the context of position functions.
  • One participant describes psi as a complex number that can be represented as a vector in a geometric plane, linking its magnitude to the probability of an event.
  • There is a question about whether Schrödinger's wave equation serves as the central mathematical equation for both QED and quantum mechanics.
  • Some participants clarify that while fundamental ideas from Schrödinger's equation are relevant, it cannot be used for relativistic particles in QED, necessitating the use of the Dirac equation.
  • Discussion includes the complexity introduced by the Dirac equation, which requires spinors rather than scalars, and the challenges of Feynman's method in Minkowski spacetime.
  • One participant notes that the Schrödinger equation can still be applied in a specific reference frame within quantum field theory (QFT), leading to the Dyson recursion formula and Feynman diagrams.
  • There is an exploration of the relationship between the Schrödinger and Dirac equations, with some participants arguing that the Dirac equation is not simply a relativistic version of the Schrödinger equation, despite initial derivations suggesting otherwise.
  • Participants discuss the equivalence of viewing QFT as either a quantum version of a classical field or as a quantum description of particles with variable numbers, highlighting the subjective nature of these interpretations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between the Schrödinger and Dirac equations, with no consensus on whether one is a direct extension of the other. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these equations in the context of QED and quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific definitions of wave functions and the unresolved nature of the mathematical steps involved in transitioning from non-relativistic to relativistic frameworks.

eb227
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am reading Feynman's QED.
On page 50 he states " The probability of an event is equal to the square of the length of an arrow called the "probility amplitude".
What, if any, is the relationship between Feynman's "arrow" and Shroedinger's wave function "psi".
 
Physics news on Phys.org
eb227 said:
I am reading Feynman's QED.
On page 50 he states " The probability of an event is equal to the square of the length of an arrow called the "probility amplitude".
What, if any, is the relationship between Feynman's "arrow" and Shroedinger's wave function "psi".


It's the same. The Schroedinger wave function "psi" is a specific "coordinate representation" of the "arrow" Feynman talks about (in the basis of functions of position).
 
Psi is a complex number. In the Argand or polar representation of complex numbers they are vectors ("little arrows") in the geometric plane spanned by the vectors 1 = (1,0) and i = (0,1).

A complex number a + ib has the polar representation of a vector of magnitude or length m making an angle of theta with the positive real axis, with m = sqrt(a^2+b^2) and theta = arctan (b/a).

Then the probabllity generated by psi = (a + ib) is (a+ib)(a - iB) = (a^2+b^2), which is the square of the magnitude, or length, of the vector in the polar represntation.
 
Does that imply that Shroedinger's wave equation is the central mathematical equation of QED as well as Quantum Mechanics?
 
Last edited:
eb227 said:
Does that imply that Shroedinger's wave equation is the central mathematical equation of QED as well as Quantum Mechanics?

No. But, the fundamental ideas in Schroedinger's equation do get carried over.

However, Schroedinger's equation can't be used in QED because it is not valid for relativistic particles. Instead, you have to use the Dirac equation, which makes the mathematics much more complicated. (Dirac wavefunctions must be spinors, rather that scalars.)
 
Parlyne said:
...you have to use the Dirac equation, which makes the mathematics much more complicated. (Dirac wavefunctions must be spinors, rather that scalars.)

Plus Feynman's method becomes nonconvergent in Minkowski spacetime. A problem that is fixed by Wick rotation, at the cost of losing the pretty motivation. I don't know if Feynman mentions that in QED.
 
Parlyne said:
No. But, the fundamental ideas in Schroedinger's equation do get carried over.

However, Schroedinger's equation can't be used in QED because it is not valid for relativistic particles. Instead, you have to use the Dirac equation, which makes the mathematics much more complicated. (Dirac wavefunctions must be spinors, rather that scalars.)

Well, you can still use Schroedinger's equation in the relativistic version, in the sense:

hbar/i d/dt |psi> = H |psi>

if you place yourself in a specific reference frame.
Only, |psi> stands for the state vector, say, in Fock space.
But usually, in QFT, we write the Schroedinger equation in time-integrated form, which leads us to the Dyson recursion formula (from which the Feynman diagrams are derived in the canonical quantisation).

The Dirac equation is now the equation of the field operator (and not of the quantum state, or "wave field" or whatever).

It is in fact a very funny interplay, that originally, the Schroedinger equation was (for a single particle), seen as a kind of field equation for a field psi over space/time in a non-relativistic version, that Dirac tried to generalise it to a relativistic field equation, and that it then turned out that Dirac's "field equation" needed a "second quantisation". That is, we had to look upon the Dirac equation as a *classical* field equation now, and that we had to apply the formalism of quantum mechanics to this classical field, and that in this quantum theory of the quantization of a classical field, the Schroedinger equation turned up, again, as the time evolution equation.
So, after all, the Dirac equation is NOT the relativistic variant of the Schroedinger equation, though it was initially derived that way.

The Schroedinger equation is the time evolution equation in Hilbert space ; the Dirac equation is a classical field equation.

However, things are even more confusing ! It can now be seen that a quantized classical field is equivalent to the quantum description of a set of particles with variable number, obeying Bose or Fermi statistics. It is then a matter of taste to see a QFT as the quantum version of a classical field, with "emerging particles" ; or to see a QFT as the quantum version of a set of particles with a given statistics and variable number, and see the "field" emerging. They are equivalent.
 
vanesch said:
So, after all, the Dirac equation is NOT the relativistic variant of the Schroedinger equation, though it was initially derived that way.

That is an important point that many introductory sources omit. It took me a while to work that out for myself.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K