Undergrad Why Does Quantum Mechanics Require Complex Numbers?

Click For Summary
Quantum mechanics employs complex numbers not merely as a mathematical artifact but as a fundamental aspect of its framework, particularly in describing probability interference. The Aharonov-Bohm effect illustrates that the complex phase of the wave function has significant implications beyond mere calculation. While any complex number can be represented by two real numbers, this transformation complicates the notation without offering deeper insights. The discussion raises the philosophical question of whether the underlying nature of reality is inherently "complex." Ultimately, the nature of quantum mechanics and its reliance on complex numbers remains a profound topic in physics.
MichPod
Messages
231
Reaction score
46
Is the fact that QM uses complex numbers should be considered as a math artefact (as it is the case when complex numbers are used for alternate current circuit analysis), or, alternatively, it has some deep and important relation to the nature (or at least to the nature of the quantum theory)? If the later is true, could you please clarify or bring some links discussing the topic?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Complex numbers are needed in order to correctly describe the interference of probabilities. However, the complex phase of the wave function is not merely a mathematical artifact, as is shown by the Aharonov-Bohm effect.
 
Whatever can be described by one complex number can be described, as well, by two real numbers. Some denotations may look more cumbersome in such a real notation, that's all.
 
Denis said:
Whatever can be described by one complex number can be described, as well, by two real numbers. Some denotations may look more cumbersome in such a real notation, that's all.

Well, a rational number may be described as a pair of integer numbers as well, but we believe (most of us) that the rational numbers give probably more adequate description of the reality than such a pair.
And... even if we pass to two real numbers instead of one complex number, we still will emulate the complex arithmetic with them. The question is - why? Is the nature in its underneath somehow "complex"?
 
MichPod said:
The question is - why? Is the nature in its underneath is somehow "complex"?
Physics doesn't answer "why" questions.

I suggest you read the link I gave, and other threads on PF on the subject (look for "Similar Discussions" below).

Thread closed.
 
I am slowly going through the book 'What Is a Quantum Field Theory?' by Michel Talagrand. I came across the following quote: One does not" prove” the basic principles of Quantum Mechanics. The ultimate test for a model is the agreement of its predictions with experiments. Although it may seem trite, it does fit in with my modelling view of QM. The more I think about it, the more I believe it could be saying something quite profound. For example, precisely what is the justification of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K