Basic scientific theories usually start with a set of hypotheses or “postulates.” There is generally no logical reason, apart from internal consistency, that can be given to justify such postulates absolutely. They come from ‘revelations’ in the minds of ‘geniuses,’ most likely with hints from Nature based on extensive careful observations. Their general validity can only be established through experimental verification. If numerous rigorously derived logical consequences of a very small set of postulates all agree with experimental observations without exception, one is inclined to accept these postulates as correct descriptions of the laws of Nature and use them confidently to explain and predict other natural phenomena. Quantum mechanics is no exception. It is based on a few postulates. For the purpose of the present discussion, we begin with three basic postulates involving: the “state functions,” “operators,” and “equations of motion.” In this chapter, this set of basic postulates and some of the corollaries and related definitions of terms are introduced and discussed. We will first simply state these postulates and introduce some of the related mathematical tools and concepts that are needed to arrive at their logical consequences later. To those who have not been exposed to the subject of quantum mechanics before, each of these postulates taken by itself may appear puzzling and meaningless at first. It should be borne in mind, however, that it is the collection of these postulates as a whole that forms the foundations of quantum mechanics.
Basic scientific theories usually start with a set of hypotheses or “postulates.” There is generally no logical reason, apart from internal consistency, that can be given to justify such postulates absolutely. They come from ‘revelations’ in the minds of ‘geniuses,’ most likely with hints from Nature based on extensive careful observations. Their general validity can only be established through experimental verification. If numerous rigorously derived logical consequences of a very small set of postulates all agree with experimental observations without exception, one is inclined to accept these postulates as correct descriptions of the laws of Nature and use them confidently to explain and predict other natural phenomena. Quantum mechanics is no exception. It is based on a few postulates. For the purpose of the present discussion, we begin with three basic postulates involving: the “state functions,” “operators,” and “equations of motion.” In this chapter, this set of basic postulates and some of the corollaries and related definitions of terms are introduced and discussed. We will first simply state these postulates and introduce some of the related mathematical tools and concepts that are needed to arrive at their logical consequences later. To those who have not been exposed to the subject of quantum mechanics before, each of these postulates taken by itself may appear puzzling and meaningless at first. It should be borne in mind, however, that it is the collection of these postulates as a whole that forms the foundations of quantum mechanics.
In this chapter the basic concepts of quantum theory are formulated via a self-consistent set of six postulates. These six postulates deal with the following: operator images of physical observables; properties of state vectors and wave functions; the connection with experimental measurements; coordinate-space forms of those operators having classical analogs; the primary dynamical equation of quantum mechanics; and the completeness of the eigenvectors of observables. The postulates are the framework on which the edifice of quantum mechanics is constructed. A separate section is devoted to the statement of each postulate and to a few examples chosen to illustrate or apply it. A comprehensive set of applications is presented in Chapters 6 and 7, where various 1-D systems are used as the vehicles for illustrating the postulates. The basic theory of this chapter is extended and developed in Chapters 8 and 9. Since probability is a key interpretational concept, a brief introduction to this topic is given in an appendix. We emphasize that our formulation of quantum theory (in this chapter and throughout this book) is restricted to the case of pure states. This is not a major restriction. It means that, when we consider ensembles of individual quantum systems (e.g., single particles, atoms, nuclei, etc.), all of the systems in the ensemble are assumed to be in the same quantum state, not necessarily an eigenstate of a quantal operator. Ensembles for which this assumption does not hold are described by a density operator or density matrix rather than by a pure state; treatments of such cases can be found in references cited later.
The behavior of classical macroscopic particles – from baseballs to planets – is governed by Newtonian mechanics as we have described in the first chapters of this book. The behavior of very small particles, on the other hand, is governed by an entirely different collection of equations and rules that go under the name of “quantum mechanics” and these particles are referred to as quantum particles. These rules have analogies to classical mechanics, but are fundamentally different and somewhat mysterious as we discussed in Chapter 8. The fundamental principles of quantum mechanics cannot be proven to be correct. They were developed based on the results of experimental observation, by analogy with classical mechanics, and through the consideration of logical implications of the formalisms used. There is no way to derive the fundamental elements of quantum mechanics, any more than one could predict from first principles that Newtonian forces should add as vectors. On the other hand, quantum mechanics is among the most rigorously tested theories in science, and the predictions of quantum mechanics have, so far, always been in agreement with experiment. In this chapter, we will present quantum mechanics as a series of postulates and examine their implications in application to simple one-dimensional systems. In the next chapter we will examine quantum effects in real systems including atoms, molecules, crystals, and artificially engineered nano-structures. Postulates of quantum mechanics QM Postulate 1: A quantum particle is described by a wave function Ψ( x , y , z , t ) which is a function of spatial coordinates and time. All physically determinable quantities can be derived from the wave function Ψ( x , y , z , t ) ; quantities which cannot be found from the wave function are not physically meaningful. Note that some things that one could ask about a quantum particle, for example the exact position and simultaneous exact momentum of a particle, are not derivable from the wave function and are therefore considered indeterminate (or uncertain ). These are things which cannot ever be known about a particle, and, as such, they are meaningless to contemplate.
This chapter starts with the definition of postulates. Here, in quantum mechanics, the postulates concern the atomic and molecular properties, which are quite far removed from everyday experience. The postulates described here make no claim to those happy mathematical adjectives such as ‘rigorous’, ‘complete’, or irreducible. The ‘proof’ of the postulates is their ability to explain the adequate experimental observations. Here, we have incorporated six postulates. The first postulate opines that ‘the state of quantum mechanical objects is described by a wavefunction’, whereas the second postulate says that ‘every physical observable is expressed by a linear operator’. It also describes how a quantum mechanical operator is constructed. The third postulate gives an idea that the measurement of a physical observable will yield a result, which is one of the Eigen values of the corresponding operator for that observable. The fourth postulate gives how the average of a sequence of measurement is connected with an operator. The fifth postulate is called the time-dependent postulate. Here, it gives a relationship between the time-dependent wave function and an operator, whereas the sixth postulate says that the wave function must be antisymmetric (or symmetric) for the exchange of identical fermions. It must be noted that each and every postulate has been explained clearly. The references, solved problems, and questions on concepts have been given at the end of the chapter.
Our purpose in this chapter is to present the key concepts of quantum mechanics in the language of Hilbert spaces. The reader who has not previously met the physical ideas motivating quantum mechanics, and some of the more elementary applications of Schrödinger's equation, is encouraged to read any of a number of excellent texts on the subject such as [1–4]. Otherwise, the statements given here must to a large extent be taken on trust – not an altogether easy thing to do, since the basic assertions of quantum theory are frequently counterintuitive to anyone steeped in the classical view of physics. Quantum mechanics is frequently presented in the form of several postulates, as though it were an axiomatic system such as Euclidean geometry. As often presented, these postulates may not meet the standards of mathematical rigour required for a strictly logical set of axioms, so that little is gained by such an approach. We will do things a little more informally here. For those only interested in the mathematical aspects of quantum mechanics and the role of Hilbert space see [5–8]. Many of the standard applications, such as the hydrogen atom, will be omitted here as they can be found in all standard textbooks, and we leave aside the enormous topic of measurement theory and interpretations of quantum mechanics. This is not to say that we need be totally comfortable with quantum theory as it stands. Undoubtedly, there are some philosophically disquieting features in the theory, often expressed in the form of socalled paradoxes.
Quantum physics consists of a formal core that is universally agreed upon (basically being a piece of mathematics with suggestive names for concepts matching related concepts of experimental culture) and an interpretational halo (trying to make this relation more precise) that remains highly disputed even after more than 90 years of modern quantum physics. The latter is the subject of the interpretation of quantum mechanics (see Part II), where many interpretations coexist and compete for the attention of those interested in what quantum physics really means. In this chapter, an axiomatic introduction to the undisputed formal core of quantum physics is given. The axioms described present nonrelativistic quantum statistical mechanics in the Schrödinger picture. The relativistic case is outside the scope of these axioms, as it must be treated by quantum field theory; see Chapter 7. As in any axiomatic setting (necessary for a formal discipline), there are a number of different but equivalent sets of axioms or postulates that can be used to define formal quantum physics. Since they are equivalent, their choice is a matter of convenience. The choice presented here is a formulation featuring three aspects: It emphasises the similarity of quantum mechanics and classical mechanics, gives most direct access to statistical mechanics, and is free from allusions to measurement. The reason for the first is that this similarity serves as a guide to meaning. From the axiomatic setting for quantum mechanics presented below, classical mechanics (in the Koopman setting discussed in Section 7.10) is obtained by simply restricting the operators to be diagonal, so that all operations happen pointwise on the diagonal elements. Thus, multiplication is commutative, and one can identify operators and functions. In particular, the density operator degenerates into a probability density. Therefore, the quantum case appears as a generalization of the classical case allowing for noncommutativity, so that both q-observables and the density operator are (usually infinite-dimensional) operators. The reason for the second is that statistical mechanics is the main tool for applications of quantum physics to the macroscopic systems we are familiar with. The reason for the third is that realistic measurements constitute a complex process involving macroscopic detectors, hence should be explained by quantum statistical mechanics rather than be part of the axiomatic foundations themselves. (This is in marked contrast to other foundations, and distinguishes the present system of axioms.)
We summarize below some of the postulates and definitions basic to our formalism, and present some important results based on these postulates. The formalism is purely mathematical in nature with very little physics input, but it provides the structure within which the physical concepts that will be discussed in the later chapters will be framed. State vectors It is important to realize that the Quantum Theory is a linear theory in which the physical state of a system is described by a vector in a complex, linear vector space. This vector may represent a free particle or a particle bound in an atom or a particle interacting with other particles or with external fields. It is much like a vector in ordinary three-dimensional space, following many of the same rules, except that it describes a very complicated physical system. We will be elaborating further on this in the following. The mathematical structure of a quantum mechanical system will be presented in terms of the notations developed by Dirac. A physical state in this notation is described by a “ket” vector, |〉, designated variously as |α〉 or |ψ〉 or a ket with other appropriate symbols depending on the specific problem at hand. The kets can be complex. Their complex conjugates, |〉 * , are designated by 〈| which are called “bra” vectors. Thus, corresponding to every ket vector there is a bra vector. These vectors are abstract quantities whose physical interpretation is derived through their so-called “representatives” in the coordinate or momentum space or in a space appropriate to the problem under consideration.