Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Some Properties of Quantum Shannon's Entropy Density

Francesco R. Ruggeri

Published Jun 22, 2019• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In this note, we examine the behaviour of Shannon’s entropy density for some examples in quantum mechanics. We start with a quasiparticle probability P(x and p) = W(x) fp exp(ipx) (where W(x) is the wavefunction given by Sum over p fp exp(ipx)) and obtain a Shannon’s entropy (after summing on p) : Total entropy density = -P(x) ln(P(x)) - P(p) ln(P(p)) - W(x) x d/dx W(x) ((1)) It may be noted that if f(p)=f(-p) ((1)) may also be written as: Total entropy density = -P(x) ln(P(x)) - P(p) ln(P(p)) - fp p d/dp fp We consider the cases of a particle in a box with an infinite potential at the walls and the harmonic oscillator ground state. Finally we consider the influence of u(x)= [d/dx W(x)]/W(x) on the spatial change of Shannon’s spatial entropy as W(x) and u(x) are often periodic and this leads to a periodic entropy density. In general, entropy is obtained by integrating the entropy density and one may question whether one should examine the density at all. In (1), however, entropy density is considered and it seems that there are some interesting properties of Shannon’s entropy density in quantum systems. Furthermore, there has been some recent work in the literature which makes use of entropy density to create an extra potential term for the Schrodinger equation in cases of temperature.

DOI
10.5281/zenodo.3252390

Related papers

Operator Entropy and Quantum Thermodynamics

Francesco R. Ruggeri

The von Neumann entropy definition is -Tr ( d ln(d)) and is linked to: = Tr (d A) ((1)). Here d is a matrix as is A i.e Aij = . As a result d is often not diagonal. It seems further that the idea of entropy is linked to an operator (2). In other words, one might have certain probabilities linked to the operator P momentum and a different set to X. For a diagonal d, von Neumann’s form is the same as Shannon’s entropy, but uses the eigenvalues of d. For a pure quantum bound state Wn(x), it seems that one considers the two operators X and P and writes two entropies using Shannon’s entropy form: - Integral dx W(x)W(x) ln(WW) and -Integral dp a(p)a(p) ln(a(p)a(p)) where W(x)=wavefunction= Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). Here P(x)=W(x)W(x) and P(p)=a(p)a(p). For example in (3), one may see calculations of these “distinct” entropies for a particle in a box with infinite potential walls. X and P are linked to measurables and for a quantum bound system one cannot know exactly x and p at the same time. One may write < KE > for a bound state in two ways: Integral dp a(p)a(p) pp/2m or Integral dx W(x) (-1/2m d/dx dW/dx). Using Shannon’s entropy approach one obtains two different entropy values Sx and Sp. With respect to von Neumann’s entropy, it is zero for a pure state. Although one cannot know x and p at the same time (in terms of a measurement) that does not prevent one from writing x and p together (i.e. both known) in exp(ipx) for the wavefunction of a free particle. In this note we suggest that one might consider product probabilities linked to more than one operator when considering entropy. For example, for <KE> one may write Integral dx P(x) Integral dp pp/2m P(p/x) thus acknowledging that both x and p play a role. In this case, P(x)P(p/x) is the probability to use in Shannon’s entropy as we have shown in (4). In (3) it is suggested that P(x)P(p/x) be used in order to incorporate both variables x and p. Using P(x)P(p) in Shannon’s entropy yields the same overall entropy when integrated over x and p i.e. S=Sx+Sp. One reason that the sum is useful is that it eliminates parameters such as L (box length) for a particle in a box with infinite walls (or k the spring constant for an oscillator. This allows for a quantum adiabatic transformation of a pure state to be isentropic. This follows from a Fourier transformation i.e. W(x)=Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). The two variables p and x scale with L in the opposite manner i.e. x/L and pL (5). Thus we argue that entropy is not necessarily linked to only one operator, but rather for a pure state is linked to variables which appear in a Fourier transform. Usually a Fourier transform is simply a mathematical procedure, but not in the case of the quantum pure state wavefunction where the variable p is actually momentum. In this note we try to investigate how the quantum relationship between p and x emerges. We argue that it exists at the level of the classical action for a free particle (relativistic or nonrelativistic) A=-Et+px where dA/dx partial =p and dA/dt partial = -E. Thus p and x are variable pairs in classical dynamics and this carries over to classical statistical phase space linked to p and x. We argue that a quantum dynamical link between p and x is also present in A i.e. -id/dx exp(iA) = p exp(iA). In other words p and x are linked dynamically in quantum mechanics as well (for a free particle) with exp(-iEt+ipx) being part of this link. The Fourier series form is already present in this solution as one may create a momentum distribution i.e. Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). This depends on p and x and both affect any operator based on p and x (or one of these). Thus we expect that probabilities linked to both p and x should appear in an expression of entropy for a quantum bound state.

•Feb 28, 2022•0 citations

Spatial Quantum Entropy

Francesco R. Ruggeri

In the literature, Shannon’s entropy with spatial density as probability i.e. density(x) ln(density(x)) appears frequently. It seems, however, that this calculation of entropy assumes no knowledge of momentum, yet density=W(x)W(x) (for a bound state) where W(x) = Sum over p a(p) exp(ipx). In other words, the wavefunction W(x) contains information about the momentum distribution associated with P(p/x)= a(p) exp(ipx)/W(x). In classical statistical mechanics, entropy is calculated using exp[ - (p*p/2m + V(x))/T) which includes both momentum and spatial considerations. In a previous note (1), we calculated a possible expression for entropy using P(p/x)P(x). This includes Shannon’s spatial entropy and other terms even if one sums over p after forming Shannon’s entropy with P(p/x)P(x). In this note, we try to consider the interpretation of these two forms of entropy.

•Jul 30, 2020•0 citations

Does Quantum Thermodynamics Dictate the Form of the Wavefunction P(x)=W(x)W(x)?

Francesco R. Ruggeri

The Schrodinger equation, a partial differential equation in W(x,t) the wavefunction, was developed by Schrodinger from ideas of L. de Broglie and then given the interpretation of probability Probability(x,t)= W*(x,t)W(x,t) by M. Born. In this note we ask whether the form P(x)=W*(x)W(x) together with P(p)=a*(p)a(p) such that W(x)=Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx) follows from quantum thermodynamics. In particular we concentrate on a quantum adiabatic transformation and insist it be one of no entropy change (as in (1)). The quantum spatial density of a particle in a box with infinite potential depends on L as P(x)= 1/L density(x/L) (bound state). Thus Shannon’s entropy simply using P(x) is L dependent. One needs P(x)P(p) in addition to the first term changing by ln(1/L) and the second by ln(L) in order to remove L dependence during an adiabatic expansion. Similar considerations hold for the quantum simple harmonic oscillator (2). Thus the idea of a P(x) and P(p) which are linked (not independent) immediately follows form quantum thermodynamics as does the form of entropy S=Sx+Sp. As a result it seems that if one deals with probability, one must not only consider conditional probability, but also a transformation function f(px) which allows for inverse dependencies on p and x on a parameter. These ideas together with P(p/x)=P(x and p) / P(x) ((1a)) and P*(x/p) = P(x and p) / P(p) lead, we argue, to the form P(x)=W*(x)W(x) and P(p)=a*(p)a(p) where W(x)=Sum over p a(p) exp(ipx). We considered the approach of conditional probabilities in an earlier note (3), but did not give motivation for using them or the form exp(ipx). Rather we brought them in as assumptions, assuming that there should be both a P(p) and P(x). In this note, we argue that they seem to follow from the idea of quantum thermodynamics and a zero entropy change along an adiabatic path i.e. one which does not change the quantum bound state n.

•Feb 7, 2022•0 citations

Speculation on an Alternative Quantum Entropy Part II

Francesco R. Ruggeri

In Part I we suggested that a free quantum particle with wavefunction exp(ipx) should have a spatial Shannon’s entropy associated with the probability cos(px)/C1 over half a wavelength, where C1 is a normalization constant. This new entropy captures the idea of uncertainty due to the wavelength even though the constant velocity suggests uniform motion i.e. W*(x)W(x) = constant. This idea was extended to a bound state and yields different results than the usual P(x)=W*(x)W(x) and P(p) =a*(p)a(p) based Shannon’s entropies where W(x)=wavefunction = Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). In this note we try to determine some properties of this new entropy. First we consider the high n limit and use a classical approach introduced in (2). Next we expand the bound state entropy to include both spatial and momentum entropies and show that the sum follows from the product probability |W(x)|/C1 |a(p)|/C2 where 1/C1 and 1/C2 are normalization constants. We also examine quantum adiabatic processes. For P(x) = W*(x)W(x) and P(p)=a*(p)a(p), one finds that such a process leads to Sp+Sx remaining unchanged for L changing adiabatically for a box with infinite potential walls or for k the spring constant changing adiabatically in an oscillator. This follows from the fact that W(x/L) or W(x .5sqrt(km) ) (oscillator), from the normalizations Integral P(x)dx= 1 and Integral P(p)dp =1 and from exp(ipx) which shows that p scales in reciprocal manner of x. Thus we argue that these properties still hold for the entropies defined using |W(x)| and |a(p)| as probabilities. In other words Sp+Sx for the new quantum entropy does not change under a quantum adiabatic transformation. Finally we note that the new entropy is not compatible with the first law of thermodynamics.

•Sep 26, 2022•0 citations

Alternate Expression for Entropy in Quantum Mechanics?

Francesco R. Ruggeri

Recently, there has been some interest in the literature in calculating temperature dependent quantum mechanical wavefunctions using the principle of maximum entropy. The idea seems to be to obtain a differential equation, similar to the Schrodinger equation, but with temperature dependent terms. It should be noted that this does not follow von Neumann statistical quantum mechanics. It should also be noted that other authors in the literature maximize or minimize other quantities related to information theory to calculate a wavefunction. The objective of this note is not to examine the maximization of entropy as applied to the calculation of a wavefunction, but to suggest a different form for entropy. Traditionally, authors seem to use the Shannon form -k W*(x)W(x) ln[ W*(x)W*(x)] as a spatial entropy and exchange W(x) for fp for the momentum one, with W(x) being the wavefunction. It is the spatial form which they seem to maximize in calculations. In this note, we consider a probability P(x intersection x) = W(x) fp sin(px) and use it in Shannon’’s entropy. Maximization of entropy then leads to an integral equation which, it seems, needs to be solved numerically, We can however, multiply such an equation by fp and sum over p to obtain results which can be compared with those of authors who use -k W*(x)W(x) ln[ W*(x)W*(x)] . NOTE: In later preprints, we have used W(x) fp exp(ipx) as probability and calculated Shannon's entropy. This has given an overall result for entropy including a term for Shannon's entropy for W(x), another term with Shannon's entropy for fp and a final term W(x) x d/dx W(x). This last term, linked to exp(ipx), is also equal to the covariance of x and d/dx ln(W(x)) which is used in the derivation of the Cramer-Rao inequality for Fisher information.

•Feb 9, 2019•0 citations

Quantum Spatial Density as an Independent Probability in Shannon's Entropy?

Francesco R. Ruggeri

In the literature, one often finds a quantum expression for Shannon’s entropy of the form: - (W*W) ln(W*W) ((1)) where W*W is spatial density i.e. W(x)= the wavefunction. This implies W*(x)W(x) is an independent probability. Given that W(x)= Sum over p a(p) exp(ipx), and W*W= Sum over p1, p2 a(p1)a(p2) exp(ip1 x) exp(ip2 x), one may see that for p1/-p1 in the latter with a(p)=a(-p) leads to cos(p1x) terms. These are positive and negative in different x regions. In fact, in many cases, the overall spatial density exhibits peaks and valleys suggesting that W*(x)W(x) is correlated, i.e. not independent we argue. Furthermore, the form ((1)) uses only position when there is an expectation value for < p*p> an , both functions of x, where p is momentum. Thus, the variance of p-ensemble average may change with x, yet position only is used in the computation of Shannon’s entropy, which we argue seems unusual. In a previous note (1), we suggest using a(1)exp(ip1 x) a(p2)exp(ip2 x) as the probability for Shannon’s entropy. This leads to a spatial form 2W x d/dx W which matches ((1)) for the ground state of the quantum oscillator case. For the ground state oscillator, W*W=C exp(-ax*x) i.e. a Gaussian. This suggests that for this case only, W*(x)W(x) represents an independent probability which may be used in Shannon’s entropy, we argue. We attempt to consider these issues in this note.

•Sep 8, 2020•0 citations
In this note, we examine the behaviour of Shannon’s entropy density for some examples in quantum mechanics. We start with a quasiparticle probability P(x and p) = W(x) fp exp(ipx) (where W(x) is the wavefunction given by Sum over p fp exp(ipx)) and obtain a Shannon’s entropy (after summing on p) : Total entropy density = -P(x) ln(P(x)) - P(p) ln(P(p)) - W(x) x d/dx W(x) ((1)) It may be noted that if f(p)=f(-p) ((1)) may also be written as: Total entropy density = -P(x) ln(P(x)) - P(p) ln(P(p)) - fp p d/dp fp We consider the cases of a particle in a box with an infinite potential at the walls and the harmonic oscillator ground state. Finally we consider the influence of u(x)= [d/dx W(x)]/W(x) on the spatial change of Shannon’s spatial entropy as W(x) and u(x) are often periodic and this leads to a periodic entropy density. In general, entropy is obtained by integrating the entropy density and one may question whether one should examine the density at all. In (1), however, entropy density is considered and it seems that there are some interesting properties of Shannon’s entropy density in quantum systems. Furthermore, there has been some recent work in the literature which makes use of entropy density to create an extra potential term for the Schrodinger equation in cases of temperature.
The von Neumann entropy definition is -Tr ( d ln(d)) and is linked to: = Tr (d A) ((1)). Here d is a matrix as is A i.e Aij = . As a result d is often not diagonal. It seems further that the idea of entropy is linked to an operator (2). In other words, one might have certain probabilities linked to the operator P momentum and a different set to X. For a diagonal d, von Neumann’s form is the same as Shannon’s entropy, but uses the eigenvalues of d. For a pure quantum bound state Wn(x), it seems that one considers the two operators X and P and writes two entropies using Shannon’s entropy form: - Integral dx W(x)W(x) ln(WW) and -Integral dp a(p)a(p) ln(a(p)a(p)) where W(x)=wavefunction= Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). Here P(x)=W(x)W(x) and P(p)=a(p)a(p). For example in (3), one may see calculations of these “distinct” entropies for a particle in a box with infinite potential walls. X and P are linked to measurables and for a quantum bound system one cannot know exactly x and p at the same time. One may write < KE > for a bound state in two ways: Integral dp a(p)a(p) pp/2m or Integral dx W(x) (-1/2m d/dx dW/dx). Using Shannon’s entropy approach one obtains two different entropy values Sx and Sp. With respect to von Neumann’s entropy, it is zero for a pure state. Although one cannot know x and p at the same time (in terms of a measurement) that does not prevent one from writing x and p together (i.e. both known) in exp(ipx) for the wavefunction of a free particle. In this note we suggest that one might consider product probabilities linked to more than one operator when considering entropy. For example, for <KE> one may write Integral dx P(x) Integral dp pp/2m P(p/x) thus acknowledging that both x and p play a role. In this case, P(x)P(p/x) is the probability to use in Shannon’s entropy as we have shown in (4). In (3) it is suggested that P(x)P(p/x) be used in order to incorporate both variables x and p. Using P(x)P(p) in Shannon’s entropy yields the same overall entropy when integrated over x and p i.e. S=Sx+Sp. One reason that the sum is useful is that it eliminates parameters such as L (box length) for a particle in a box with infinite walls (or k the spring constant for an oscillator. This allows for a quantum adiabatic transformation of a pure state to be isentropic. This follows from a Fourier transformation i.e. W(x)=Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). The two variables p and x scale with L in the opposite manner i.e. x/L and pL (5). Thus we argue that entropy is not necessarily linked to only one operator, but rather for a pure state is linked to variables which appear in a Fourier transform. Usually a Fourier transform is simply a mathematical procedure, but not in the case of the quantum pure state wavefunction where the variable p is actually momentum. In this note we try to investigate how the quantum relationship between p and x emerges. We argue that it exists at the level of the classical action for a free particle (relativistic or nonrelativistic) A=-Et+px where dA/dx partial =p and dA/dt partial = -E. Thus p and x are variable pairs in classical dynamics and this carries over to classical statistical phase space linked to p and x. We argue that a quantum dynamical link between p and x is also present in A i.e. -id/dx exp(iA) = p exp(iA). In other words p and x are linked dynamically in quantum mechanics as well (for a free particle) with exp(-iEt+ipx) being part of this link. The Fourier series form is already present in this solution as one may create a momentum distribution i.e. Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). This depends on p and x and both affect any operator based on p and x (or one of these). Thus we expect that probabilities linked to both p and x should appear in an expression of entropy for a quantum bound state.
In the literature, Shannon’s entropy with spatial density as probability i.e. density(x) ln(density(x)) appears frequently. It seems, however, that this calculation of entropy assumes no knowledge of momentum, yet density=W(x)W(x) (for a bound state) where W(x) = Sum over p a(p) exp(ipx). In other words, the wavefunction W(x) contains information about the momentum distribution associated with P(p/x)= a(p) exp(ipx)/W(x). In classical statistical mechanics, entropy is calculated using exp[ - (p*p/2m + V(x))/T) which includes both momentum and spatial considerations. In a previous note (1), we calculated a possible expression for entropy using P(p/x)P(x). This includes Shannon’s spatial entropy and other terms even if one sums over p after forming Shannon’s entropy with P(p/x)P(x). In this note, we try to consider the interpretation of these two forms of entropy.
The Schrodinger equation, a partial differential equation in W(x,t) the wavefunction, was developed by Schrodinger from ideas of L. de Broglie and then given the interpretation of probability Probability(x,t)= W*(x,t)W(x,t) by M. Born. In this note we ask whether the form P(x)=W*(x)W(x) together with P(p)=a*(p)a(p) such that W(x)=Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx) follows from quantum thermodynamics. In particular we concentrate on a quantum adiabatic transformation and insist it be one of no entropy change (as in (1)). The quantum spatial density of a particle in a box with infinite potential depends on L as P(x)= 1/L density(x/L) (bound state). Thus Shannon’s entropy simply using P(x) is L dependent. One needs P(x)P(p) in addition to the first term changing by ln(1/L) and the second by ln(L) in order to remove L dependence during an adiabatic expansion. Similar considerations hold for the quantum simple harmonic oscillator (2). Thus the idea of a P(x) and P(p) which are linked (not independent) immediately follows form quantum thermodynamics as does the form of entropy S=Sx+Sp. As a result it seems that if one deals with probability, one must not only consider conditional probability, but also a transformation function f(px) which allows for inverse dependencies on p and x on a parameter. These ideas together with P(p/x)=P(x and p) / P(x) ((1a)) and P*(x/p) = P(x and p) / P(p) lead, we argue, to the form P(x)=W*(x)W(x) and P(p)=a*(p)a(p) where W(x)=Sum over p a(p) exp(ipx). We considered the approach of conditional probabilities in an earlier note (3), but did not give motivation for using them or the form exp(ipx). Rather we brought them in as assumptions, assuming that there should be both a P(p) and P(x). In this note, we argue that they seem to follow from the idea of quantum thermodynamics and a zero entropy change along an adiabatic path i.e. one which does not change the quantum bound state n.
In Part I we suggested that a free quantum particle with wavefunction exp(ipx) should have a spatial Shannon’s entropy associated with the probability cos(px)/C1 over half a wavelength, where C1 is a normalization constant. This new entropy captures the idea of uncertainty due to the wavelength even though the constant velocity suggests uniform motion i.e. W*(x)W(x) = constant. This idea was extended to a bound state and yields different results than the usual P(x)=W*(x)W(x) and P(p) =a*(p)a(p) based Shannon’s entropies where W(x)=wavefunction = Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). In this note we try to determine some properties of this new entropy. First we consider the high n limit and use a classical approach introduced in (2). Next we expand the bound state entropy to include both spatial and momentum entropies and show that the sum follows from the product probability |W(x)|/C1 |a(p)|/C2 where 1/C1 and 1/C2 are normalization constants. We also examine quantum adiabatic processes. For P(x) = W*(x)W(x) and P(p)=a*(p)a(p), one finds that such a process leads to Sp+Sx remaining unchanged for L changing adiabatically for a box with infinite potential walls or for k the spring constant changing adiabatically in an oscillator. This follows from the fact that W(x/L) or W(x .5sqrt(km) ) (oscillator), from the normalizations Integral P(x)dx= 1 and Integral P(p)dp =1 and from exp(ipx) which shows that p scales in reciprocal manner of x. Thus we argue that these properties still hold for the entropies defined using |W(x)| and |a(p)| as probabilities. In other words Sp+Sx for the new quantum entropy does not change under a quantum adiabatic transformation. Finally we note that the new entropy is not compatible with the first law of thermodynamics.
Recently, there has been some interest in the literature in calculating temperature dependent quantum mechanical wavefunctions using the principle of maximum entropy. The idea seems to be to obtain a differential equation, similar to the Schrodinger equation, but with temperature dependent terms. It should be noted that this does not follow von Neumann statistical quantum mechanics. It should also be noted that other authors in the literature maximize or minimize other quantities related to information theory to calculate a wavefunction. The objective of this note is not to examine the maximization of entropy as applied to the calculation of a wavefunction, but to suggest a different form for entropy. Traditionally, authors seem to use the Shannon form -k W*(x)W(x) ln[ W*(x)W*(x)] as a spatial entropy and exchange W(x) for fp for the momentum one, with W(x) being the wavefunction. It is the spatial form which they seem to maximize in calculations. In this note, we consider a probability P(x intersection x) = W(x) fp sin(px) and use it in Shannon’’s entropy. Maximization of entropy then leads to an integral equation which, it seems, needs to be solved numerically, We can however, multiply such an equation by fp and sum over p to obtain results which can be compared with those of authors who use -k W*(x)W(x) ln[ W*(x)W*(x)] . NOTE: In later preprints, we have used W(x) fp exp(ipx) as probability and calculated Shannon's entropy. This has given an overall result for entropy including a term for Shannon's entropy for W(x), another term with Shannon's entropy for fp and a final term W(x) x d/dx W(x). This last term, linked to exp(ipx), is also equal to the covariance of x and d/dx ln(W(x)) which is used in the derivation of the Cramer-Rao inequality for Fisher information.
In the literature, one often finds a quantum expression for Shannon’s entropy of the form: - (W*W) ln(W*W) ((1)) where W*W is spatial density i.e. W(x)= the wavefunction. This implies W*(x)W(x) is an independent probability. Given that W(x)= Sum over p a(p) exp(ipx), and W*W= Sum over p1, p2 a(p1)a(p2) exp(ip1 x) exp(ip2 x), one may see that for p1/-p1 in the latter with a(p)=a(-p) leads to cos(p1x) terms. These are positive and negative in different x regions. In fact, in many cases, the overall spatial density exhibits peaks and valleys suggesting that W*(x)W(x) is correlated, i.e. not independent we argue. Furthermore, the form ((1)) uses only position when there is an expectation value for < p*p> an , both functions of x, where p is momentum. Thus, the variance of p-ensemble average may change with x, yet position only is used in the computation of Shannon’s entropy, which we argue seems unusual. In a previous note (1), we suggest using a(1)exp(ip1 x) a(p2)exp(ip2 x) as the probability for Shannon’s entropy. This leads to a spatial form 2W x d/dx W which matches ((1)) for the ground state of the quantum oscillator case. For the ground state oscillator, W*W=C exp(-ax*x) i.e. a Gaussian. This suggests that for this case only, W*(x)W(x) represents an independent probability which may be used in Shannon’s entropy, we argue. We attempt to consider these issues in this note.