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 Letters

Configuration Spaces for Quantum Spinning Particles

Francesco Guerra, R. Marra

Published May 30, 1983• 4 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The authors investigate possible candidates of configuration spaces for the description of the rotational degrees of freedom of quantum spinning particles (including half-integer spin states), and point out their connections in relation to the set of physical observables and superselecting sectors present in the theory.
DOI
10.1103/physrevlett.50.1715

Related papers

A reconstruction of quantum theory for spinning particles

U. Klein

As part of a probabilistic reconstruction of quantum theory (QT), we show that spin is not a purely quantum mechanical phenomenon, as has long been assumed. Rather, this phenomenon occurs before the transition to QT takes place, namely in the area of the quasi-classical (here better quasi-quantum) theory. This borderland between classical physics and QT can be reached within the framework of our reconstruction by the replacement $p \rightarrow M (q, t)$, where $p$ is the momentum variable of the particle and $M(q, t)$ is the momentum field in configuration space. The occurrence of spin, and its special value $1/2$ , is a consequence of the fact that $M(q,t)$ must have exactly three independent components $M_{k}(q,t)$ for a single particle because of the three-dimensionality of space. In the Schrödinger equation for a "particle with spin zero", the momentum field is usually represented as a gradient of a single function $S$. This implies dependencies between the components $M_{k}(q,t)$ for which no explanation exists. In reality, $M(q,t)$ needs to be represented by three functions, two of which are rotational degrees of freedom. The latter are responsible for the existence of spin. All massive structureless particles in nature must therefore be spin-one-half particles, simply because they have to be described by $4$ real fields, one of which has the physical meaning of a probability density, while the other three are required to represent the momentum field in three-dimensional space. We derive the Pauli-Schrödinger equation, the correct value $g=2$ of the gyromagnetic ratio, the classical limit of the Pauli-Schrödinger equation, and clarify some other open questions in the borderland between classical physics and QT.

arXiv:2202.13364•Feb 27, 2022•0 citations

The spin degree of freedom from observer’s mathematics point of view

Boris Khots, Dmitriy Khots

This paper considers spin - j representation of the Lie group SU(2) and its applications to contemporary physics from Observer's Mathematics point of view (see www.mathrelativity.com). This mathematics was introduced by authors based on denial of infinity idea. We proved here the following. Theorem. In Observers Mathematics the probability of spin - j transformation is a homomorphism (representation) of SU(2) to the set of matrix transformations of a linear space of polynomial functions is less than 1. Theorem. The probability of elementary fermions have half-integer spin in Observer's Mathematics is less than 1. The probability of elementary bosons have integer spin in Observer's Mathematics is less than 1.

Spintronics•Aug 20, 2020•1 citation

Spin in Relativistic Quantum Theory

Wayne Nicholas Polyzou, W. Glöckle, Henryk Witała

We discuss the role of spin in Poincaré invariant formulations of quantum mechanics.

arXiv:1208.5840•Few-Body Systems•Dec 28, 2012•31 citations

Spin as a Transformation Class of Rotating Wave Modes

Jérôme Beau

This note examines the hypothesis that the wave function is a combination of rotating and non-rotating wave modes, spin expressing the rotation of these components rather than the rotation of a particle-like object. For the photon the hypothesis is nearly literal: the transverse components of a circularly polarized wave rotate, and the associated angular momentum is mechanically measurable. A scalar counterexample shows that the rotation of components is not sufficient: spin is fixed by the way the components transform under rotations of physical space. The resulting hierarchy is: the relative phase is a measurable coordinate within a sector, the weight $m$ is an axial winding degree, the spin $j$ labels the irreducible representation of $SU(2)$, and univalence $(-1)^{2j}$ separates superselection sectors as a rule on the algebra of observables. The formulation avoids the historical superluminal-velocity objection, which constrains rigid bodies rather than internal rotations of wave components. Any rotational ontology of spin must involve a relational, extended, or topologically attached wave configuration, never a point particle endowed with a mere internal axis. A soldering audit sharpens the programme-facing conclusion into two formal results: an exact Veronese-type obstruction excludes the first internal candidate for selecting the compact real form of the carrier square, and the currently derived data are shown to leave the spinorial soldering indeterminate — the missing data being a phase-sensitive real-form selector, an independent rotation action on the emergent space, and a Casimir-independent normalisation. Interpretive outlook (not a result): these findings leave open two structural readings. A future derived and sufficient soldering could make rotations effective symmetries of projected geometry, whereas an irreducible residual indeterminacy would be consistent with treating the spinorial carrier as prior to space.

•Jul 15, 2026•0 citations

Spin in Relativistic Quantum Theory

We discuss the role of spin in Poincaré invariant formulations of quantum mechanics.

WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks•May 19, 2023•0 citations

Particle Spin and Rotation

N. Rosen

It is proposed to treat the spin of a particle phenomenologically by considering the particle as a small rotating sphere, the rotation of which is described by euler parameters. If the rotation is quantized in the space of the euler parameters, one obtains both integral and half-integral values for the spin. In this way one arrives at a formalism in which the spin components can be represented as differential operators in the Schroedinger representation.

Physical Review•Jun 1, 1951•26 citations
As part of a probabilistic reconstruction of quantum theory (QT), we show that spin is not a purely quantum mechanical phenomenon, as has long been assumed. Rather, this phenomenon occurs before the transition to QT takes place, namely in the area of the quasi-classical (here better quasi-quantum) theory. This borderland between classical physics and QT can be reached within the framework of our reconstruction by the replacement p→M(q,t)p \rightarrow M (q, t)p→M(q,t), where ppp is the momentum variable of the particle and M(q,t)M(q, t)M(q,t) is the momentum field in configuration space. The occurrence of spin, and its special value 1/21/21/2 , is a consequence of the fact that M(q,t)M(q,t)M(q,t) must have exactly three independent components Mk(q,t)M_{k}(q,t)Mk​(q,t) for a single particle because of the three-dimensionality of space. In the Schrödinger equation for a "particle with spin zero", the momentum field is usually represented as a gradient of a single function SSS. This implies dependencies between the components Mk(q,t)M_{k}(q,t)Mk​(q,t) for which no explanation exists. In reality, M(q,t)M(q,t)M(q,t) needs to be represented by three functions, two of which are rotational degrees of freedom. The latter are responsible for the existence of spin. All massive structureless particles in nature must therefore be spin-one-half particles, simply because they have to be described by 444 real fields, one of which has the physical meaning of a probability density, while the other three are required to represent the momentum field in three-dimensional space. We derive the Pauli-Schrödinger equation, the correct value g=2g=2g=2 of the gyromagnetic ratio, the classical limit of the Pauli-Schrödinger equation, and clarify some other open questions in the borderland between classical physics and QT.
This paper considers spin - j representation of the Lie group SU(2) and its applications to contemporary physics from Observer's Mathematics point of view (see www.mathrelativity.com). This mathematics was introduced by authors based on denial of infinity idea. We proved here the following. Theorem. In Observers Mathematics the probability of spin - j transformation is a homomorphism (representation) of SU(2) to the set of matrix transformations of a linear space of polynomial functions is less than 1. Theorem. The probability of elementary fermions have half-integer spin in Observer's Mathematics is less than 1. The probability of elementary bosons have integer spin in Observer's Mathematics is less than 1.
This note examines the hypothesis that the wave function is a combination of rotating and non-rotating wave modes, spin expressing the rotation of these components rather than the rotation of a particle-like object. For the photon the hypothesis is nearly literal: the transverse components of a circularly polarized wave rotate, and the associated angular momentum is mechanically measurable. A scalar counterexample shows that the rotation of components is not sufficient: spin is fixed by the way the components transform under rotations of physical space. The resulting hierarchy is: the relative phase is a measurable coordinate within a sector, the weight mmm is an axial winding degree, the spin jjj labels the irreducible representation of SU(2)SU(2)SU(2), and univalence (−1)2j(-1)^{2j}(−1)2j separates superselection sectors as a rule on the algebra of observables. The formulation avoids the historical superluminal-velocity objection, which constrains rigid bodies rather than internal rotations of wave components. Any rotational ontology of spin must involve a relational, extended, or topologically attached wave configuration, never a point particle endowed with a mere internal axis. A soldering audit sharpens the programme-facing conclusion into two formal results: an exact Veronese-type obstruction excludes the first internal candidate for selecting the compact real form of the carrier square, and the currently derived data are shown to leave the spinorial soldering indeterminate — the missing data being a phase-sensitive real-form selector, an independent rotation action on the emergent space, and a Casimir-independent normalisation. Interpretive outlook (not a result): these findings leave open two structural readings. A future derived and sufficient soldering could make rotations effective symmetries of projected geometry, whereas an irreducible residual indeterminacy would be consistent with treating the spinorial carrier as prior to space.