Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:2209.07318 · International Journal of Modern Physics A

Newton’s equations from quantum mechanics for a macroscopic body in the vacuum

Kenichi Konishi

Published May 20, 2023• 8 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Newton’s force law [Formula: see text] is derived from the Schrödinger equation for isolated macroscopic bodies, composite states of e.g. [Formula: see text] atoms and molecules, at finite body temperatures. We first review three aspects of quantum mechanics (QM) in this context: (i) Heisenberg’s uncertainty relations for their center of mass (CM), (ii) the diffusion of the CM wave packet, and (iii) a finite body temperature which implies a metastable (mixed-) state of the body: photon emissions and self-decoherence. They explain the origin of the classical trajectory for a macroscopic body. The ratio between the range [Formula: see text] over which the quantum fluctuations of its CM are effective, and the body’s (linear) size [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] or [Formula: see text], tells whether the body’s CM behaves classically or quantum mechanically, respectively. In the first case, Newton’s force law for its CM follows from the Ehrenfest theorem. We illustrate this for weak gravitational forces, a harmonic-oscillator potential, and for constant external electromagnetic fields slowly varying in space. The derivation of the canonical Hamilton equations for many-body systems is also discussed. Effects due to the body’s finite size such as the gravitational tidal forces appear in perturbation theory. Our work is consistent with the well-known idea that the emergence of classical physics in QM is due to the environment-induced decoherence, but complements and completes it, by clarifying the conditions under which Newton’s equations follow from QM, and by deriving them explicitly.

DOI
10.1142/s0217751x2350080x

Related papers

Problems with the Newton–Schrödinger equations

Charis Anastopoulos, B. L. Hu

We examine the origin of the Newton–Schrödinger equations (NSEs) that play an important role in alternative quantum theories (AQT), macroscopic quantum mechanics and gravity-induced decoherence. We show that NSEs for individual particles do not follow from general relativity (GR) plus quantum field theory (QFT). Contrary to what is commonly assumed, the NSEs are not the weak-field (WF), non-relativistic (NR) limit of the semi-classical Einstein equation (SCE) (this nomenclature is preferred over the 'Moller–Rosenfeld equation') based on GR+QFT. The wave-function in the NSEs makes sense only as that for a mean field describing a system of N particles as , not that of a single or finite many particles. From GR+QFT the gravitational self-interaction leads to mass renormalization, not to a non-linear term in the evolution equations of some AQTs. The WF-NR limit of the gravitational interaction in GR+QFT involves no dynamics. To see the contrast, we give a derivation of the equation (i) governing the many-body wave function from GR+QFT and (ii) for the non-relativistic limit of quantum electrodynamics. They have the same structure, being linear, and very different from NSEs. Adding to this our earlier consideration that for gravitational decoherence the master equations based on GR+QFT lead to decoherence in the energy basis and not in the position basis, despite some AQTs desiring it for the 'collapse of the wave function', we conclude that the origins and consequences of NSEs are very different, and should be clearly demarcated from those of the SCE equation, the only legitimate representative of semiclassical gravity, based on GR+QFT.

arXiv:1403.4921•New Journal of Physics•Aug 19, 2014•90 citations

Quantum mechanics from Newton's second law and the canonical commutation relation [ X , P ] = i

Mark C. Palenik

Despite the fact that it has been known since the time of Heisenberg that quantum operators obey a quantum version of Newton's laws, students are often told that derivations of quantum mechanics must necessarily follow from the Hamiltonian or Lagrangian formulations of mechanics. Here, we first derive the existing Heisenberg equations of motion from Newton's laws and the uncertainty principle using only the equations $F=\frac{dP}{dt}$, $P=m\frac{dV}{dt}$, and $\left[X,P\right]=i$. Then, a new expression for the propagator is derived that makes a connection between time evolution in quantum mechanics and the motion of a classical particle under Newton's laws. The propagator is solved for three cases where an exact solution is possible 1) the free particle 2) the harmonic oscillator 3) a constant force, or linear potential in the standard interpretation. Such a picture may be useful for students as they make the transition from classical to quantum mechanics and help solidify the equivalence of the Hamiltonian, Lagrangian, and Newtonian formulations of physics in their minds.

arXiv:1402.0396•European Journal of Physics•May 9, 2014•4 citations

The Antecedents and Consequences of The Combination of Quantum and Classical Theory

Runsheng Tu

The widespread quest to quantize gravity mirrors humanity’s enduring drive to unify quantum and macroscopic physical frameworks. This research initiates its inquiry by integrating quantum mechanics with classical mechanics, yielding novel analytical perspectives, and introduces the Schrödinger-Tu equation—a wave function that incorporates gravitational potential energy and is capable of describing macroscopic objects. Validating the practical viability of merging quantum and classical approaches, several computational cases involving atoms and molecules yield successful outcomes. Additionally, this study derives a wave-mechanical formulation of classical mechanical laws, furnishing direct empirical evidence that quantum mechanics and classical mechanics are not mutually exclusive but rather compatible and complementary. Further substantiation of their compatibility encompasses the following. key points: • The mass term m in the Schrödinger equation (SE) can be scaled to sufficiently large values to characterize macroscopic entities • The steady-state SE (Tψ +Vψ=Eψ) inherently integrates the wave function ψ with the classical energy conservation relation T+V=E; • Potential energy functions within the SE can be derived from macroscopic force fields; • Newton’s second law F=ma and the SE are mutually derivable, establishing a fundamental theoretical linkage; 5.Electron diffraction experiments concurrently demonstrate wave-particle duality, a phenomenon that bridges both mechanical frameworks.This paradigm shift—recasting the relationship between quantum and classical mechanics from one of incompatibility to ompatibility—represents a pivotal theoretical advancement, with the potential to catalyze the development of a generalized wave echanics.

International Journal of Quantum Technologies•Sep 4, 2026•0 citations

The Quantum Ratio 1

Kenichi Konishi, H - T Elze

Abstract The concept of the Quantum Ratio was born out of the efforts to find a simple but universal criterion if the center of mass (CM) of an isolated (microscopic or macroscopic) body behaves quantum mechanically or classically, and under which conditions. It is defined as the ratio between the quantum fluctuation range, which is the spatial extension of the pure-state CM wave function, and the linear size of the body (the space support of the internal, bound-state wave function). The two cases where the ratio is smaller than unity or much larger than unity, roughly correspond to the body’s CM behaving classically or quantum mechanically, respectively. An important notion following from the introduction of quantum ratio is that the elementary particles (thus the electron and the photon) are quantum mechanical. This is so even when the environment-induced decoherence turns them into a mixed state. Decoherence (mixed state) and classical state should not be identified. This simple observation is further elaborated, by analyzing some atomic or molecular processes. It may have far-reaching implications on the way quantum mechanics works, e.g., in biological systems.

Journal of Physics Conference Series•Jun 1, 2025•0 citations

Quantum Mechanics Equations of Classical Mechanics Laws: Fundamentals of Generalized Wave Mechanics

Runsheng Tu

Classical mechanics and quantum mechanics have long been framed as binary opposites—but this dichotomy has yielded no real benefits, only persistent confusion. The fundamental equations of quantum mechanics cannot logically demarcate a clear boundary between the quantum and classical realms; in fact, the mass m and potential energy V in the Schrödinger equation seamlessly traverse the divide between the microscopic and macroscopic. The electromagnetic potential energy in the Schrödinger equation can be replaced with the potential energy of interactive forces, which can further be converted into force itself using the relation F = V/r. Derivations have now produced a force operator and quantum mechanical equations that explicitly incorporate force—including a quantum formulation of Newton’s second law. These results provide direct evidence that quantum and classical mechanics are not incompatible, but complementary. By resolving the historical absence of “force” as a formal concept in quantum mechanics, we bridge the conceptual gap between macroscopic classical frameworks and microscopic quantum theory, challenging long-held perceptions of their irreconcilability. This unified approach explains why nanoscale particles exhibit quantum properties, simplifies calculations of quantum forces, and lays the groundwork for a generalized wave mechanics that unifies mechanical descriptions across all scales.

International Journal of Quantum Technologies•Sep 22, 2026•0 citations

The Quantum Ratio

Kenichi Konishi, Hans-Thomas Elze

The concept of quantum ratio has emerged from recent efforts to understand how Newton’s equations appear for the center of mass (CM) of an isolated macroscopic body at finite body temperatures as a first approximation of quantum mechanical equations. It is defined as Q≡Rq/L0, where the quantum fluctuation range Rq is the spatial extension of the pure-state CM wave function, whereas L0 stands for the body’s linear size (the space support of the internal bound-state wave function). The two cases Rq/L0≲1 and Rq/L0≫1 roughly correspond to the body’s CM behaving classically or quantum mechanically, respectively. In the present note, we elaborate on this concept and illustrate it through several examples. An important notion following from introduction of the quantum ratio is that the elementary particles (thus, the electron and the photon) are quantum mechanical even when environment-induced decoherence places them into a mixed state. Thus, decoherence and classical state should not be identified. This simple observation, further illustrated by consideration of a few atomic and molecular processes, may have significant implications for the way that quantum mechanics works in biological systems.

arXiv:2402.10702•Symmetry•Apr 4, 2024•3 citations
Newton’s force law [Formula: see text] is derived from the Schrödinger equation for isolated macroscopic bodies, composite states of e.g. [Formula: see text] atoms and molecules, at finite body temperatures. We first review three aspects of quantum mechanics (QM) in this context: (i) Heisenberg’s uncertainty relations for their center of mass (CM), (ii) the diffusion of the CM wave packet, and (iii) a finite body temperature which implies a metastable (mixed-) state of the body: photon emissions and self-decoherence. They explain the origin of the classical trajectory for a macroscopic body. The ratio between the range [Formula: see text] over which the quantum fluctuations of its CM are effective, and the body’s (linear) size [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] or [Formula: see text], tells whether the body’s CM behaves classically or quantum mechanically, respectively. In the first case, Newton’s force law for its CM follows from the Ehrenfest theorem. We illustrate this for weak gravitational forces, a harmonic-oscillator potential, and for constant external electromagnetic fields slowly varying in space. The derivation of the canonical Hamilton equations for many-body systems is also discussed. Effects due to the body’s finite size such as the gravitational tidal forces appear in perturbation theory. Our work is consistent with the well-known idea that the emergence of classical physics in QM is due to the environment-induced decoherence, but complements and completes it, by clarifying the conditions under which Newton’s equations follow from QM, and by deriving them explicitly.
We examine the origin of the Newton–Schrödinger equations (NSEs) that play an important role in alternative quantum theories (AQT), macroscopic quantum mechanics and gravity-induced decoherence. We show that NSEs for individual particles do not follow from general relativity (GR) plus quantum field theory (QFT). Contrary to what is commonly assumed, the NSEs are not the weak-field (WF), non-relativistic (NR) limit of the semi-classical Einstein equation (SCE) (this nomenclature is preferred over the 'Moller–Rosenfeld equation') based on GR+QFT. The wave-function in the NSEs makes sense only as that for a mean field describing a system of N particles as , not that of a single or finite many particles. From GR+QFT the gravitational self-interaction leads to mass renormalization, not to a non-linear term in the evolution equations of some AQTs. The WF-NR limit of the gravitational interaction in GR+QFT involves no dynamics. To see the contrast, we give a derivation of the equation (i) governing the many-body wave function from GR+QFT and (ii) for the non-relativistic limit of quantum electrodynamics. They have the same structure, being linear, and very different from NSEs. Adding to this our earlier consideration that for gravitational decoherence the master equations based on GR+QFT lead to decoherence in the energy basis and not in the position basis, despite some AQTs desiring it for the 'collapse of the wave function', we conclude that the origins and consequences of NSEs are very different, and should be clearly demarcated from those of the SCE equation, the only legitimate representative of semiclassical gravity, based on GR+QFT.
Despite the fact that it has been known since the time of Heisenberg that quantum operators obey a quantum version of Newton's laws, students are often told that derivations of quantum mechanics must necessarily follow from the Hamiltonian or Lagrangian formulations of mechanics. Here, we first derive the existing Heisenberg equations of motion from Newton's laws and the uncertainty principle using only the equations F=dPdtF=\frac{dP}{dt}F=dtdP​, P=mdVdtP=m\frac{dV}{dt}P=mdtdV​, and [X,P]=i\left[X,P\right]=i[X,P]=i. Then, a new expression for the propagator is derived that makes a connection between time evolution in quantum mechanics and the motion of a classical particle under Newton's laws. The propagator is solved for three cases where an exact solution is possible 1) the free particle 2) the harmonic oscillator 3) a constant force, or linear potential in the standard interpretation. Such a picture may be useful for students as they make the transition from classical to quantum mechanics and help solidify the equivalence of the Hamiltonian, Lagrangian, and Newtonian formulations of physics in their minds.
The widespread quest to quantize gravity mirrors humanity’s enduring drive to unify quantum and macroscopic physical frameworks. This research initiates its inquiry by integrating quantum mechanics with classical mechanics, yielding novel analytical perspectives, and introduces the Schrödinger-Tu equation—a wave function that incorporates gravitational potential energy and is capable of describing macroscopic objects. Validating the practical viability of merging quantum and classical approaches, several computational cases involving atoms and molecules yield successful outcomes. Additionally, this study derives a wave-mechanical formulation of classical mechanical laws, furnishing direct empirical evidence that quantum mechanics and classical mechanics are not mutually exclusive but rather compatible and complementary. Further substantiation of their compatibility encompasses the following. key points: • The mass term m in the Schrödinger equation (SE) can be scaled to sufficiently large values to characterize macroscopic entities • The steady-state SE (Tψ +Vψ=Eψ) inherently integrates the wave function ψ with the classical energy conservation relation T+V=E; • Potential energy functions within the SE can be derived from macroscopic force fields; • Newton’s second law F=ma and the SE are mutually derivable, establishing a fundamental theoretical linkage; 5.Electron diffraction experiments concurrently demonstrate wave-particle duality, a phenomenon that bridges both mechanical frameworks.This paradigm shift—recasting the relationship between quantum and classical mechanics from one of incompatibility to ompatibility—represents a pivotal theoretical advancement, with the potential to catalyze the development of a generalized wave echanics.
Abstract The concept of the Quantum Ratio was born out of the efforts to find a simple but universal criterion if the center of mass (CM) of an isolated (microscopic or macroscopic) body behaves quantum mechanically or classically, and under which conditions. It is defined as the ratio between the quantum fluctuation range, which is the spatial extension of the pure-state CM wave function, and the linear size of the body (the space support of the internal, bound-state wave function). The two cases where the ratio is smaller than unity or much larger than unity, roughly correspond to the body’s CM behaving classically or quantum mechanically, respectively. An important notion following from the introduction of quantum ratio is that the elementary particles (thus the electron and the photon) are quantum mechanical. This is so even when the environment-induced decoherence turns them into a mixed state. Decoherence (mixed state) and classical state should not be identified. This simple observation is further elaborated, by analyzing some atomic or molecular processes. It may have far-reaching implications on the way quantum mechanics works, e.g., in biological systems.
Classical mechanics and quantum mechanics have long been framed as binary opposites—but this dichotomy has yielded no real benefits, only persistent confusion. The fundamental equations of quantum mechanics cannot logically demarcate a clear boundary between the quantum and classical realms; in fact, the mass m and potential energy V in the Schrödinger equation seamlessly traverse the divide between the microscopic and macroscopic. The electromagnetic potential energy in the Schrödinger equation can be replaced with the potential energy of interactive forces, which can further be converted into force itself using the relation F = V/r. Derivations have now produced a force operator and quantum mechanical equations that explicitly incorporate force—including a quantum formulation of Newton’s second law. These results provide direct evidence that quantum and classical mechanics are not incompatible, but complementary. By resolving the historical absence of “force” as a formal concept in quantum mechanics, we bridge the conceptual gap between macroscopic classical frameworks and microscopic quantum theory, challenging long-held perceptions of their irreconcilability. This unified approach explains why nanoscale particles exhibit quantum properties, simplifies calculations of quantum forces, and lays the groundwork for a generalized wave mechanics that unifies mechanical descriptions across all scales.
The concept of quantum ratio has emerged from recent efforts to understand how Newton’s equations appear for the center of mass (CM) of an isolated macroscopic body at finite body temperatures as a first approximation of quantum mechanical equations. It is defined as Q≡Rq/L0, where the quantum fluctuation range Rq is the spatial extension of the pure-state CM wave function, whereas L0 stands for the body’s linear size (the space support of the internal bound-state wave function). The two cases Rq/L0≲1 and Rq/L0≫1 roughly correspond to the body’s CM behaving classically or quantum mechanically, respectively. In the present note, we elaborate on this concept and illustrate it through several examples. An important notion following from introduction of the quantum ratio is that the elementary particles (thus, the electron and the photon) are quantum mechanical even when environment-induced decoherence places them into a mixed state. Thus, decoherence and classical state should not be identified. This simple observation, further illustrated by consideration of a few atomic and molecular processes, may have significant implications for the way that quantum mechanics works in biological systems.