Why is Psi Considered a Complex Phenomenon?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter imran
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complex Psi
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the wave function, psi (Ψ), in quantum mechanics, specifically why it is considered a complex phenomenon rather than a real one. Participants explore theoretical implications, mathematical formulations, and the historical context of the Schrödinger Equation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that using complex numbers for the wave function is primarily a mathematical convenience that simplifies calculations.
  • Others argue that the nature of the Schrödinger Equation necessitates complex solutions, raising the question of why the equation is formulated this way.
  • One participant points out that the wave function is not necessarily complex if only considering time-independent states, but becomes complex when time dependence is included.
  • Another participant discusses the derivation of complex numbers from de Broglie's relations and the mixing of derivatives in the equations, contrasting it with classical wave equations that involve only second derivatives.
  • A later reply references contemporary physicists' views on the complexity of psi, noting that the reason for its complex nature remains an open question.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether psi must be complex, with some asserting it is necessary due to the mathematical structure of quantum mechanics, while others suggest it may not be inherently complex under certain conditions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the fundamental reasons for psi's complexity.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions and conditions under which psi is considered complex, including the role of time dependence and the mathematical requirements of the Schrödinger Equation. There are also references to limitations in the current understanding of why psi has both real and imaginary components.

imran
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
why psi is complex!
why can't it is a real ? :rolleyes:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
because it is easier to write the wave function in complex numbers.
 
It's not neccessarily complex. Take the infinite square well for an example. What your hamiltonian is like determines what the wave function turns out to be. As far as I know the only restrictions on psi are that it must be a continuous, single valued function, normalizable and that it's first derivative must be continuous excluding points where the potential is infinite.
 
imran said:
why psi is complex!
why can't it is a real ?

Because that's the only way people have figured out how to get predictions that agree with experiment.

OK, you can say it's because of the way the Schrödinger Equation is set up. Solutions to the S.E. have to be complex. But that just changes the question to "why is the Schrödinger Equation the way it is?" You can't win. :cry:

Sterj said:
because it is easier to write the wave function in complex numbers.

That's true for E&M. You can do electromagnetic waves using only real sines and cosines, but the math is easier sometimes if you use complex exponentials instead. In QM, on the other hand, you need those i's. The only way around them is to write the real and imaginary parts of psi as separate functions, and turn the Schrödinger Equation into a pair of coupled differential equations that mix the two functions together. But that just rephrases imran's question to, "why do we have to do that?" Again, you can't win. :cry:

inha said:
It's not neccessarily complex. Take the infinite square well for an example.

You're probably thinking of the time-independent stationary state wave function psi(x). Include the time dependence to make it psi(x,t) and you'll make it complex. I tried to include an example, but the TeX parser doesn't seem to be working right now... I get the equations I posted in another message over the weekend, on another subject entirely!
 
jtbell said:
You're probably thinking of the time-independent stationary state wave function psi(x). Include the time dependence to make it psi(x,t) and you'll make it complex. I tried to include an example, but the TeX parser doesn't seem to be working right now... I get the equations I posted in another message over the weekend, on another subject entirely!

Ah yes. I should have mentioned the time independence. It seems that I type faster than it's good for me.
 
imran said:
why psi is complex!
why can't it is a real ? :rolleyes:

If you start from the de Broglie's relations for the energy and the momentum, and you assume that they are related by the classical relation E = { {\vec p}^2 \over 2 m} + V({\vec r}), and you assume that that plane waves solutions must exist, and you assume linearity, then you are forced to introduced complex numbers. The key point is that the equation mixes a first derivative (to get the energy) and second derivatives (to get the p^2). In contrast, the classical wave equation contains only second derivatives.

Pat
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SredniVashtar
nrqed said:
The key point is that the equation mixes a first derivative (to get the energy) and second derivatives (to get the p^2). In contrast, the classical wave equation contains only second derivatives.

Gee, that's smart :approve:

Patrick.
 
NRQED, that is indeed a very nice description...one to remember

marlon
 
If somebody of you is interested in reading what contemporary physicist thinks about the problem try www.quniverse.sk/buzek/zaujimave/p343_s.pdf[/URL] . As an attracting example let me give you a very small citation:
"But what of psi (r) itself? Why is it a complex number,
composed of `real’ and `imaginary’ parts, Re psi(r)+ i I am psi(r)?
The surprising truth, I believe, is that at this point we do
not know why psi has two parts."
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K