What is the significance of the Dirac delta function in quantum mechanics?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Loren Booda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the significance of the Dirac delta function in quantum mechanics, particularly in relation to the position operator and its implications for measurement and probability. Participants explore various aspects of quantum mechanics, including the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the relationship between position and momentum operators.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants discuss the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, noting that the product of uncertainties in position and momentum is a constant, often relating it to the Planck constant.
  • There is a suggestion that the imaginary unit 'i' should not be included in the uncertainty principle but is relevant in the context of quantizing momentum as an operator.
  • One participant questions why only momentum is quantized as an operator and not position, seeking clarification on the mathematical implications of simultaneously quantizing both.
  • Another participant describes the Dirac delta function as a position operator in quantum mechanics, explaining its properties and how it relates to measurement and probability distributions.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of the Dirac delta function, including its definition and how it assigns certainty to a measurement point while introducing uncertainty in momentum.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the Dirac delta function and its role in quantum mechanics. While some points are clarified, there remains uncertainty and differing opinions on the quantization of position and momentum, as well as the implications of the Dirac delta function.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their understanding of the mathematical concepts involved, particularly regarding the application of the Dirac delta function and its integration properties. There is also mention of the need for careful unit selection when discussing constants like the Planck constant.

Loren Booda
Messages
3,115
Reaction score
4
In your opinion, what physics of the past 100 years most closely approaches the elegance, simplicity and appeal of Einstein's equation E=mc2?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How about: 0=0
 
I don't know any physics from the last 100 years :s
 
Loren Booda said:
In your opinion, what physics of the past 100 years most closely approaches the elegance, simplicity and appeal of Einstein's equation E=mc2?

[tex]\Delta x \Delta p = ih[/tex]
 
selfAdjoint said:
[tex]\Delta x \Delta p = ih[/tex]

I agree. This is much more revolutionary than simple relativity.

And to be technical, Einstein first publised his papers in 1905 on SR, which would make E=mc^2 out of the 100 year range given I believe. :-p
 
selfAdjoint said:
[tex]\Delta x \Delta p = ih[/tex]

I am going to show my supreme ignorance of physics by asking what this means?

The change in x and p = complex number times the plank constant? Wild guesses here? I'm serious I have no idea what this relates too sorry.

For us physics numptys could you let us in on this breakthrough?:smile:

EDIT: I can't believe I didn't conjugate the word numpty properly, I apologise to Scotsmen everywhere! :smile:
 
Last edited:
The imaninary number i should be left out of that Heisenberg uncertainty principle, but included in such as the Q. M. operator for momentum.

What do you all think of ther contention that relativity is more fundamental than quantum mechanics?
 
Schrödinger's Dog said:
I am going to show my supreme ignorance of physics by asking what this means?

The change in x and p = complex number times the plank constant? Wild guesses here? I'm serious I have no idea what this relates too sorry.

For us physics numptys could you let us in on this breakthrough?:smile:

EDIT: I can't believe I didn't conjugate the word numpty properly, I apologise to Scotsmen everywhere! :smile:


Yes the imaginary i comes in in quantizing the momentum to an operator. Ignore it for the present purposes. The change( or range of change ~ standard deviation of distribution of possible values) for the position x, multiplied by the same thing for the momentum p, equals a constant. By picking your units carefully you can make this constant be the Planck constant h.

The point is that the more narrowly position is constrained to be, the broader is the constraint on momentum, and vice versa. In the limit where you know one of them exactly, as you know the momentum of the photons in a single-frequency beam of light, then the position of those photons becomes completely uncertain, you can't pick out one or the other in order; any of them could be anywhere along the beam.
 
selfAdjoint said:
..Yes the imaginary i comes in quantizing the momentum to an operator...
Question. Why not also quantize the "position" to an operator--why just "momentum" ? What mathematics results if both position and momentum are simultaneously quantized ?
 
  • #10
General relativity for me would fit the bill. Like quantum mechanics the leap in imagination for the concepts of general relativity was rather large. Also being a theory which makes use of tensors the scope of the field equation is enormous and also lends to an elegance that is beyond most other theories I've studied.
 
  • #11
The displacement is also assigned an operator, usually the Kronecker delta function.
 
  • #12
Loren Booda said:
The displacement is also assigned an operator, usually the Kronecker delta function.
Thanks. So how does this knowledge modify this ? : [tex]\Delta x \Delta p = ih[/tex]
 
  • #13
selfAdjoint said:
Yes the imaginary i comes in in quantizing the momentum to an operator. Ignore it for the present purposes. The change( or range of change ~ standard deviation of distribution of possible values) for the position x, multiplied by the same thing for the momentum p, equals a constant. By picking your units carefully you can make this constant be the Planck constant h.

The point is that the more narrowly position is constrained to be, the broader is the constraint on momentum, and vice versa. In the limit where you know one of them exactly, as you know the momentum of the photons in a single-frequency beam of light, then the position of those photons becomes completely uncertain, you can't pick out one or the other in order; any of them could be anywhere along the beam.

Thanks that's a very complete answer and easy to understand, although I'm glad I just finished studying a statistics block or I may have had more questions.:smile:
 
  • #14
Rade said:
Thanks. So how does this knowledge modify this ? : [tex]\Delta x \Delta p = ih[/tex]

idk, maybe more accurate to say something:

[tex]\Delta x \Delta p > h/(2 \pi)[/tex]

if I did that LaTeX right...
 
  • #15
Loren Booda said:
The displacement is also assigned an operator, usually the Kronecker delta function.
I'm sure I do not understand. Could you explain?
 
  • #16
Actually, the position operator in quantum mechanics is usually given by a Dirac delta function. It may be described 1.) as a function equal to zero except for one neighborhood of the domain approaching a singularity, with non-zero range, and 2.) so that the integral of its range over all its domain equals 1.

Take a sinusoidal wavefunction (technically, slowly tapering off as it approaches infinity, which allows that non-zero position probability can be measured at least finitely along its infinite extent, and normalization can be defined). Once measurement is made, the operator applies and the wavefunction "collapses," and a definite probability of 1 applies to the point of measurement.

Mathematically, the Dirac delta function may choose a discrete value of the variable (position) under consideration when integrating its probability over all space, effectively assigning certainty to the point of measurement. Likewise, position's complement, momentum, introduces an operator (the Fourier transform of the Dirac delta) which under integration yields an infinite range. One might say that a discrete frequency corresponds to a totally uncertain (infinite) wavetrain.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
12K
  • · Replies 190 ·
7
Replies
190
Views
17K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 140 ·
5
Replies
140
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
119
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K