Some aspects of the interpretation of quantum theory are discussed.It is emphasized that quantum theory is formulated in a Cartesian coordinate system; in other coordinates the result obtained with the help of the Hamiltonian formalism and commutator relations between 'canonically conjugated' coordinate and momentum operators leads to a wrong version of quantum mechanics.In this connection the Feynman integral formalism is also discussed.In this formalism the measure is not well-defined and there is no idea how to distinguish between the true version of quantum mechanics and an incorrect one; it is rather a mnemonic rule to generate perturbation series from an undefined zero order term.The origin of time is analyzed in detail by the example of atomic collisions.It is shown that the time-dependent Schrödinger equation for the closed three-body (two nuclei + electron) system has no physical meaning since in the high impact energy limit it transforms into an equation with two independent time-like variables; the time appears in the stationary Schrödinger equation as a result of extraction of a classical subsystem (two nuclei) from a closed three-body system.Following the Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky experiment and Bell's inequality the wave function is interpreted as an actual field of information in the elementary form.The relation between physics and mathematics is also discussed.
Some aspects of the interpretation of quantum theory are discussed.It is emphasized that quantum theory is formulated in a Cartesian coordinate system; in other coordinates the result obtained with the help of the Hamiltonian formalism and commutator relations between 'canonically conjugated' coordinate and momentum operators leads to a wrong version of quantum mechanics.In this connection the Feynman integral formalism is also discussed.In this formalism the measure is not well-defined and there is no idea how to distinguish between the true version of quantum mechanics and an incorrect one; it is rather a mnemonic rule to generate perturbation series from an undefined zero order term.The origin of time is analyzed in detail by the example of atomic collisions.It is shown that the time-dependent Schrödinger equation for the closed three-body (two nuclei + electron) system has no physical meaning since in the high impact energy limit it transforms into an equation with two independent time-like variables; the time appears in the stationary Schrödinger equation as a result of extraction of a classical subsystem (two nuclei) from a closed three-body system.Following the Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky experiment and Bell's inequality the wave function is interpreted as an actual field of information in the elementary form.The relation between physics and mathematics is also discussed.
Some aspects of the interpretation of microscopic physics in terms of quantum theory are discussed. It is first emphasized that quantum theory is formulated in a Cartesian coordinate system; in other coordinates the result obtained with the help of the Hamiltonian formalism and commutation relations between ''canonically conjugated'' coordinate and momentum operators leads to a wrong version of quantum mechanics. In this connection the Feynman integral formalism is also discussed. In this formalism the measure is not well defined, and there is no idea how to distinguish between the true version of quantum mechanics and an incorrect one. In this respect, the Feynman approach consists of a mnemonic rule to generate perturbation series from an undefined zero-order term. The origin of time in the quantum framework is then analyzed in detail and illustrated by the example of atomic collisions. It is shown that the time-dependent Schr ¨ odinger equation for the closed three-body (two nuclei + electron) system has no physical meaning because in the high-impact energy limit it transforms into an equation with two independent time-like variables; time naturally appears in the stationary Schr ¨ odinger equation as a result of extraction of a classical subsystem (two nuclei) from a closed three-body system. Finally, following the well-known Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky experiment and Bell's inequality, we reiterate that the wave function must be interpreted as an actual field of information, in a form as elementary as the usual material particles and electromagnetic fields. In fact, experimental measurements transfer this quantum information field into the classical world, which is directly discernable. In my conclusion, the relation between physical reality and its mathematical formulation is discussed. 2012 Physics Essays Publication. (DOI: 10.4006/0836-1398-25.1.27) R ´
Some aspects of the interpretation of quantum theory are discussed. It is emphasized that quantum theory is formulated in the Cartesian coordinate system; in other coordinates the result obtained with the help of the Hamiltonian formalism and commutator relations between “canonically conjugated” coordinate and momentum operators leads to a wrong version of quantum mechanics. The origin of time is analyzed by the example of atomic collision theory in detail; it is shown that the time-dependent Schrödinger equation is meaningless since in the high-impact-energy limit it transforms into an equation with two time-like variables. Following the Einstein-Rozen-Podolsky experiment and Bell’s inequality, the wave function is interpreted as an actual field of information in the elementary form. The concept “measurement” is also discussed.
Probabilistic description of results of measurements and its consequences for understanding quantum mechanics are discussed. It is shown that the basic mathematical structure of quantum mechanics like the probability amplitudes, Born rule, probability density current, commutation and uncertainty relations, momentum operator, rules for including scalar and vector potentials and antiparticles can be derived from the definition of the mean values of powers of space coordinates and time. Equations of motion of quantum mechanics, the Klein-Gordon equation, Schrödinger equation and Dirac equation are obtained from the requirement of the relativistic invariance of the theory. The limit case of localized probability densities leads to the Hamilton-Jacobi equation of classical mechanics. Many-particle systems are also discussed.
Quantum physics consists of a formal core that is universally agreed upon (basically being a piece of mathematics with suggestive names for concepts matching related concepts of experimental culture) and an interpretational halo (trying to make this relation more precise) that remains highly disputed even after more than 90 years of modern quantum physics. The latter is the subject of the interpretation of quantum mechanics (see Part II), where many interpretations coexist and compete for the attention of those interested in what quantum physics really means. In this chapter, an axiomatic introduction to the undisputed formal core of quantum physics is given. The axioms described present nonrelativistic quantum statistical mechanics in the Schrödinger picture. The relativistic case is outside the scope of these axioms, as it must be treated by quantum field theory; see Chapter 7. As in any axiomatic setting (necessary for a formal discipline), there are a number of different but equivalent sets of axioms or postulates that can be used to define formal quantum physics. Since they are equivalent, their choice is a matter of convenience. The choice presented here is a formulation featuring three aspects: It emphasises the similarity of quantum mechanics and classical mechanics, gives most direct access to statistical mechanics, and is free from allusions to measurement. The reason for the first is that this similarity serves as a guide to meaning. From the axiomatic setting for quantum mechanics presented below, classical mechanics (in the Koopman setting discussed in Section 7.10) is obtained by simply restricting the operators to be diagonal, so that all operations happen pointwise on the diagonal elements. Thus, multiplication is commutative, and one can identify operators and functions. In particular, the density operator degenerates into a probability density. Therefore, the quantum case appears as a generalization of the classical case allowing for noncommutativity, so that both q-observables and the density operator are (usually infinite-dimensional) operators. The reason for the second is that statistical mechanics is the main tool for applications of quantum physics to the macroscopic systems we are familiar with. The reason for the third is that realistic measurements constitute a complex process involving macroscopic detectors, hence should be explained by quantum statistical mechanics rather than be part of the axiomatic foundations themselves. (This is in marked contrast to other foundations, and distinguishes the present system of axioms.)
All of the mathematical formulations of quantum mechanics describe the interaction between radiation and atoms, but we show here that only Einstein has been able to establish a solid logical connection with classical theory. His methods are used to interpret the other mathematical models by requiring that observables be described in a physically-defined coordinate system and that there be strict adherence to the conservation of momentum. The properties of momentum exchange are included in a quantum oscillator, or clock, by replacing the non-relativistic Hamiltonian model with a relativistically correct Lagrangian model. Equal contributions are assigned to photon, electron, and nucleus; and field boundaries are defined that coincide with the electron shells. The fields of the particles superpose linearly, but otherwise their physical integrity is maintained throughout. The Lagrangian model accounts for the 720 degree rotation of a wave function as an initial 360 degree electromagnetic wave cycle (photon absorption) followed by a second wave cycle (photon emission), yielding two wave cycles to correspond with one complete electron cycle. The abstract space of quantum mechanics is replaced by a real classical space.
This paper analyzes the modified canonical Heisenberg commutation relations or GUP, from a standard Hamiltonian point of view. For a one-dimensional system, a such modified canonical Heisenberg commutation relation is defined by the commutator between a position x^ and a momentum operator p^ (called the deformed momentum), which becomes a function F of the same operators: x^,p^=F(x^,p^), that is, the Heisenberg algebra closes itself in general in a nonlinear way. The function F also depends on a parameter that controls the deformation of the Heisenberg algebra in such a way that for a null parameter value, one recovers the usual Heisenberg algebra x^,p^0=iℏI. Thus, it naturally raises the following questions: What does a relation of this type mean in Hamiltonian theory from a standard point of view? Is the deformed momentum the canonical variable conjugate to the position in such a relation? Moreover, what are the canonical variables in this model? The answer to these questions comes from the existence of two different phase spaces: The first one, called the non-deformed phase (which is obtained for control parameter value equal to zero), is defined by the Cartesian x^ coordinate and its non-deformed conjugate momentum p^0, which satisfies the standard quantum mechanical Heisenberg commutation relation. The second phase space, the deformed one, is given by the deformed momentum p^ and a new position coordinate y^, which is its canonical conjugate variable, so y^ and p^ also satisfy standard commutation relations. We construct a classical canonical transformation that maps the non-deformed phase space into the deformed one for a specific class of deformation functions F. Additionally, a quantum mechanical operator transformation is found between the two non-commutative phase spaces, which allows the Schrödinger equation to be written in both spaces. Thus, there are two equivalent quantum mechanical descriptions of the same physical process associated with a deformed commutation relation.