Formal expressions are derived for the classical limit of unitary matrix elements in systems of indistinguishable particles. Simple analytic examples are used to illustrate the contribution to these matrix elements from different classical paths involving exchanges of indistinguishable particles. The Pauli exclusion principle is shown to follow from the formal results and an application to molecular symmetry is discussed.
Formal expressions are derived for the classical limit of unitary matrix elements in systems of indistinguishable particles. Simple analytic examples are used to illustrate the contribution to these matrix elements from different classical paths involving exchanges of indistinguishable particles. The Pauli exclusion principle is shown to follow from the formal results and an application to molecular symmetry is discussed.
The connection between the exclusion principle and the principle of indistinguishability of identical particles in quantum mechanics is discussed. It is shown with the aid of a density matrix defined for states with arbitrary permutation symmetry that the particles are indistinguishable only for one-dimensional representations of the permutation group (symmetrical and antisymmetrycal), and are distinguishable in all the states that are degenerate in the permutations. It is demonstrated by the same token that the exclusion principle follows from the principle of indistinguishability of identical particles and the Pauli theorem on the connection between spin and statistics.
In this article, we discuss the identity and indistinguishability of quantum systems and the consequent need to introduce an extra postulate in Quantum Mechanics to correctly describe situations involving indistinguishable particles. This is, for electrons, the Pauli Exclusion Principle, or in general, the Symmetrization Postulate. Then, we introduce fermions and bosons and the distributions respectively describing their statistical behaviour in indistinguishable situations. Following that, we discuss the spin-statistics connection, as well as alternative statistics and experimental evidence for all these results, including the use of bunching and antibunching of particles emerging from a beam splitter as a signature for some bosonic or fermionic states.
In this article, we discuss the identity and indistinguishability of quantum systems and the consequent need to introduce an extra postulate in Quantum Mechanics to correctly describe situations involving indistinguishable particles. This is, for electrons, the Pauli Exclusion Principle, or in general, the Symmetrization Postulate. Then, we introduce fermions and bosons and the distributions respectively describing their statistical behaviour in indistinguishable situations. Following that, we discuss the spin-statistics connection, as well as alternative statistics and experimental evidence for all these results, including the use of bunching and antibunching of particles emerging from a beam splitter as a signature for some bosonic or fermionic states.
If, in a system of identical particles, the one particle state is defined by the partial trace to one of the component spaces of the total Hilbert space, then all one particle states are identical. The particles are indistinguishable. This is often thought to be a typical quantum mechanical phenomenon. I will show however that an analogous procedure to define particle states exists in classical mechanics, which results in classical indistinguishable identical particles. From this analogy it follows that the indistinguishability of identical particles depends on how we define particle states. It is not an inevitable result of the symmetry postulate. Indeed, if particles are defined by partial traces, consistent use of the symmetry postulate leads to the conclusion that all identical particles in the universe are indistinguishable, so that particles can never be pointed at, not even in the classical limit. This does not correspond to the way the term particle is actually used in practice. I will argue that a particle should be defined in such a way that in the classical limit the quantum particle state becomes the state of a classical particle. This will lead us to a definition of particles which is in line with the way the term particle is actually used by physicists.
Details of the many-particle system can also be read from my book titled “Quantum Field Theory: Feynman Path Integrals and Diagrammatic Techniques in Condensed Matter” [ 23 ]. The fundamental difference between classical and quantum mechanics relates the concept of indistinguishability of identical particles where each particle can be equipped with an identifying marker without influencing its behavior in classical mechanics. Besides in classical mechanics, the particle follows its own continuous path in phase space and so it is possible to determine the particular process taking place. So, principally, each particle in a group of identical particles can be identified which is not so in quantum mechanics. It is not possible to mark a particle without influencing its physical state, and worse, if a number of identical particles are brought to the same region in space, their wave functions will rapidly spread out and overlap with one another, thereby soon rendering it impossible to say which particle is where. One of the fundamental assumptions for many-particle systems is therefore that identical particles (i.e., particles characterized by the same quantum numbers such as mass, charge and spin) are, in principle, indistinguishable.
The symmetrization postulates of quantum mechanics (symmetry for bosons, antisymmetry for fermions) are usually taken to entail that quantum particles of the same kind (e.g., electrons) are all in exactly the same state and therefore indistinguishable in the strongest possible sense. These symmetrization postulates possess a general validity that survives the classical limit, and the conclusion seems therefore unavoidable that even classical particles of the same kind must all be in the same state—in clear conflict with what we know about classical particles. In this article we analyze the origin of this paradox. We shall argue that in the classical limit classical particles emerge , as new entities that do not correspond to the “particle indices” defined in quantum mechanics. Put differently, we show that the quantum mechanical symmetrization postulates do not pertain to particles , as we know them from classical physics, but rather to indices that have a merely formal significance. This conclusion raises the question of whether many discussions in the literature about the status of identical quantum particles have not been misguided.