In their simplest formulations, classical dynamics is the study of Hamiltonian flows and quantum mechanics of propagators. Both are linked, and emerge from the datum of a single classical concept, the Hamiltonian function. We study and emphasize the analogies between Hamiltonian flows and quantum propagators; this allows us to verify G. Mackey's observation that quantum mechanics (in its Weyl formulation) is a refinement of Hamiltonian mechanics. We discuss in detail the metaplectic representation, which very explicitly shows the close relationship between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics; the latter emerging from the first by lifting Hamiltonian flows to the double covering of the symplectic group. We also give explicit formulas for the factorization of Hamiltonian flows into simpler flows, and prove a quantum counterpart of these results.In their simplest formulations, classical dynamics is the study of Hamiltonian flows and quantum mechanics of propagators. Both are linked, and emerge from the datum of a single classical concept, the Hamiltonian function. We study and emphasize the analogies between Hamiltonian flows and quantum propagators; this allows us to verify G. Mackey's observation that quantum mechanics (in its Weyl formulation) is a refinement of Hamiltonian mechanics. We discuss in detail the metaplectic representation, which very explicitly shows the close relationship between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics; the latter emerging from the first by lifting Hamiltonian flows to the double covering of the symplectic group. We also give explicit formulas for the factorization of Hamiltonian flows into simpler flows, and prove a quantum counterpart of these results.

arXiv:1501.03137Reviews in Mathematical PhysicsJul 1, 20158 citations

QUANTUM FLOWS WITH INFINITE DEGREES OF FREEDOM AND THEIR PERTURBATIONS

P.K. Das, Kalyan B. Sinha

QP-PQ, quantum probability and white noise analysisJul 1, 19923 citations

On the Structure of Classical and Quantum Flows

Luigi Accardi, Anilesh Mohari, Centro V. Volterra

Journal of Functional AnalysisFeb 1, 199632 citations

Modular flow and the area operator

Xi Dong, Donald M. Marolf, Pratik Rath

In the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence, the Jafferis-Lewkowycz-Maldacena-Suh (JLMS) formula relates the boundary modular Hamiltonian to the HRT area operator and the corresponding bulk modular Hamiltonian. In standard discussions of a holographic code built from perturbative excitations on a fixed classical background, the $A/4G$ term dominates over the bulk modular Hamiltonian in the limit $G \to 0$ . However, this setup is insufficient to describe the action of boundary modular flows that change the classical background. In contrast, our recent discussion of `large' codes provides a useful framework to obtain a JLMS formula that relates bulk and boundary modular flows acting on appropriate states in the code. Here, one sees that the bulk modular Hamiltonian is not in fact subdominant when the modular flow defined by one state acts on another state peaked around a sufficiently different classical background. Instead, the bulk modular Hamiltonian can be of order $1/G$ and can dominate over the $A/4G$ term. Nevertheless, we show that if the two states have the same classical background except for data conjugate to the HRT area then, under mild assumptions and over a large range of flow parameters, the modular-flowed state is described by a classical background given by the HRT-area flow alone.In the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence, the Jafferis-Lewkowycz-Maldacena-Suh (JLMS) formula relates the boundary modular Hamiltonian to the HRT area operator and the corresponding bulk modular Hamiltonian. In standard discussions of a holographic code built from perturbative excitations on a fixed classical background, the $A/4G$ term dominates over the bulk modular Hamiltonian in the limit $G \to 0$. However, this setup is insufficient to describe the action of boundary modular flows that change the classical background. In contrast, our recent discussion of `large' codes provides a useful framework to obtain a JLMS formula that relates bulk and boundary modular flows acting on appropriate states in the code. Here, one sees that the bulk modular Hamiltonian is not in fact subdominant when the modular flow defined by one state acts on another state peaked around a sufficiently different classical background. Instead, the bulk modular Hamiltonian can be of order $1/G$ and can dominate over the $A/4G$ term. Nevertheless, we show that if the two states have the same classical background except for data conjugate to the HRT area then, under mild assumptions and over a large range of flow parameters, the modular-flowed state is described by a classical background given by the HRT-area flow alone.

arXiv:2609.14165Sep 12, 20260 citations

A/4G

term dominates over the bulk modular Hamiltonian in the limit

G \to 0

. However, this setup is insufficient to describe the action of boundary modular flows that change the classical background. In contrast, our recent discussion of `large' codes provides a useful framework to obtain a JLMS formula that relates bulk and boundary modular flows acting on appropriate states in the code. Here, one sees that the bulk modular Hamiltonian is not in fact subdominant when the modular flow defined by one state acts on another state peaked around a sufficiently different classical background. Instead, the bulk modular Hamiltonian can be of order

1/G

and can dominate over the

A/4G

term. Nevertheless, we show that if the two states have the same classical background except for data conjugate to the HRT area then, under mild assumptions and over a large range of flow parameters, the modular-flowed state is described by a classical background given by the HRT-area flow alone.