Hydrodynamical equations for the probability density \ensuremath{\rho} and the local velocity v of a non-Markovian stochastic process have been recently obtained. The corresponding complex equation in terms of the wave function \ensuremath{\psi} coincides with the Schr\"odinger equation if the first-order terms only are retained. The second-order terms vanish and the third-order terms could be considered as QED-type corrections. To obtain the coefficient ${\mathit{D}}_{4}$ of the third-order term the probability density \ensuremath{\rho} for a free particle is obtained by stochastic electrodynamics. This solution is substituted in the new complex equation, thus obtaining ${\mathit{D}}_{4}$. By this coefficient the calculation of the Lyman-\ensuremath{\alpha} wavelength is in agreement with the best direct measurements for the transition 2P\ensuremath{\rightarrow}1S. The 1S displacement is 1% of the QED value for the Lamb shift. It is suggested how the new negative contribution could be the difference between the (1+0.01) QED value for the 3S state and the corresponding experimental value, which is 20% less than that given by QED.
Hydrodynamical equations for the probability density \ensuremath{\rho} and the local velocity v of a non-Markovian stochastic process have been recently obtained. The corresponding complex equation in terms of the wave function \ensuremath{\psi} coincides with the Schr"odinger equation if the first-order terms only are retained. The second-order terms vanish and the third-order terms could be considered as QED-type corrections. To obtain the coefficient D4 of the third-order term the probability density \ensuremath{\rho} for a free particle is obtained by stochastic electrodynamics. This solution is substituted in the new complex equation, thus obtaining D4. By this coefficient the calculation of the Lyman-\ensuremath{\alpha} wavelength is in agreement with the best direct measurements for the transition 2P\ensuremath{\rightarrow}1S. The 1S displacement is 1% of the QED value for the Lamb shift. It is suggested how the new negative contribution could be the difference between the (1+0.01) QED value for the 3S state and the corresponding experimental value, which is 20% less than that given by QED.
The radiation damping terms of classical electrodynamics are introduced into a set of stochastic equations of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics to study their effects on the energy levels of a stationary system to first order in perturbation theory. In the potential case there appear correction terms to Schr\"odinger's equation, one of which is calculated by solving a subsidiary equation. In particular, we obtain for the Lamb shift an expression of essentially stochastic origin, whose structure is in complete agreement with known results. According to this calculation, which has the advantage of being devoid of divergence problems, the non-relativistic spinless contribution to the Lamb shift of the 2s level amounts of 60% of the total effect.
In the literature, stochastic approaches employed to derive the Schrodinger equation seem to focus on the idea of a classical spatial density which depends on time and space ie. density(x,t). As a result, d/dt (partial) density appears in various equations such as the continuity and Focker Planck equations. At one point in the derivation the quantum wavefunction is introduced “mathematically” as W(x,t)=sqrt(density(x,t)) exp(i S(x,t)) where S is related to a velocity field through u(x,t)=velocity= d/dx S. From quantum mechanics, -Et becomes a term of S the velocity field. The stochastic/hydrodynamical approaches employ the term du/dt partial = d/dt (partial) d/dx S and then “pull out”” d/dx leaving d/dt (partial) S which yields -E average energy from the -Et term. In this note we argue that for a bound quantum state density(x) so d/dt (partial) density = 0, yet the statistical ideas of quantum mechanics should be present in such a case. Furthermore for the free particle wavefunction exp(ipx-iEt), density=1. In fact, the Schrodinger equation should follow for a free particle even the case of density=1. Stochastic processes seem to be based on equations which consider a change in classical spatial density at a point x in time due to flow in or out or stochastic changes. Quantum processes seem to deal with periodic probability changes from one dimension to another exp(ipx) (2 dimensions) which are somehow related to a physical process of momentum flow. Ultimately one links this process to an energy conservation which does not seem to be the same as a classical stochastic/hydrodynamical approach. In this note we argue that a free particle with a constant momentum p has periodic stochastic processes associated with it through its complex probability change in the region of its wavelength, but that these are linked to creating the momentum p. Furthermore momentum is linked to energy so we argue that the Schrodinger equation is a stochastic equation linking energy and momentum and that time and space are separated i.e. there is no situation of following a change in spatial density in time for a free particle with momentum p. For a bound state, one has a distribution of free particles, but again time is removed from the problem in the sense that it only appears in exp(-iEt) in the wavefunction to again establish a relationship between energy and average momentum and potential. There is again no nonzero d/dt (partial) density term which seems to be key in stochastic equations. Only if one takes a linear combination of energy eigenstates Sum over En an(En) exp(-iEnt) Wn(x) does one obtain the form density(x,t), but we argue that quantum features should already appear in exp(ipx) and the bound state scenario with a zero d/dt (partial) density(x,t). We argue, however, that the Schrodinger equation and fundamental stochastic ideas of quantum mechanics should already be present at the level of exp(ipx).
This paper presents a quantum-field-theoretic formulation of the hydrogen 2p → 1s Lyman-α transition, replacing the semiclassical Bohr–Maxwell description with the modern framework of quantum electrodynamics. The initial and final bound-electron states are described by the Dirac equation in the proton’s Coulomb field, with the Schrödinger equation recovered as the leading nonrelativistic limit. The electromagnetic radiation field is quantized, and photon emission is generated by the QED interaction Hamiltonian. The transition amplitude is evaluated from the atomic current and quantized electromagnetic field, leading through Fermi’s golden rule to the spontaneous-emission rate and Einstein coefficient A₂₁. Energy and momentum conservation require the emitted photon to carry the atomic transition energy, including the small correction associated with proton recoil. At leading order, the Lyman-α photon has ΔE ≈ 10.2 eV, ν ≈ 2.47 × 10¹⁵ Hz, and λ ≈ 121.6 nm. In the electric-dipole approximation, the field-theoretic calculation reduces to the standard matrix element of the interaction Hamiltonian H_int = −μ·E, thereby connecting QED directly to the transition dipole moment, oscillator strength, Einstein A coefficient, and radiative lifetime. The calculation reproduces the accepted numerical results for hydrogen while identifying their origin in the coupling between the quantized electron field and the quantized electromagnetic field. The paper also explains how classical electrodynamics is recovered from QED. Maxwell’s equations govern the expectation values of the electromagnetic-field operators in the appropriate classical-field limit, particularly for coherent states containing many photons. A single spontaneously emitted Lyman-α photon, however, remains a genuinely quantum excitation rather than a classical electromagnetic wave. Leading corrections beyond the nonrelativistic Coulomb approximation are then considered, including relativistic fine structure, the Lamb shift, and atomic recoil. The resulting treatment provides a rigorous bridge from the historical Bohr model and Schrödinger wave mechanics to Dirac theory and full QED, verifying the Lyman-α energy, frequency, wavelength, transition probability, and radiative decay structure within a unified quantum-field framework.
According to non-relativistic quantummechanics, the evolution of the wave function of a free particle of mass m and momentum p is described by the Schro¨dinger equation: i ∂ψ ∂t = Hψ , (6.1) with the Hamiltonian operator H = −∇2/2m obtained from the expression for energy E = p2 2m , (6.2) using the substitution E → i ∂ ∂t , p → −i∇ . (6.3) Schro¨dinger himself [6] first suggested a generalisation of equation (6.1) based on the use of the relativistic energy equation: E2 = p2 +m2 . (6.4) (+m2)ψ = 0 , (6.5) Multiplying by ψ∗ and subtracting the product of ψ and the complex conjugate of (6.5) from the result, the continuity equation is obtained ∂ρ ∂t = ∇j , (6.6) with ρ = ψ∗ ∂ψ ∂t − ψ∂ψ ∂t (6.7) and j = −∇ (ψ∗∇ψ − ψ∇ψ∗) . (6.8) However, the ρ which appears in equation (6.6) cannot be identified with the probability density, in analogy with the similar quantity obtained from the Schro¨dinger equation, because it does not have the required property of being always positive-definite. To be convinced of this it is sufficient to substitute i∂/∂t→ E in (6.7). The result, ρ = E|ψ|2 , shows that ρ can be either positive or negative, following from the fact that the Klein-Gordon equation has solutions for the energy with both signs E = ± √ p2 +m2 , Note that in the non-relativistic limit E ≈ m > 0, and the familiar result ρ ∝ |ψ|2 is recovered.
Do diffusive non-Markovian stochastic Schr\"odinger equations (SSEs) for open quantum systems have a physical interpretation? In a recent paper [Phys. Rev. A 66, 012108 (2002)] we investigated this question using the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics. We found that the solution of a non-Markovian SSE represents the state the system would be in at that time if a measurement was performed on the environment at that time, and yielded a particular result. However, the linking of solutions at different times to make a trajectory is, we concluded, a fiction. In this paper we investigate this question using the modal (hidden variable) interpretation of quantum mechanics. We find that the noise function z(t) appearing in the non-Markovian SSE can be interpreted as a hidden variable for the environment. That is, some chosen property (beable) of the environment has a definite value z(t) even in the absence of measurement on the environment. The non-Markovian SSE gives the evolution of the state of the system ``conditioned'' on this environment hidden variable. We present the theory for diffusive non-Markovian SSEs that have as their Markovian limit SSEs corresponding to homodyne and heterodyne detection, as well as one which has no Markovian limit.
Introduction. There exists a very comprehensive theory concerning the time development of probabilistic systems. This is the Theory of Stochastic processes (1). Quantum mechanics as described by the Schrödinger equation rests very heavily on probabilistic interpretation, and yet, after forty years of remarkably rapid advances and successes, it is not clear how it is related to stochastic theory. The formal similarity of certain aspects of, and equations used in these two theories are well known. The diffusion equation corresponds to the Schrödinger equation, a correspondence only marred by a square root of minus unity appearing with the time derivative in the latter equation. The Kolmogoroff–Chapman relation for probabilities in Brownian motion has an analogue (2) in quantum mechanics, not for probabilities though, but for the complex probability amplitudes. The uncertainty relation also has a stochastic analogue (3). Some of these analogous characteristics are actually symptomatic of the gulf which separates these two theories. There are solutions to the diffusion equation which have a very clear physical probabilistic meaning. This is not the case with the corresponding and formally similar solutions to the Schrödinger equation and is partly due to the √ − 1 mentioned earlier. The probabilistic interpretation of the solutions to the diffusion equation is direct and immediate. On the other hand, the probabilistic interpretation of the solutions, ψ of the Schrödinger equation involve the introduction of the probability density, p = ψ*ψ. One great difference between these two theories lies in their each having distinct principles of linear superposition. In Stochastic Theory probabilities are superposed and in quantum mechanics amplitudes or wave functions are superposed.