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

Physical Review

Quantum Electrodynamics without Dead Wood

P. A. M. Dirac

Published Aug 9, 1965• 55 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In quantum electrodynamics one can obtain a Hamiltonian which gives reasonable field equations in the Heisenberg picture, but which does not allow of solutions of the wave equation to represent physical states in the Schr\"odinger picture. The inference is that the Heisenberg picture is a good picture, the Schr\"odinger picture is a bad picture, and the two pictures are not equivalent. The usual proof of the equivalence of the two pictures fails because the state vector of the Schr\"odinger picture does not remain in Hilbert space. One can set up quantum electrodynamics entirely in the Heisenberg picture and thereby avoid the worst difficulties encountered in the Schr\"odinger picture. The theory takes a logical form and is not merely an assembly of working rules. It can be applied to the calculation of the anomalous magnetic moment and the Lamb shift, and is then similar to the usual calculations of these effects, with a good deal of dead wood cut away. There is a problem concerned with the general interpretation of quantum mechanics when one cannot use the Schr\"odinger picture and some postulates are proposed for dealing with it.

DOI
10.1103/physrev.139.b684

Related papers

Complements

Bernard d’Espagnat

This chapter briefly explains the two elementary points concerning quantum mechanics: the mean value rule and the Heisenberg picture. The Schrodinger and Heisenberg pictures are two different but equivalent sets of rules. In other words, when applied to a given physical situation they lead to the same observable predictions. In some respects the Heisenberg picture has definite technical advantages. It is particularly convenient, for instance, in quantum field theory. For describing pure cases the use of wave functions in place of kets is sometimes convenient. The mean value of an observable A and the probability that a measurement of A yields eigenvalue a k can be expressed by means of wave functions. The state vector of a system that does not undergo a measurement does not change with time, obviously this state vector is suddenly modified—also in the Heisenberg picture—when a measurement takes place.

CRC Press eBooks•May 4, 2018•0 citations

Alternative Formulations

Bernard d’Espagnat

The description of the time evolution of systems is technically known as the "Schrodinger picture." An important alternative description is the "Heisenberg picture," which indeed was the one Heisenberg used when he first formulated quantum mechanics. The Schrodinger and Heisenberg pictures represent two different but equivalent sets of rules. In other words, when applied to a given physical situation they lead to the same observable predictions. In some respects, the Heisenberg picture presents definite technical advantages. It is particularly convenient, for instance, in quantum field theory. The chapter discusses work consistently with the equivalent Schrodinger set of rules. For this reason, it describes briefly the Heisenberg formulation. The chapter shows that the expressions used in the Schrodinger picture can be carried over to the Heisenberg picture. It implies, however, that the kets associated with the possible values that can be found upon measurement of an observable are themselves time-dependent kets.

CRC Press eBooks•Mar 5, 2018•0 citations

On the (Non)Equivalence of the Schrodinger and Heisenberg Pictures of Quantum Mechanics

de Gosson, Anthony Maurice

The aim of this short Note is to show that the Schrodinger and Heisenberg pictures of quantum mechanics cannot be equivalent unless one uses a quantization rule clearly stated by Born and Jordan in their famous 1925 paper. This rule is sufficient and necessary to ensure energy conservation in Heisenberg's matrix mechanics. It follows, in particular, that Schrodinger and Heisenberg mechanics yield different theories if one quantizes the Hamiltonian using the Weyl prescription.

•Apr 27, 2014•0 citations

The Heisenberg versus the Schrodinger picture in quantum field theory

Dan Solomon

The Heisenberg picture and Schrodinger picture are supposed to be equivalent representations of quantum mechanics. However this idea has been challenged by P.A.M. Dirac. Also, it has been recently shown by A. J. Faria et al that this is not necessarily the case. In this article a simple problem will be worked out in quantum field theory in which the Heisenberg picture and Schrodinger picture give different results.

arXiv:quant-ph/0308096•Aug 18, 2003•0 citations

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF QUANTUM MECHANICS

Steven Weinberg

We have seen in the previous chapter how useful wave mechanics can be in solving physical problems. But wave mechanics has several limitations. It describes physical states by means of wave functions, which are functions of the positions of the particles of the system, but why should we single out position as the fundamental physical observable? For instance, we might want to describe states in terms of probability amplitudes for particles to have certain values of the momentum or energy rather than the position. A more fundamental limitation is that there are attributes of physical systems that cannot be described at all in terms of the positions and momenta of a set of particles. One of these attributes is spin , which will be a chief subject of Chapter 4. Another is the value of the electric or magnetic field at some point in space, treated in Chapter 11. This chapter will describe the principles of quantum mechanics in a formalism which is essentially the “transformation theory” of Dirac, mentioned briefly in Section 1.4. This formalism generalizes both the wave mechanics of Schrödinger and the matrix mechanics of Heisenberg, and is sufficiently comprehensive to apply to any sort of physical system. States The first postulate of quantum mechanics is that physical states can be represented as vectors in a sort of abstract space known as Hilbert space . Before getting into Hilbert space, I need to say a bit about vectors in general. In kindergarten we learn that vectors are quantities with both magnitude and direction. Later, when we study analytic geometry, we learn instead to describe a vector in d dimensions as a string of d numbers, the components of the vector. The latter approach lends itself well to calculation, but in some respects the kindergarten version is better, because it allows us to describe relations among vectors without specifying a coordinate system. For instance, a statement that one vector is parallel to a second vector, or perpendicular to a third, has nothing to do with how we choose our coordinate system. Here we will formulate what we mean by vector spaces in general, and Hilbert space in particular, in a way that is independent of the coordinates we use to describe directions in these spaces.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Sep 10, 2015•2 citations

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF QUANTUM MECHANICS

Steven Weinberg

We have seen in the previous chapter how useful wave mechanics can be in solving physical problems. But wave mechanics has several limitations. It describes physical states by means of wave functions, which are functions of the positions of the particles of the system, but why should we single out position as the fundamental physical observable? For instance, we might want to describe states in terms of probability amplitudes for particles to have certain values of the momentum or energy rather than the position. A more fundamental limitation: There are attributes of physical systems that cannot be described at all in terms of the positions and momenta of a set of particles. One of these attributes is spin , which will be the subject of Chapter 4. Another is the value of the electric or magnetic field at some point in space, treated in Chapter 11. This chapter will describe the principles of quantum mechanics in a formalism which is essentially the “transformation theory” of Dirac, mentioned briefly in Section 1.4. This formalism generalizes both the wave mechanics of Schrödinger and the matrix mechanics of Heisenberg, and is sufficiently comprehensive to apply to any sort of physical system. States The first postulate of quantum mechanics is that physical states can be represented as vectors in a sort of abstract space known as Hilbert space . Before getting into Hilbert space, I need to say a bit about vectors in general. In kindergarten we learn that vectors are quantities with both magnitude and direction. Later, when we study analytic geometry, we learn instead to describe a vector in d dimensions as a string of d numbers, the components of the vector. This latter approach lends itself well to calculation, but in some respects the kindergarten version is better, because it allows us to describe relations among vectors without specifying a coordinate system. For instance, a statement that one vector is parallel to a second vector, or perpendicular to a third, has nothing to do with how we choose our coordinate system.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Nov 22, 2012•52 citations
In quantum electrodynamics one can obtain a Hamiltonian which gives reasonable field equations in the Heisenberg picture, but which does not allow of solutions of the wave equation to represent physical states in the Schr"odinger picture. The inference is that the Heisenberg picture is a good picture, the Schr"odinger picture is a bad picture, and the two pictures are not equivalent. The usual proof of the equivalence of the two pictures fails because the state vector of the Schr"odinger picture does not remain in Hilbert space. One can set up quantum electrodynamics entirely in the Heisenberg picture and thereby avoid the worst difficulties encountered in the Schr"odinger picture. The theory takes a logical form and is not merely an assembly of working rules. It can be applied to the calculation of the anomalous magnetic moment and the Lamb shift, and is then similar to the usual calculations of these effects, with a good deal of dead wood cut away. There is a problem concerned with the general interpretation of quantum mechanics when one cannot use the Schr"odinger picture and some postulates are proposed for dealing with it.
This chapter briefly explains the two elementary points concerning quantum mechanics: the mean value rule and the Heisenberg picture. The Schrodinger and Heisenberg pictures are two different but equivalent sets of rules. In other words, when applied to a given physical situation they lead to the same observable predictions. In some respects the Heisenberg picture has definite technical advantages. It is particularly convenient, for instance, in quantum field theory. For describing pure cases the use of wave functions in place of kets is sometimes convenient. The mean value of an observable A and the probability that a measurement of A yields eigenvalue a k can be expressed by means of wave functions. The state vector of a system that does not undergo a measurement does not change with time, obviously this state vector is suddenly modified—also in the Heisenberg picture—when a measurement takes place.
The description of the time evolution of systems is technically known as the "Schrodinger picture." An important alternative description is the "Heisenberg picture," which indeed was the one Heisenberg used when he first formulated quantum mechanics. The Schrodinger and Heisenberg pictures represent two different but equivalent sets of rules. In other words, when applied to a given physical situation they lead to the same observable predictions. In some respects, the Heisenberg picture presents definite technical advantages. It is particularly convenient, for instance, in quantum field theory. The chapter discusses work consistently with the equivalent Schrodinger set of rules. For this reason, it describes briefly the Heisenberg formulation. The chapter shows that the expressions used in the Schrodinger picture can be carried over to the Heisenberg picture. It implies, however, that the kets associated with the possible values that can be found upon measurement of an observable are themselves time-dependent kets.
We have seen in the previous chapter how useful wave mechanics can be in solving physical problems. But wave mechanics has several limitations. It describes physical states by means of wave functions, which are functions of the positions of the particles of the system, but why should we single out position as the fundamental physical observable? For instance, we might want to describe states in terms of probability amplitudes for particles to have certain values of the momentum or energy rather than the position. A more fundamental limitation is that there are attributes of physical systems that cannot be described at all in terms of the positions and momenta of a set of particles. One of these attributes is spin , which will be a chief subject of Chapter 4. Another is the value of the electric or magnetic field at some point in space, treated in Chapter 11. This chapter will describe the principles of quantum mechanics in a formalism which is essentially the “transformation theory” of Dirac, mentioned briefly in Section 1.4. This formalism generalizes both the wave mechanics of Schrödinger and the matrix mechanics of Heisenberg, and is sufficiently comprehensive to apply to any sort of physical system. States The first postulate of quantum mechanics is that physical states can be represented as vectors in a sort of abstract space known as Hilbert space . Before getting into Hilbert space, I need to say a bit about vectors in general. In kindergarten we learn that vectors are quantities with both magnitude and direction. Later, when we study analytic geometry, we learn instead to describe a vector in d dimensions as a string of d numbers, the components of the vector. The latter approach lends itself well to calculation, but in some respects the kindergarten version is better, because it allows us to describe relations among vectors without specifying a coordinate system. For instance, a statement that one vector is parallel to a second vector, or perpendicular to a third, has nothing to do with how we choose our coordinate system. Here we will formulate what we mean by vector spaces in general, and Hilbert space in particular, in a way that is independent of the coordinates we use to describe directions in these spaces.
We have seen in the previous chapter how useful wave mechanics can be in solving physical problems. But wave mechanics has several limitations. It describes physical states by means of wave functions, which are functions of the positions of the particles of the system, but why should we single out position as the fundamental physical observable? For instance, we might want to describe states in terms of probability amplitudes for particles to have certain values of the momentum or energy rather than the position. A more fundamental limitation: There are attributes of physical systems that cannot be described at all in terms of the positions and momenta of a set of particles. One of these attributes is spin , which will be the subject of Chapter 4. Another is the value of the electric or magnetic field at some point in space, treated in Chapter 11. This chapter will describe the principles of quantum mechanics in a formalism which is essentially the “transformation theory” of Dirac, mentioned briefly in Section 1.4. This formalism generalizes both the wave mechanics of Schrödinger and the matrix mechanics of Heisenberg, and is sufficiently comprehensive to apply to any sort of physical system. States The first postulate of quantum mechanics is that physical states can be represented as vectors in a sort of abstract space known as Hilbert space . Before getting into Hilbert space, I need to say a bit about vectors in general. In kindergarten we learn that vectors are quantities with both magnitude and direction. Later, when we study analytic geometry, we learn instead to describe a vector in d dimensions as a string of d numbers, the components of the vector. This latter approach lends itself well to calculation, but in some respects the kindergarten version is better, because it allows us to describe relations among vectors without specifying a coordinate system. For instance, a statement that one vector is parallel to a second vector, or perpendicular to a third, has nothing to do with how we choose our coordinate system.