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

Contemporary Physics

How certain is the uncertainty principle?

Edward H. Kerner

Published Sep 1, 1995• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

For the ground problem of Newtonian mechanics, recent work is reviewed where it is shown that there is a one-parameter family of Lagrangians all producing the same equations of motion, all non-equivalent canonically, and all satisfying Galilean covariance. The canonical momentum becomes parameter dependent and therefore ambiguous, and then so too do the canonical commutation rules and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (e.g. the coordinate of one particle may become complementary not to its usual mechanical momentum but to the momentum of a different particle). A way of resolving the ambiguity of commutation rules, by reformulating many-particle dynamics as higher-order one-particle dynamics, is pointed out and includes as well a means to generalize relativistically a non-relativistic dynamics.

DOI
10.1080/00107519508222173

Related papers

The uncertainty principle for energy and time

Jan Hilgevoord

It is generally thought desirable that quantum theory entail an uncertainty relation for time and energy similar to the one for position and momentum. Nevertheless, the existence of such a relation has still remained problematic. Here, it is shown that the problem is due to a confusion between the position coordinates of a point particle (a material system) and the coordinates of a point in space: The time coordinate should be put on a par with the space coordinates, not with the canonical position coordinates of a material system. Whereas quantum mechanics incorporates a Heisenberg uncertainty relation between the canonical position coordinates and their conjugate momenta, there is no reason why a Heisenberg relation should hold between the space coordinates and the canonical momenta, or between the time coordinate and the energy of the system. However, uncertainty relations of a different kind exist between the space coordinates and the total momentum of the system and between the time coordinate and the total energy. These relations are completely similar and may be taken together to form a relativistically covariant set of uncertainty relations. The relation between the time coordinate and the energy implies the well-known relation between the lifetime of a state and its energy spread.

American Journal of Physics•Dec 1, 1996•122 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 Inconsistency of the Usual Galilean Transformation in Quantum Mechanics and How To Fix It

Daniel M. Greenberger

Abstract It is shown that the generally accepted statement that one cannot superpose states of different mass in non-relativistic quantum mechanics is inconsistent. It is pointed out that the extra phase induced in a moving system, which was previously thought to be unphysical, is merely the non-relativistic residue of the "twin-paradox" effect. In general, there are phase effects due to proper time differences between moving frames that do not vanish non-relativistically. There are also effects due to the equivalence of mass and energy in this limit. The remedy is to include both proper time and rest energy non-relativis-tically. This means generalizing the meaning of proper time beyond its classical meaning, and introduc­ ing the mass as its conjugate momentum. The result is an uncertainty principle between proper time and mass that is very general, and an integral role for both concepts as operators in non-relativistic physics.

Zeitschrift für Naturforschung A•Feb 1, 2001•5 citations

ALTERNATIVE HAMILTONIANS OF CLASSICAL MECHANICS AND NONCANONICAL QUANTIZATIONS

A. Horzela

Noncanonical quantization schemes have been proposed in quantum physics long time ago. Recalling some of them I associate these investigations to the quantum mechanical im-plications of the canonically inequivalent Hamilton formula-tions of classical Newtonian dynamics. As the simplest illus-tration of such alternative Hamiltonian descriptions I consider one dimensional system of two particles interacting harmoni-cally. Description of the motion of their center of mass is stan-dard and guarantees the Galilean covariance but the internal motion is described as a noncanonical oscillator for which the Hamiltonian and the total energy are not related by a simple proportionality. Alternative Hamiltonians lead to alternative Poisson structures which may be considered as classical ana-logues of the noncanonical quantum commutation rules. Gen-Concepts of Physics, Vol. I (2004) 11 erated alternative quantizations are consistent with the same Heisenberg equations of motion, i.e., they satisfy the Wigner principle of quantization. For the one dimensional harmonic oscillator the simplest noncanonical algebraic description is given in terms of the Lie algebra so(p, q), p+ q = 3. In such a case the Hamiltonian is still a linear function while the energy is a quadratic polynomial of the main quantum number. This leads to nonstandard termodynamical properties obeyed by such a noncanonical oscillator. The 3-dimensional harmonic oscillator also has a noncanonical description given in terms of the simple Lie algebra, so(p, q), p+ q = 5 in the case under consideration. The most important physical consequence of such a description is the noncommutativity of the coordinate operators, interpreted to be an implication of the noncommu-tative geometry of the underlying spacetime.

•Jan 1, 2004•0 citations

Uncertainty Principles for Position- and Momentum-Like Operators

Lara Ortelli, Gael Silva

At the quantum scale, objects such as fundamental particles, atoms, and molecules are modeled as localized wavepackets rather than concrete objects. As such, some quantities that are well-defined at our human scale physics instead become uncertain. For instance, quantum objects do not have a precise position, and instead their position is understood probabilistically and we look to the expected, or average, value of the position. Another quirk of quantum mechanics is that quantities such as position and momentum become operators that act on functions, similar to matrices acting on vectors. As such, quantities that may have commuted classically may not at the quantum level. For instance, position (x) and momentum (p) commute in classical physics (xp = px), but they do not commute at the quantum level (xp ≠ px). For noncommuting operators A and B, the uncertainty principle qualitatively describes how well one can know A and B simultaneously: the more certain one is of the value of A, the less one knows the value B and vice versa. The standard example is that of position and momentum: the Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that the more certain one is of the position of a quantum object, the more uncertain one is about its momentum. The classic uncertainty principles between noncommuting operators are those of position and momentum, the z and x or y components of angular momentum, and number and phase operators. These operators are very rigid and do not provide easy generalization to more general operators. In this project, we used an infinite matrix representation to analyze the uncertainty principle underlying position and momentum which allows for broader generalization. The biggest component of this project was determining eigenvalues of infinite banded matrices which was aided by the use of the mathematical software Mathematica.

•Mar 27, 2026•0 citations

The generalized uncertainty principle within the ordinary framework of quantum mechanics

Y.V. Przhiyalkovskiy

A proper deformation of the underlying coordinate and momentum commutation relations in quantum mechanics provides a phenomenological approach to account for the influence of gravity on small scales. Introducing the squared momentum term results in a generalized uncertainty principle, which limits the minimum uncertainty in particle position to the Planck length. However, such a deformation of the commutator significantly changes the formalism, making it separate from the canonical formalism of quantum mechanics. In this study, it is shown that the deformed algebra of position and momentum operators can be incorporated into the framework of ordinary quantum mechanics.

arXiv:2407.09123•Jul 12, 2024•1 citation
For the ground problem of Newtonian mechanics, recent work is reviewed where it is shown that there is a one-parameter family of Lagrangians all producing the same equations of motion, all non-equivalent canonically, and all satisfying Galilean covariance. The canonical momentum becomes parameter dependent and therefore ambiguous, and then so too do the canonical commutation rules and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (e.g. the coordinate of one particle may become complementary not to its usual mechanical momentum but to the momentum of a different particle). A way of resolving the ambiguity of commutation rules, by reformulating many-particle dynamics as higher-order one-particle dynamics, is pointed out and includes as well a means to generalize relativistically a non-relativistic dynamics.
It is generally thought desirable that quantum theory entail an uncertainty relation for time and energy similar to the one for position and momentum. Nevertheless, the existence of such a relation has still remained problematic. Here, it is shown that the problem is due to a confusion between the position coordinates of a point particle (a material system) and the coordinates of a point in space: The time coordinate should be put on a par with the space coordinates, not with the canonical position coordinates of a material system. Whereas quantum mechanics incorporates a Heisenberg uncertainty relation between the canonical position coordinates and their conjugate momenta, there is no reason why a Heisenberg relation should hold between the space coordinates and the canonical momenta, or between the time coordinate and the energy of the system. However, uncertainty relations of a different kind exist between the space coordinates and the total momentum of the system and between the time coordinate and the total energy. These relations are completely similar and may be taken together to form a relativistically covariant set of uncertainty relations. The relation between the time coordinate and the energy implies the well-known relation between the lifetime of a state and its energy spread.
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.
Abstract It is shown that the generally accepted statement that one cannot superpose states of different mass in non-relativistic quantum mechanics is inconsistent. It is pointed out that the extra phase induced in a moving system, which was previously thought to be unphysical, is merely the non-relativistic residue of the "twin-paradox" effect. In general, there are phase effects due to proper time differences between moving frames that do not vanish non-relativistically. There are also effects due to the equivalence of mass and energy in this limit. The remedy is to include both proper time and rest energy non-relativis-tically. This means generalizing the meaning of proper time beyond its classical meaning, and introduc­ ing the mass as its conjugate momentum. The result is an uncertainty principle between proper time and mass that is very general, and an integral role for both concepts as operators in non-relativistic physics.
Noncanonical quantization schemes have been proposed in quantum physics long time ago. Recalling some of them I associate these investigations to the quantum mechanical im-plications of the canonically inequivalent Hamilton formula-tions of classical Newtonian dynamics. As the simplest illus-tration of such alternative Hamiltonian descriptions I consider one dimensional system of two particles interacting harmoni-cally. Description of the motion of their center of mass is stan-dard and guarantees the Galilean covariance but the internal motion is described as a noncanonical oscillator for which the Hamiltonian and the total energy are not related by a simple proportionality. Alternative Hamiltonians lead to alternative Poisson structures which may be considered as classical ana-logues of the noncanonical quantum commutation rules. Gen-Concepts of Physics, Vol. I (2004) 11 erated alternative quantizations are consistent with the same Heisenberg equations of motion, i.e., they satisfy the Wigner principle of quantization. For the one dimensional harmonic oscillator the simplest noncanonical algebraic description is given in terms of the Lie algebra so(p, q), p+ q = 3. In such a case the Hamiltonian is still a linear function while the energy is a quadratic polynomial of the main quantum number. This leads to nonstandard termodynamical properties obeyed by such a noncanonical oscillator. The 3-dimensional harmonic oscillator also has a noncanonical description given in terms of the simple Lie algebra, so(p, q), p+ q = 5 in the case under consideration. The most important physical consequence of such a description is the noncommutativity of the coordinate operators, interpreted to be an implication of the noncommu-tative geometry of the underlying spacetime.
At the quantum scale, objects such as fundamental particles, atoms, and molecules are modeled as localized wavepackets rather than concrete objects. As such, some quantities that are well-defined at our human scale physics instead become uncertain. For instance, quantum objects do not have a precise position, and instead their position is understood probabilistically and we look to the expected, or average, value of the position. Another quirk of quantum mechanics is that quantities such as position and momentum become operators that act on functions, similar to matrices acting on vectors. As such, quantities that may have commuted classically may not at the quantum level. For instance, position (x) and momentum (p) commute in classical physics (xp = px), but they do not commute at the quantum level (xp ≠ px). For noncommuting operators A and B, the uncertainty principle qualitatively describes how well one can know A and B simultaneously: the more certain one is of the value of A, the less one knows the value B and vice versa. The standard example is that of position and momentum: the Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that the more certain one is of the position of a quantum object, the more uncertain one is about its momentum. The classic uncertainty principles between noncommuting operators are those of position and momentum, the z and x or y components of angular momentum, and number and phase operators. These operators are very rigid and do not provide easy generalization to more general operators. In this project, we used an infinite matrix representation to analyze the uncertainty principle underlying position and momentum which allows for broader generalization. The biggest component of this project was determining eigenvalues of infinite banded matrices which was aided by the use of the mathematical software Mathematica.
A proper deformation of the underlying coordinate and momentum commutation relations in quantum mechanics provides a phenomenological approach to account for the influence of gravity on small scales. Introducing the squared momentum term results in a generalized uncertainty principle, which limits the minimum uncertainty in particle position to the Planck length. However, such a deformation of the commutator significantly changes the formalism, making it separate from the canonical formalism of quantum mechanics. In this study, it is shown that the deformed algebra of position and momentum operators can be incorporated into the framework of ordinary quantum mechanics.