Feynman's Lagrangian path integral was an outgrowth of Dirac's vague surmise that Lagrangians have a role in quantum mechanics. Lagrangians implicitly incorporate Hamilton's first equation of motion, so their use contravenes the uncertainty principle, but they are relevant to semiclassical approximations and relatedly to the ubiquitous case that the Hamiltonian is quadratic in the canonical momenta, which accounts for the Lagrangian path integral's "success". Feynman also invented the Hamiltonian phase-space path integral, which is fully compatible with the uncertainty principle. We recast this as an ordinary functional integral by changing direct integration over subpaths constrained to all have the same two endpoints into an equivalent integration over those subpaths' unconstrained second derivatives. Function expansion with generalized Legendre polynomials of time then enables the functional integral to be unambiguously evaluated through first order in the elapsed time, yielding the Schroedinger equation with a unique quantization of the classical Hamiltonian. Widespread disbelief in that uniqueness stemmed from the mistaken notion that no subpath can have its two endpoints arbitrarily far separated when its nonzero elapsed time is made arbitrarily short. We also obtain the quantum amplitude for any specified configuration or momentum path, which turns out to be an ordinary functional integral over, respectively, all momentum or all configuration paths. The first of these results is directly compared with Feynman's mistaken Lagrangian-action hypothesis for such a configuration path amplitude, with special heed to the case that the Hamiltonian is quadratic in the canonical momenta.
Feynman's Lagrangian path integral was an outgrowth of Dirac's vague surmise that Lagrangians have a role in quantum mechanics. Lagrangians implicitly incorporate Hamilton's first equation of motion, so their use contravenes the uncertainty principle, but they are relevant to semiclassical approximations and relatedly to the ubiquitous case that the Hamiltonian is quadratic in the canonical momenta, which accounts for the Lagrangian path integral's "success". Feynman also invented the Hamiltonian phase-space path integral, which is fully compatible with the uncertainty principle. We recast this as an ordinary functional integral by changing direct integration over subpaths constrained to all have the same two endpoints into an equivalent integration over those subpaths' unconstrained second derivatives. Function expansion with generalized Legendre polynomials of time then enables the functional integral to be unambiguously evaluated through first order in the elapsed time, yielding the Schroedinger equation with a unique quantization of the classical Hamiltonian. Widespread disbelief in that uniqueness stemmed from the mistaken notion that no subpath can have its two endpoints arbitrarily far separated when its nonzero elapsed time is made arbitrarily short. We also obtain the quantum amplitude for any specified configuration or momentum path, which turns out to be an ordinary functional integral over, respectively, all momentum or all configuration paths. The first of these results is directly compared with Feynman's mistaken Lagrangian-action hypothesis for such a configuration path amplitude, with special heed to the case that the Hamiltonian is quadratic in the canonical momenta.
The conventional approach to quantum mechanics begins with the classical Hamiltonian and changes observables to noncommuting operators. Canonically conjugate observables have to be noncommuting operators in order to satisfy the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The dynamics of a quantum mechanical system is given by the time-dependent Schrödinger equation. In the early 1940s Feynman realized that it would be possible to construct a quantum model using the classical Lagrangian approach (a method closely related to the action integral). Dirac had earlier pointed out that eit times the Lagrangian was analogous to a transformation function for the wave function in which the wave function at one instant could be related to the wave function at a next instant in a time interval of t by multiplying with such an exponential function. Feynman found the exponential phase factor to be the action S which is the time integral of the Lagrangian. Further, he noticed that it was necessary to perform integrals over all space variables at every instant of time to find the transition amplitudes. He developed a way for describing and evaluating the integration using the idea of integral over all paths. In Feynman’s approach, the particles are described using amplitudes calculated along the paths they may or may not follow. These amplitudes behave like waves, their phase changes as the quantum system moves along the path and the amplitudes for all paths superpose and interfere. This interference between all paths is called as sum-over-histories and the resulting amplitude is connected in the same way that the amplitude of a wave function is linked to probability as magnitude-squared.
Through a very careful analysis of Dirac's 1932 paper on the Lagrangian in Quantum Mechanics as well as the second and third editions of his classic book {\it The Principles of Quantum Mechanics}, I show that Dirac's contributions to the birth of the path-integral approach to quantum mechanics is not restricted to just his seminal demonstration of how Lagrangians appear naturally in quantum mechanics, but that Dirac should be credited for creating a path-integral which I call {\it Dirac path-integral} which is far more general than Feynman's while possessing all its desirable features. On top of it, the Dirac path-integral is fully compatible with the inevitable quantisation ambiguities, while the Feynman path-integral can never have that full consistency. In particular, I show that the claim by Feynman that for infinitesimal time intervals, what Dirac thought were analogues were actually proportional can not be correct always. I have also shown the conection between Dirac path-integrals and the Schrödinger equation. In particular, it is shown that each choice of Dirac path-integral yields a {\it quantum Hamiltonian} that is generically different from what the Feynman path-integral gives, and that all of them have the same {\it classical analogue}. Dirac's method of demonstrating the least action principle for classical mechanics generalizes in a most straightforward way to all the generalized path-integrals.
We present a consistent and comprehensive treatise on the foundations of the extended Hamilton–Lagrange formalism — where the dynamical system is parametrized along a general system evolution parameter s, and the time t is treated as a dependent variable t(s) on equal footing with all other configuration space variables qi(s). In the action principle, the conventional classical action L1d t is then replaced by the generalized action L1d s, with L and L1denoting the conventional and the extended Lagrangian, respectively. It is shown that a unique correlation of L1and L exists if we refrain from performing simultaneously a transformation of the dynamical variables. With the appropriate correlation of L1and L in place, the extension of the formalism preserves its canonical form. In the extended formalism, the dynamical system is described as a constrained motion within an extended space. We show that the value of the constraint and the parameter s constitutes an additional pair of canonically conjugate variables. In the corresponding quantum system, we thus encounter an additional uncertainty relation. As a consequence of the formal similarity of conventional and extended Hamilton–Lagrange formalisms, Feynman's nonrelativistic path integral approach can be converted on a general level into a form appropriate for relativistic quantum physics. In the emerging parametrized quantum description, the additional uncertainty relation serves as the means to incorporate the constraint and hence to finally eliminate the parametrization. We derive the extended Lagrangian L1of a classical relativistic point particle in an external electromagnetic field and show that the generalized path integral approach yields the Klein–Gordon equation as the corresponding quantum description. We furthermore derive the space–time propagator for a free relativistic particle from its extended Lagrangian L1. These results can be regarded as the proof of principle of the relativistic generalization of Feynman's path integral approach to quantum physics.
Path integrals are by and large defined directly in terms of the configuration space representation of the quantum entity's degrees of freedom and employ the Lagrangian description of the quantum entity; most of the path integrals in this book follow this approach. The Hamiltonian provides another independent approach for defining path integrals and is discussed in this chapter. Two important path integrals, which are directly based on the Hamiltonian, are the following: (a) one that is defined on the degree of freedom's phase space , defined as the tensor product of the degree of freedom space and its canonical conjugate momentum space; and (b) path integrals using the coherent state basis instead of the coordinate basis. Path integrals defined on phase space, or for coherent states, are both based on the Hamiltonian. To put in the foreground the role of the Hamiltonian in quantum mechanics, the canonical equations connecting the Lagrangian to the Hamiltonian are discussed. A brief review of Hamiltonian mechanics, also called the canonical equations, is given in Section 5.1 and the connection of symmetries with conservation laws is discussed in Section 5.2. The Hamiltonian is derived from the Lagrangian in Section 5.3, for both Minkowski and Euclidean time. Phase space path integrals are defined in Section 5.4. Canonical quantization based on the Poisson brackets is discussed in Section 5.5, and Dirac brackets required for quantizing constrained systems are derived in Section 5.7. Coherent states and their path integrals are discussed in Sections 5.10 to 5.14.
Abstract In Chapter 2, a path integral representation of the quantum operator e-β H in the case of Hamiltonians H of the separable form p2/2m + V(q) has been constructed. Here, the construction is extended to Hamiltonians that are more general functions of phase space variables. This results in integrals over paths in phase space involving the action expressed in terms of the classical Hamiltonian H(p,q). However, it is shown that, in the general case, the path integral is not completely defined, and this reflects the problem that the classical Hamiltonian does not specify completely the quantum Hamiltonian, due to the problem of ordering quantum operators in products. When the Hamiltonian is a quadratic function of the momentum variables, the integral over momenta is Gaussian and can be performed. In the separable example, the path integral of Chapter 2 is recovered. In the case of the charged particle in a magnetic field a more general form is found, which is ambiguous, since a problem of operator ordering arises, and the ambiguity must be fixed. Hamiltonians that are general quadratic functions provide other important examples, which are analysed thoroughly. Such Hamiltonians appear in the quantization of the motion on Riemannian manifolds. There, the problem of ambiguities is even more severe. The problem is illustrated by the analysis of the quantization of the free motion on the sphere SN−1.
Abstract The equation of motion in the standard formulation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, the Schrödinger equation, is based on the Hamiltonian. In contrast, in Feynman’s path-integral formulation of quantum mechanics, the equation of motion is the propagation equation, which is based on the Lagrangian. That these two different equations of motion are equivalent was shown by Feynman, who provided a derivation of the Schrödinger equation from the propagation equation. Surprisingly, however, while in classical mechanics there exists a simple relationship between the Hamiltonian and the Lagrangian, there is nothing in Feynman’s derivation that gives any indication of this relationship. Here I show that the equations of motion in the Hamiltonian and Lagrangian formulations of quantum mechanics are, in fact, simply related to each other.