This chapter introduces the paradigm ‘quantization as selection problem’ by means of few historical remarks. They include Einstein’s 1907 reasoning, Schrödinger’s 1926 derivation of his wave equation, and Gödel’s theorem and Munchhausen’s trilemma. The latter ones concern questions, which can be posed, but not be answered within CM. Such questions transcendent CM. This book poses the question, how the mechanics of oscillators without turning points looks like. (“oscillators without turning points” means oscillators, which may assume configurations beyond the classical turning points.)
This chapter introduces the paradigm ‘quantization as selection problem’ by means of few historical remarks. They include Einstein’s 1907 reasoning, Schrödinger’s 1926 derivation of his wave equation, and Gödel’s theorem and Munchhausen’s trilemma. The latter ones concern questions, which can be posed, but not be answered within CM. Such questions transcendent CM. This book poses the question, how the mechanics of oscillators without turning points looks like. (“oscillators without turning points” means oscillators, which may assume configurations beyond the classical turning points.)
This chapter brings together Einstein’s 1907 vision of ‘quantization as selection problem’ (see Section 5.1) and our explorations of the possible and impossible (momentum) configurations in Chapter 4. The hierarchy is formulated in terms of the latter ones and consists of Newtonian systems, non-Newtonian classical systems, non-classical systems and non-mechanical systems. These explorations are assisted by an overview on selection problems in classical and quantum theory, by further reasonings for Einstein’s vision and by few explanations about alternative and harmony in Euler’s axioms of classical mechanics. Two fundamental conclusions for non-classical systems can be drawn already at this stage. (i), The notion of path as a point-wise relationship between the configurations and the momentum configurations looses its meaning. (ii), there are no longer coordinates describing the boundaries of a system in (momentum) like the classical turning points of an oscillator.
Elements of quantum mechanics Quantum mechanics was discovered in 1925 through groping efforts to compromise two apparently contradictory pictures on the fundamental entities in nature. One was the wave picture for light which was later extended to matter by de Broglie, another was the corpuscular picture of matter which was later extended to light by Einstein. Schrödinger's wave equation came as a natural development of the first stream, while Heisenberg's matrix mechanics was presented as a unique proposal from the second stream. In spite of completely different appearances, the two theories proved, within a couple of years after their discoveries, to be equivalent. This is a most beautiful example that the physical reality exists independent of the mathematical framework formulated for its description. In this chapter, we will give a very brief review of the principles of quantum mechanics, 1–3 mainly with the harmonic oscillator as a model system for the following reasons. The first is historical: the electromagnetic wave, whose interaction with matter is the subject of this book, is a harmonic oscillator, a system which was for the first time subject to “quantization”, thus opening a way to the discovery of quantum mechanics. The second is technical: the harmonic oscillator is one of very few examples of analytically soluble problems in quantum mechanics. The third is pedagogical: the harmonic oscillator is a system best suited for realization of the equivalence of the two different pictures mentioned above and hence for a deeper understanding of the principles of quantum mechanics.
This chapter summarizes the main results of this book and draws some conclusions. Special attention is paid to the axiomatic basis, i.e., to Schrödinger’s requirements and Hertz’s program, which lead to the novel paradigm of quantization as selection problem (rather than eigenvalue problem). Both ones are realized by means of limiting (Schrödingerian weight) functions, which guarantee the validity of the energy conservation law in the classically forbidden regions of configuration and momentum configuration spaces (e.g, beyond the turning points of classical oscillators). Further topics are the separation of external and internal parameters as initiated by Euler, the differences between classical and quantum wave equations, causality and determinism, hidden variables, symmetry and field quantization.
The "quantum equation" should "carry the quantum conditions in itself" (Second Commun., p. 511); 2. There should be a special mathematical method for solving the stationary Schrödinger equation, which accounts for the non-classical character of the quantization problem, ie, which is different from the classical eigenvalue methods for calculating the (eigen)modes of strings, resonators and so on (ibid., p. 513);3. The derivation should uniquely decide, that the energy rather than the frequency values are discretized (ibid., pp.511, 519), since only the former means true quantization, while the latter corresponds to the classical discretization mentioned in requirement 2;4. The use of the classical expressions for the kinetic and potential energies should be justified (Fourth Commun., p. 113).Schrödinger's requirements 1 and 2 mean, that -contrary to the very title of the papersquantization is actually not an eigenvalue problem.For in the latter the discretization is imposed not by the differential equation itself, but by the boundary conditions, and this is the classical discretization for standing waves in organ pipes etc.I will fulfill all four requirements by treating quantization as a selection problem.The number of stationary states of a quantum system is smaller than that of a classical system [6].I will describe, (i), the selection of quantum systems out of the set of all mechanical systems and, (ii), the selection of their stationary states out of the continuum of classical stationary states.Earlier arguing [19][10] is improved and extended in several essential points. Elements of an Eulerian representation of classical mechanics Euler's axiomsLeonhard Euler [20][21][22][23][24][25] was the first to apply the calculus to all areas of mathematics and mechanics of his time, and he developed novel methods, such as the calculus of variations and topology.Moreover, he worked out an axiomatic of mechanics, where only Newton's Law (axiom) 1 concerning the conservation of stationary states is retained as an axiom, while Newton's Laws (axioms) 2 and 3 concerning the change of stationary states are treated as problems to be solved (for a detailed account, see [19][10][45]).This allows for introducing alternative equations of motion without loosing the contact to CM.The existence of stationary states is postulated in the following axioms (as in Newton's axioms, rotatory motion is not considered). Axiom E0: Every body is either resting or moving.This means, that the subsequent axioms E1 and E2 are not independent of each other; they exclude each other and, at once, they are in harmony with each other [22].
In the first two chapters we have examined the basic principles – superposition (p. 18), complementarity (p. 19), quantization (p. 44), statistical algorithm (p. 57), and correspondence (p. 72) (see also Subsec. 2.3.4) – and the basic entities, observables and states, of quantum mechanics, as well as the main differences with respect to classical mechanics. While what we have discussed so far is rather a static picture of observables and states, in this chapter we shall deal with quantum dynamics, i.e. with the time evolution of quantum-mechanical systems. Historically, after Bohr had provided a quantized description of the atom (see Subsec. 1.5.4), Einstein showed the quantized nature of photons (see Subsec. 1.2.1), and de Broglie hypothized the wave-like nature of matter (see Subsec. 1.5.5), the first building block of quantum mechanics was provided by the commutation relations, proposed by Heisenberg in 1925, whose consequence is represented by the uncertainty relation (see Subsec. 2.2.7 and Sec. 2.3). This was the subject of the previous chapters. The dynamical part of the theory was proposed by Schrödinger in 1926, and is known as the Schrödinger equation. It is also known as wave mechanics (see Subsec. 1.5.7). In this chapter we shall show that Heisenberg's and Schrödinger's formulations are only two different aspects of the same theory. We shall also come back to this point in Sec. 8.1.1. Here, first we shall derive the fundamental equation which rules quantum dynamics (Sec. 3.1), and, in Sec. 3.2, we shall summarize the main properties of the Schrödinger equation.
Quantum mechanics is essentially a 20th century development that is based on a number of observations that defied classical explanations. While some of these experiments have semiclassical explanations, the triumph of quantum mechanics is that it gives precise verification for an overwhelming number of experimental observations. Its extensions into relativistic quantum mechanics through quantum electrodynamics (QED), electro-weak theory, and quantum chromodynamics (QCD) have led us to the Standard Model of today. While the number of unanswered questions remains approximately constant at each stage of development, the number of answered questions that relate theory with experiment continues to grow rapidly. In this chapter, some of the historical landmarks in the development of the theory are noted. The resolution of the dilemmas presented by classical theory will be dealt with in later chapters, but these are listed to motivate the break from classical mechanics. Because of the apparently unphysical nature of the postulates upon which quantum mechanics is founded, we supply motivation and justification for this break. In the first part of this chapter, we will review some of the experiments that confounded classical theory, and then introduce a formalism that provides some rationale for the postulates upon which quantum mechanics is based. In the end, these postulates will stand on their own.