Why are plane waves not possible representations of states in quantum theory?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter AxiomOfChoice
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Scattering States
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the representation of states in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing the nature of plane waves and their relation to Hilbert space. Participants explore the implications of using plane waves as solutions to the Schrödinger equation and their physical realizability.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that plane wave solutions to the Schrödinger equation are not normalizable and therefore do not belong to Hilbert space, raising questions about their physical interpretation.
  • Another participant suggests that while plane waves are not physically realizable states, they can be useful as idealizations and that physically realizable states are superpositions of these waves, referred to as wave packets.
  • A further inquiry is made about the nature of linear combinations of plane waves, questioning whether integrals should be considered instead of sums in this context.
  • Another participant asserts that plane waves are distributions that belong to the dual of the domain of position and momentum operators, indicating a more complex mathematical framework involving rigged Hilbert spaces.
  • References to literature are provided to support the discussion, including works on rigged Hilbert space and its role in quantum mechanics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the physical realizability of plane waves, with some arguing they are useful idealizations while others emphasize their limitations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these perspectives and the mathematical framework involved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the understanding of the mathematical treatment of plane waves, particularly concerning their normalization and representation within Hilbert space. There is also a dependence on specific definitions and formulations that are not universally agreed upon.

AxiomOfChoice
Messages
531
Reaction score
1
One of the postulates of quantum mechanics, as quoted in any textbook on the subject, is something like the following: "states are vectors in a Hilbert space."

But then they go on to solve the problem of the free particle, which should (I guess) be about the simplest problem one can solve. The associated stationary Schrödinger equation in one dimension looks like

[tex] -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \psi'' = E\psi.[/tex]

This admits solutions of the form [itex]\psi(x) = Ae^{ikx} + Be^{-ikx}[/itex], where of course [itex]k = \sqrt{2mE}/\hbar[/itex]. But these are NOT normalizable and are therefore not in any sort of Hilbert space, since any vector in a Hilbert space necessarily has finite norm (and can therefore be normalized). So what is going on here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Those states are not physically realizable. Physically realizable scattering states are superpositions of them (wave packets). Nevertheless, they are useful as idealizations.
 
jtbell said:
Those states are not physically realizable. Physically realizable scattering states are superpositions of them (wave packets). Nevertheless, they are useful as idealizations.

Okay. So though those states themselves are not in our Hilbert space, certain linear combinations (and I guess we need to talk about [itex]\int[/itex] instead of [itex]\sum[/itex] when we say "linear combinations"...or do we?) of them are?
 
Plane waves are not possible representations of states in quantum theory. They are distributions and belong to the dual of the domain of the position and momentum operators and all their powers. This domain is a dense subspace of the Hilbert space, and it's dual is thus much larger than the Hilbert space (for a Hilbert space the topological dual is isomorphic with the Hilbert space itself).

This formulation of quantum theory, called Gelfand construction (or rigged Hilbert space), justifies the quite handwaving approach of physicists to these matters, which goes back to Dirac. A very nice pedagogical introduction can be found in

R. de la Madrid, The role of rigged Hilbert space in quantum mechanics, Eur. J. Phys. 26, 287 (2005) 287
doi:10.1088/0143-0807/26/2/008

A good textbook using this formulation is

L. Ballentine, Quantum Mechanics

and a more formal mathematical representation is given in

Galindo, A., and Pascual, P.: Quantum Mechanics, Springer Verlag, 1990, 2 Vols.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K