In classical physics, the ‘state’ of a particle, at any particular time, is taken to involve a definite position in space and a definite motion; and the state of a system of particles is taken to involve a definite position in space and a definite motion for each of the particles. The situation in relation to quantum mechanics is completely different. As in classical physics, calculations can be made concerning the position and motion of a particle. However, this representation is not by means of symbols for scalar or vector quantities: it is by a more complex mathematical object. This quantum state does not indicate or represent position or motion in any direct way: what it does in substance is to enable calculation of the probability of the particle in question being found to have a position or momentum if an appropriate measurement is made.
In classical physics, the ‘state’ of a particle, at any particular time, is taken to involve a definite position in space and a definite motion; and the state of a system of particles is taken to involve a definite position in space and a definite motion for each of the particles. The situation in relation to quantum mechanics is completely different. As in classical physics, calculations can be made concerning the position and motion of a particle. However, this representation is not by means of symbols for scalar or vector quantities: it is by a more complex mathematical object. This quantum state does not indicate or represent position or motion in any direct way: what it does in substance is to enable calculation of the probability of the particle in question being found to have a position or momentum if an appropriate measurement is made.
Classical mechanics is usually valid at the macro scale. The changes in the position and the momentum of the object over time are described by the Hamiltonian equation of motion. The wave function in quantum mechanics, if unobserved, evolves in a smooth and continuous way according to the Schrodinger equation, which is related to the Hamiltonian equation of motion. This equation describes a linear superposition of different states at time. A quantum mechanical description of a physical system is related to a probabilistic representation; it is described by a vector in Hilbert space. This description extends the two- or three-dimensional Euclidean space into spaces that have any finite or infinite number of dimensions. The state of a compound system is projected to the subspace that corresponds to the observed state and the vector representing the state is renormalized to the unit length. An observable describes a subspace for some dimensions with a special case of one dimension.
We summarize below some of the postulates and definitions basic to our formalism, and present some important results based on these postulates. The formalism is purely mathematical in nature with very little physics input, but it provides the structure within which the physical concepts that will be discussed in the later chapters will be framed. State vectors It is important to realize that the Quantum Theory is a linear theory in which the physical state of a system is described by a vector in a complex, linear vector space. This vector may represent a free particle or a particle bound in an atom or a particle interacting with other particles or with external fields. It is much like a vector in ordinary three-dimensional space, following many of the same rules, except that it describes a very complicated physical system. We will be elaborating further on this in the following. The mathematical structure of a quantum mechanical system will be presented in terms of the notations developed by Dirac. A physical state in this notation is described by a “ket” vector, |〉, designated variously as |α〉 or |ψ〉 or a ket with other appropriate symbols depending on the specific problem at hand. The kets can be complex. Their complex conjugates, |〉 * , are designated by 〈| which are called “bra” vectors. Thus, corresponding to every ket vector there is a bra vector. These vectors are abstract quantities whose physical interpretation is derived through their so-called “representatives” in the coordinate or momentum space or in a space appropriate to the problem under consideration.
Light and magnetic and electrical phenomena were assumed to be explainable in mechanical terms. Representation of values possessed in terms of the states of the objects in question in classical physics is straightforward and intuitive: a state is just a ‘list’ of the quantities an object has, and the ‘degree’ which they are possessed, that evolves in accordance with an equation of motion. Dispersion is an attribute of a probability distribution, or more generally of a measure, and it indicates the way in which values spread on either side of the mean or ‘expectation value’. Relativisation to the preferred determinate observable gives rise to a class of n-tuples of relations, which people can think of as intantiations of ‘lawlike’ connections that always involve the preferred observable. Two alternative interpretations of quantum mechanics, the standard and the modal interpretation, were used to support this viewpoint.
In the standard formulation of quantum mechanics, observables are represented by operators in a Hilbert space and states by vectors in it. Quantum field theory too is formulated in terms of field operators. States in field theory include the vacuum state, one particle states, two particle states and so on. One does not measure operators or state vectors, however; measurements involve eigenvalues of operators or transition probabilities between states. It turns out that one can formulate quantum mechanics and field theory without using operators. Indeed, the probability amplitude for a transition from a position q1 at time t1 to a position q2 at time t2 can be expressed as a path integral ∫ dt L(q(t),q˙(t)), (5.1) where q(t) runs over all possible functions satisfying the conditions q(t1) = q1, q(t2) = q2 (5.2) and the integral over q(t) is an integral over all such paths of the exponential evaluated for each path. The measure of integration is not well defined a priori, but it is possible to give prescriptions that make sense. In classical mechanics, positions at two different times determine a path from the second order differential equation of motion, which yields a definite solution if two conditions are imposed. In contrast, quantum mechanics does not allow us to talk about trajectories. The path integral formulation manifestly refers to the myriad paths that may be taken by a particle in going from one point to another. It goes so far as to assign a probability amplitude to each path, and it is related to the classical action corresponding to that path. However, it is complex and it also involves a superposition, characteristic of quantum mechanics.
The wave function Before beginning to describe the quantum theory of measurement, we shall discuss briefly the main concepts of quantum mechanics. Readers familiar with quantum mechanics may skip this section and go on to section 2.2. Consider, as a pedagogical aid, a classical particle that can move only along the x direction. For example, it might be a bead on an infinite needle. If we know at any moment of time the values of two numbers, the particle's position and momentum, then we can compute from them all other features of the particle's motion: the forces acting on it, its resulting acceleration, etc. In other words, this pair of numbers, the position and momentum, completely define the state of the classical particle at the chosen moment of time. Similarly, for three-dimensional motion the state is defined by six numbers: the three spatial coordinates x, y, z and the three corresponding components of the momentum p x , p y , p z . A quantum object, with its dual particle-like and wave-like properties, is much more complex than a classical particle. Interferometric experiments (chapter I) show that the object can be spread out over some region of space, or for the bead on a needle, over an interval of x .
Despite its power as the conceptual basis for a huge range of physical phenomena in atomic and subatomic physics, quantum mechanics still suffers from a lack of clarity regarding the physical meaning of its fundamental theoretical concepts, such as those of quantum state and of quantum theoretical quantities or variables , dealt with by the known mathematical-theoretical rules. These concepts have generally been considered as not giving a direct description of physical systems, for they do not correspond to what is usually understood by `physical states' or `physical properties', notably characterized by definite numerical values such as those obtained from measurement. The situation has been tentatively expressed in terms of various `interpretations', conceived not only with regard to the physical meanings of mathematical quantities, but also in connection with philosophical statements about `physical reality'. The question of whether or not quantum theoretical quantities describe definite physical systems existing in nature has therefore generally been considered as beyond the possibilities of physics, because of the definitions that are commonly taken for `physical state' and `physical quantity'. We sketch the main ideas on this problem and propose a possible way out of the puzzle, in terms of an extension of the meaning given to the concepts of the physical state and physical quantity of a system, which would allow one, without any theoretical change in quantum mechanics, to speak consistently of real quantum systems as having definite physical properties .