CRC Press eBooks

Collective Electrodynamics I

Carver Mead

Published Nov 16, 2018• 0 citations

Abstract

Standard results of electromagnetic theory are derived from the direct interaction of macroscopic quantum systems; the only assumptions used are the Einstein-deBroglie relations, the discrete nature of charge, the Green’s function for the vector potential, and the continuity of the wave function. No reference is needed to Maxwell’s equations or to traditional quantum formalism. Correspondence limits based on classical mechanics are shown to be inappropriate. “But the real glory of science is that we can find a way of thinking such that the law is evident .” — R. P. Feynman

DOI: 10.1201/9780429500459-4

Related papers

Collective electrodynamics I

Carver Mead

Standard results of electromagnetic theory are derived from the direct interaction of macroscopic quantum systems; the only assumptions used are the Einstein-deBroglie relations, the discrete nature of charge, the Green's function for the vector potential, and the continuity of the wave function. No reference is needed to Maxwell's equations or to traditional quantum formalism. Correspondence limits based on classical mechanics are shown to be inappropriate.

Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesJun 10, 19977 citations

Collective electrodynamics I (superconductoryquantum coherenceyvector potentialymagnetic interaction)

Carver Mead

Standard results of electromagnetic theory are derived from the direct interaction of macroscopic quan- tum systems; the only assumptions used are the Einstein- deBroglie relations, the discrete nature of charge, the Green's function for the vector potential, and the continuity of the wave function. No reference is needed to Maxwell's equations or to traditional quantum formalism. Correspondence limits based on classical mechanics are shown to be inappropriate.

Jan 1, 19970 citations

Quantum Mechanics

Peter E. Hodgson

The difﬁculties of the old quantum theory were largely dispelled by the development of quantum mechanics in the 1920s. First Heisenberg (1925) developed the rather abstract matrix mechanics and soon after Schro¨dinger (1926; see also Eckart, 1926) developed the physically more appealing wave mechanics. Subsequently he showed them to be mathematically equivalent. The physicists were greatly relieved; now they had once again a mathematical formalism that enabled the results of experiments to be calculated. It was possible to move forward. It is certainly a very elegant and indeed beautiful formalism, and does enable the results of many physical measurements to be calculated with great accuracy. It is used daily by atomic and nuclear physicists; there is no other way to make calculations. From the earliest days there has been intense debate about the interpretation of quantum mechanics, and it shows no signs of being settled; if anything it is becoming more intense over the years. As Penrose has remarked, no one understands quantum mechanics. Feynman (1967; see also Sykes, 1994) also admitted that ‘nobody understands quantum mechanics’, and Einstein once remarked: ‘I have thought a hundred times as much about the quantum problems as I have about general relativity theory’ (Pais, 1994, p. 57). It should therefore be evident that the most that can be done here is to try to show where the real difﬁculties lie, and how the failure to recognize that quantum mechanics is an essentially statistical theory has led to a series of confusing quantum paradoxes. It is just these paradoxes that have often been used to support theological speculations. It is useful to ask what ‘understanding quantum mechanics’ actually means. Certainly it means being able to calculate the results of many measurements. The same applies to Newton’s theory of gravitation, which we understand in the sense that we can use it as a basis of calculation, although we do not really understand the gravitational force itself. Very often, especially in modern physics, the mathematical formalism does not give us the sort of intuitive physical feeling for what is going on that we often obtain from classical mechanics. Perhaps we can never achieve more than this for quantum mechanics. In classical mechanics we can assume that a property that is measured objectively exists prior to the interaction of the measuring apparatus with the observed system. Quantum mechanics, however, ‘is incompatible with the proposition that measurement discovers some unknown but pre-existing property’ (Peres, 1997, p. 14). There is an important distinction between mysteries and absurdities. We may be forced to live with mysteries, but there is no reason why we should put up with absurdities such as the wave-particle duality, tunnelling through potential barriers, acausal events and the collapse of the wave function. These are the quantum paradoxes that will be discussed later on. They arise within the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics and are solved by other interpretations. These alternative interpretations enable us to make conjectures about what is going on, even though we cannot understand it in detail. This is acceptable and a stimulus to further research. It is certainly difﬁcult enough to understand quantum mechanics, but there is no need to try to visualize logical absurdities in the effort to do so. Quantum mechanics is a mathematical formalism that makes it possible to calculate the results of some experiments. Anything more than this, such as questions about the interpretation of what is measured and whether it tells us what is actually going on in the system being studied, belongs to philosophy. Thus we are concerned here with what is essentially a philosophical debate; if it were just a matter of physics the debate would have been settled long ago. One of the difﬁculties is that it invokes the results of experiments and uses the language of quantum mechanics. Inevitably this language uses philosophical terms and then it is easy to give the impression that the philosophical propositions are in some way entailed by the physical results. These in turn can inﬂuence theological thinking. In order to be quite clear which arguments are justiﬁed and which are not, it is essential to separate the three levels of discourse: physical, philosophical and theological. Our task is to relate these together, and this immediately raises the traditional problems of the philosophy of science, including the relation of experiment to theory, and of theory to explanation. We begin by discussing experiments, distinguishing between those that are real and those that are imaginary.

Routledge eBooksSep 8, 20170 citations

The present status of the quantum theory of light : proceedings of a symposium in honour of Jean-Pierre Vigier

Stanley Jeffers

Preface. Introduction to the Conference. A Quantum of Light Shed on a Classical Problem C.K. Whitney. A Classical Photon Model R.J. Beil. Stationary Vacuum-Polarization 'P Fields': the Missing Element in Electromagnetism and Quantum Mechanics M.H. MacGregor. Electrons and Photons as Soliton-Waves G. Hunter. Topological Solitons in Non-Linear Electrodynamics G. Kalbermann. A Particle or a Photon in a Field T.W. Marshall, E. Santos. Could the Photon be Superfluous? M. Sachs. Fluctuation-Dissipation Quantum Electrodynamics G.F. Efremov, et al. Einstein-de-Broglie-Proca Theory of Light and Simultaneous Existence of Transverse and Longitudinal Photons S. Roy, M. Roy. Origin, Observation and Consequences of the B(3) Field M.W. Evans. Opto-Magnetic Effects in Non-Absorbing Media: Problems of Measurement and Interpretation S. Jeffers, et al. Generalized Equations of Electrodynamics of Continuous Media V.M. Dubovik, et al. Maxwellian Analysis of Reflection and Refraction R.D. Prosser, et al. Solutions of Maxwell Equations for a Hollow Curved Wave Conductor N. Bashkov, A. Tchernomorov. Maxwell's Equations Directly from the Dynamics of Point Particles G.N. Ord. Obtaining the Schrodinger and Dirac Equations from the Einstein/KAC Model of Brownian Motion by Projection G.N. Ord. Derivation of the Schrodinger Equation T.B. Andrews. An Appraisal of Stochastic Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics M. Baublitz, Jr. Compatible Statistical Interpretation of Quantum Beats M. Bozic. Stochastic Non-Markov Model of Quantum Mechanical Behaviour S.R. Vatsya. A Fundamental Force as the Deterministic Explanation of Quantum Mechanics B.J. Dalton. A Geometric Approach to the Quantum Mechanics of the Broglie and Vigier W.R. Wood, G. Papini. Stable Orbits as Limit Cycles S. Bergia. The Correspondence Principle: Periodic Orbits from Quantum Mechanics D. Provost. Neutron Interferometric Experiments on Quantum Mechanics G. Badurek. Enigmatic Neutrons V.K. Ignatovich. Experiments to Test the Reality of De Broglie Waves J.R. Croca. Preselected Quantum Optical Correlations M. Pavicic. Apparent Contradiction in EPR Correlations L.C. Ryff. The Wave- particle Duality E. Bitsakis. Quantum Mechanical Tunneling in a Causal Interpretation M. Clarkson. Quantum Uncertainty, Wave-particle Duality and Fundamental Symmetries P. Rowlands. On the Contradiction between Quantum Mechanics and Relativity: a Superluminal Quantum Morse Telegraph A. Garuccio. Incompatibility between Einstein's Relativity and Lorentz's Equations P. Marmet. On Self-Interaction and (Non-)Perturbative Quantum GRT H.-H. von Borzeszkowski. Classical Physics Foundations for Quantum Physics L. Motz, D.W. Kraft. Inertial Transformations: A Review F. Selleri. The Lorentz Invariance Revisited M. Surdin. A New Type of Massive Spin-One Boson: And Its Relation with Maxwell Equations D.V. Ahluwalia. Implications of Extended Models of the Electron for Particle Theory and Cosmology E.J. Sternglass. The Takabayasi Moving Frame, from the A Potential to the Z Boson R. Boudet. The Nature of the Cosmological Redshift M. Moles. A Quantum Digital Theory of Light N.V. Pope. Toward a Comprehensible Physical Theory: Gravity and Quantum Mechanics H. Yilmaz. Hidden Background Field and Quantum Non-Locality R. Ramanathan. Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Correlations within Bell Region R. Horodecki. Electromagnetic Gauge as Integration Condi

Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooksJan 1, 19972 citations

Quantum Electrodynamics

L. Rosenfeld

In quantum theory, the interpretation of the mathematical formalism raises problems of a far more delicate kind than in classical theory.

Physics TodaySep 1, 195062 citations

Description of the Electron in the Electromagnetic Field: The Dirac Type Equation and the Equation for the Wave Function in Spinor Coordinate Space

Pavel Gorev

Physical processes are usually described using four-dimensional vector quantities - coordinate vector, momentum vector, current vector. But at the fundamental level they are characterized by spinors - coordinate spinors, momentum spinors, spinor wave functions. The propagation of fields and their interaction takes place at the spinor level, and since each spinor uniquely corresponds to a certain vector, the results of physical processes appear before us in vector form. For example, the relativistic Schrödinger equation and the Dirac equation are formulated by means of coordinate vectors, momentum vectors and quantum operators corresponding to them. In the Dirac equation the wave function is a spinor with complex components, but still coordinates and momentum are vectors. For a closed description of nature using only spinor quantities, it is necessary to have an equation similar to the Dirac equation in which momentum, coordinates and operators are spinors. It is such an equation that is presented in this paper. Using the example of the interaction between an electron and an electromagnetic field, we can see that the spinor equation contains more detailed information about the interaction than the vector equations. This is not new for quantum mechanics, since it describes interactions using complex wave functions, which cannot be observed directly, and only when measured goes to probabilities in the form of squares of the moduli of the wave functions. In the same way spinor quantities are not observable, but they completely determine observable vectors. In Section 2 of the paper, we analyze the quadratic form for an arbitrary four-component complex vector based on Pauli matrices. The form is invariant with respect to Lorentz transformations including any rotations and boosts. The invariance of the form allows us to construct on its basis an equation for a free particle combining the properties of the relativistic wave equation and the Dirac equation. For an electron in the presence of an electromagnetic potential it is shown that taking into account the commutation relations between the momentum and coordinate components allows us to obtain from this equation the known results describing the interactions of the electron spin with the electric and magnetic field. In the presence of a potential the momentum components cease to commute with each other. To neutralize this effect, the Schrödinger equation is supplemented by several equations with mixed partial derivatives on coordinates. In section 3 of the paper this quadratic form is expressed through momentum spinors, which makes it possible to obtain an equation for the spinor wave function in spinor coordinate space by replacing the momentum spinor components by partial derivative operators on the corresponding coordinate spinor component. Section 4 presents a modification of the theory of the path integral, which consists in considering the path integral in the spinor coordinate space. The Lagrangian densities for the scalar field and for the electron field, along with their corresponding propagators, are presented. An equation of motion for the electron is proposed that is relativistically invariant. This novel equation permitted the construction of an actually invariant procedure for the second quantization of the fermion field in spinor coordinate space. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that the field operators are a combination of plane waves in spinor or vector space, with the coefficients of which being pseudospinors or pseudovectors. Each of these pseudovectors or pseudospinors corresponds to one of the particles presented in the theory of electrodynamics. Furthermore, each plane wave possesses an additional coefficient in the form of a creation or annihilation operator. In vector space, these operators commute, whereas in spinor space they anticommutate. The paper presents the spinor and vector representations of the field operators in explicit form, comprising sets of 16 pseudospinors or 4 pseudovectors corresponding to particles represented in electrodynamics. An explicit form of the symmetric traceless tensor with spin two, zero mass and two polarizations is presented, which can serve as a model of the graviton. The results obtained may prompt changes in some aspects of the construction of Feynman diagrams. Among other things, it presents a purely mathematical derivation of Maxwell's inhomogeneous equations without reference to empirical data on the action of electric current, which is usually referred to when deriving equations. Section 4 presents Einstein's inhomogeneous equation, which features the Riemann tensor rather than the Ricci tensor, with the energy-momentum tensor of a charged particle having four indices rather than two. In the case where a particle of matter has a charge, another Riemann tensor is added to Einstein’s equation, in addition to the usual Riemann curvature tensor, which describes the additional curvature created for a charged particle by an electromagnetic field.

Mar 25, 20260 citations