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

The Journal of Chemical Physics

Comment on ‘‘Dirac states for unit position and momentum: Phase consistency of their angular momentum representations’’

G. E. Hahne

Published Mar 1, 1983• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

The argument presented makes two points about Snider’s [J. Chem. Phys. 76, 3543 (1982)] transformation between ‘‘unit position’’ states ‖r̂〉 and ‘‘unit momentum’’ states ‖p〉 for the motion of a structureless particle in three space: Snider’s transformation (1) implicitly defines an operator p̂ that has a classical limit a unit vector that is perpendicular to both r̂ and l=r×p, while on a classical scattering trajectory for r→∞, the physical unit vector p/p≊±r̂, and (2) attempts, inconsistent with the kinematics of states and observables of the system, to pass from r̂ to p̂ amplitudes of a state vector without any reference to the scalar r or p dependence of the wave functions.

DOI
10.1063/1.444997

Related papers

Reply to ‘‘Comment on ‘Dirac states for unit position and momentum: Phase consistency of their angular momentum representations’ ’’a)

Robert F. Snider

It is stressed that the defined states and their relationship deal exclusively with the quantum mechanics of directions and angular momentum. In particular, they have nothing to do with the possibility of factoring three dimensional motion into magnitude and directional components. A magnitude independent derivation of the previously obtained result is given.

The Journal of Chemical Physics•Mar 1, 1983•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

Comment on “Legendre-transform functionals for spin-density-functional theory” [J. Chem. Phys. 124, 224108 (2006)]

A. Holas, Robert Balawender

In this Comment the authors propose an alternative formulation of the starting point to the analysis performed in the commented paper [P. W. Ayers and W. Yang, J. Chem. Phys.124, 224108 (2006)]. An important role of the z component of the vector of the total spin angular momentum operator for the considered many-electron system is indicated. The authors believe their approach to be mathematically cleaner and conceptually easier than the original treatment.

The Journal of Chemical Physics•Dec 26, 2006•16 citations

Dirac states for unit position and momentum: Phase consistency of their angular momentum representations

Robert F. Snider

It is shown that the position and momentum directional representations of angular momentum states must satisfy Σλs〈r̂‖λs〉〈λs‖p̂〉 = Σλs(i)λYλs(r̂)Yλs(p̂)*. This imposes phase constraints on the relation between 〈r̂‖λs〉, 〈p̂‖λs〉, Yλs(r̂), and Yλs(p̂). In the accompanying paper, it is shown that this resolves a problem in the centrifugal sudden approximation of molecular collision theory.

The Journal of Chemical Physics•Apr 1, 1982•7 citations

On the Dirac Theory of Spin 1/2 Particles and Its Non-Relativistic Limit

Leslie L. Foldy, Siegfried A. Wouthuysen

By a canonical transformation on the Dirac Hamiltonian for a free particle, a representation of the Dirac theory is obtained in which positive and negative energy states are separately represented by two-component wave functions. Playing an important role in the new representation are new operators for position and spin of the particle which are physically distinct from these operators in the conventional representation. The components of the time derivative of the new position operator all commute and have for eigenvalues all values between $\ensuremath{-}c$ and $c$. The new spin operator is a constant of the motion unlike the spin operator in the conventional representation. By a comparison of the new Hamiltonian with the non-relativistic Pauli-Hamiltonian for particles of spin \textonehalf{}, one finds that it is these new operators rather than the conventional ones which pass over into the position and spin operators in the Pauli theory in the non-relativistic limit. The transformation of the new representation is also made in the case of interaction of the particle with an external electromagnetic field. In this way the proper non-relativistic Hamiltonian (essentially the Pauli-Hamiltonian) is obtained in the non-relativistic limit. The same methods may be applied to a Dirac particle interacting with any type of external field (various meson fields, for example) and this allows one to find the proper non-relativistic Hamiltonian in each such case. Some light is cast on the question of why a Dirac electron shows some properties characteristic of a particle of finite extension by an examination of the relationship between the new and the conventional position operators.

Physical Review•Apr 1, 1950•2,183 citations
The argument presented makes two points about Snider’s [J. Chem. Phys. 76, 3543 (1982)] transformation between ‘‘unit position’’ states ‖r̂〉 and ‘‘unit momentum’’ states ‖p〉 for the motion of a structureless particle in three space: Snider’s transformation (1) implicitly defines an operator p̂ that has a classical limit a unit vector that is perpendicular to both r̂ and l=r×p, while on a classical scattering trajectory for r→∞, the physical unit vector p/p≊±r̂, and (2) attempts, inconsistent with the kinematics of states and observables of the system, to pass from r̂ to p̂ amplitudes of a state vector without any reference to the scalar r or p dependence of the wave functions.
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.
By a canonical transformation on the Dirac Hamiltonian for a free particle, a representation of the Dirac theory is obtained in which positive and negative energy states are separately represented by two-component wave functions. Playing an important role in the new representation are new operators for position and spin of the particle which are physically distinct from these operators in the conventional representation. The components of the time derivative of the new position operator all commute and have for eigenvalues all values between $\ensuremath{-}c$ and ccc. The new spin operator is a constant of the motion unlike the spin operator in the conventional representation. By a comparison of the new Hamiltonian with the non-relativistic Pauli-Hamiltonian for particles of spin \textonehalf{}, one finds that it is these new operators rather than the conventional ones which pass over into the position and spin operators in the Pauli theory in the non-relativistic limit. The transformation of the new representation is also made in the case of interaction of the particle with an external electromagnetic field. In this way the proper non-relativistic Hamiltonian (essentially the Pauli-Hamiltonian) is obtained in the non-relativistic limit. The same methods may be applied to a Dirac particle interacting with any type of external field (various meson fields, for example) and this allows one to find the proper non-relativistic Hamiltonian in each such case. Some light is cast on the question of why a Dirac electron shows some properties characteristic of a particle of finite extension by an examination of the relationship between the new and the conventional position operators.