We study the physical content of the Snider quantum transport equation and the origin of a puzzling feature of this equation, which implies contradictory values for the one-particle density operator. We discuss in detail why the two values are in fact not very different provided that the studied particles have sufficiently large wave packets and only a small interaction probability, a condition which puts a limit on the validity of the Snider equation. In order to improve its range of application, we propose a reinterpretation of the equation as a ldquomixedrdquo equation relating the real one-particle distribution function (on the left-hand side of the equation) to the ldquofreerdquo distribution (on the right-hand side), which we have introduced in a recent contribution. In its original form, the Snider equation is valid only when used to generate Boltzmann-type equations where collisions are treated as point processes in space and time (no range, no duration); in this approximation, virial corrections are not included, so that the real and free distributions coincide. If the equation is used beyond this approximation to generate nonlocal and density corrections, we conclude that the results are not necessarily correct.
We study the physical content of the Snider quantum transport equation and the origin of a puzzling feature of this equation, which implies contradictory values for the one-particle density operator. We discuss in detail why the two values are in fact not very different provided that the studied particles have sufficiently large wave packets and only a small interaction probability, a condition which puts a limit on the validity of the Snider equation. In order to improve its range of application, we propose a reinterpretation of the equation as a ldquomixedrdquo equation relating the real one-particle distribution function (on the left-hand side of the equation) to the ldquofreerdquo distribution (on the right-hand side), which we have introduced in a recent contribution. In its original form, the Snider equation is valid only when used to generate Boltzmann-type equations where collisions are treated as point processes in space and time (no range, no duration); in this approximation, virial corrections are not included, so that the real and free distributions coincide. If the equation is used beyond this approximation to generate nonlocal and density corrections, we conclude that the results are not necessarily correct.
It is shown that the weak-coupling limit is not valid for the third-order term in the density expansion of quantum or classical transport coefficients. The weak-coupling limit is not valid in the sense that it does not preserve the qualitative features of real gases and, hence, is useless within the context of the transport divergence problem. In fact, it is shown that, although the weak-coupling limit of the recollision part of the quantum four-particle collision operator diverges, its contribution to transport coefficients actually converges (whereas this contribution is known to diverge logarithmically when no weak-coupling limit is taken). A rather curious behavior is uncovered for the quantum weak-coupling limit of the recollision part of the four-particle collision operator. It is found that the matrix elements of this operator grow as t21 and oscillate rapidly. This growth, which is faster than logarithmic in t, is associated with a spatial overlapping of broadening wave packets. Because of the accompanying oscillation, however, it does not present any divergence problem to transport theory.
A derivation of the quantum-mechanical analog of the Maxwell-Boltzmann equation of transport for gases at low density is presented. The analysis requires: the definition of a time differential which is necessary for the selection of only secular variations in the time dependence of the distribution functions (coarse-graining in time); a binary collision approximation; the connection between the phase-space transformation function, relating the Wigner distribution function at different times, and the transition matrix in the theory of scattering of two particles; and a coarse graining in configuration space leading to a kinetic equation for spatially nonuniform systems. A consequence of the binary collision approximation is the exclusion of the effects of symmetrization (Bose-Einstein or Fermi-Dirac statistics) resulting in density-dependent terms.
This article is the second of a series where we propose a theory of the dynamics of quantum gases with a precise treatment of the short range two body correlations. For this purpose, we use a variant of the Wigner transform, the "free transform" , which has a useful property in this context: if, before collision, two particles are uncorrelated, the incoming part of the free Wigner transform remains always exactly factorized. Therefore, instead of asssuming a factorization of the two particle distribution, it is less restrictive to make a similar assumption on the free transform. Time symmetry is broken when the correlations of the outgoing part of the free transform are ignored; this approximation, which is well in the spirit of Boltzmann, amounts to considering successive collisions as independent processes (the correlations present in the outgoing part could play a role if the same particles rapidly collided again, an unlikely event in dilute gases). Therefore, the succession of collisions is not treated exactly, but each collision is, even during interaction. One then obtains a closed set of equations which leads directly to a kinetic equation for the free distribution $ f $. The equation includes retardation and quantum refraction effects, and provides a generalization of the Boltzmann equation. The reconstruction of the two particle distribution function $ f_{II} $ from $ f $ reintroduces the effects of short range correlations and, more generally, gives the values of all one particle and two particle physical observables. The price to pay for not using the usual one particle distribution is that the relation between the local physical quantities (density of particles, energy density, etc.) becomes more complicated than in the usual theory, and includes terms which are non linear in $ f $. We nevertheless show how this formalism automatically satisfies the local conservation of all hydrodynamic quantities: particle, momentum and energy densities. The pressure tensor includes quadratic terms which correspond to second virial corrections. The temperature of the gas is defined from the kinetic energy of the particles when they are far apart from each other. We finally briefly discuss the connections of this formalism with the classical Enskog theory, or mean field type theories such as the Landau theory (in particular, we note the presence of recoil effects in the "molecular field")
Classical mechanics traces a particle’s movement through space and time through x(t). For example, one may consider the case of a particle moving at constant speed (momentum p) in one direction or a particle bouncing back and forth at constant speed in a box. These problems are described in time and have direction and position associated with time etc. It is possible to define a probability P(x,t) in the classical picture based on delta time, the amount of time a particle spends in a little region of space dx. P(x,t), by itself, loses much relevant information present in the x(t) scenario because a particle moving to the right, or to the left, or bouncing back and forth all have the same probability, 1/L, where L is length. Furthermore, this probability is the same for all p (momentum) values. Thus a probability description, without extra information, is a subset of the relevant information in the problem. As a result, to describe the classical picture fully, one might say that a particle has a probability of 1/L, but also a mass mo and velocity +v (i.e. momentum mov nonrelativistically). For the particle bouncing back and forth in a box with constant p, one needs to give the initial position at time=0 and then a subsequent time (as well as the initial velocity and mo) in order to fully describe the problem, even though probability = 1/L. In the literature (see (1)), there have been many attempts to derive the quantum Schrodinger equation from a classical Fockker-Planck equation or a continuity equation (which follows from the Fokker-Planck equation as shown in (1)). The continuity equation contains a probability P(x,t) and a velocity(x,t) and is generally argued to represent classical physics. It does, if one retains appropriate classical conditions such as the discontinuity of density for a particle in a box (i.e. density=0 outside the box, but 1/L inside) and the notion of differing directions within the box. In fact, one may write density=W*(x,t)W(x,t) where W(x,t) is an ad hoc complex function and still retain compatibility with classical physics. If one does not, however, retain the classical conditions completely, nonclassical physics is introduced, even if density(x,t)=1/L. For example, in quantum mechanics density(x) is considered to be continuous in all x. Thus for a particle moving in a box, density outside the box is 0 so at the box wall it must also be 0. In the classical case, the density is 1 inside the box and 0 outside. There is a discontinuity classically and this cannot be changed and this contradicts the quantum mechanical picture. Thus quantum mechanics does not follow form classical Fokker-Planck or continuity equations which retain classical conditions.. Furthermore, because time is completely removed in the FP-continuity approach as applied to quantum mechanics, one cannot distinguish between forwards and backwards motion. As seen by the velocity field given in (1), v is zero for a bound particle which completely removes the sense of time and violates the classical physics conditions. It is, however, not zero for a particle moving in one direction. Thus there seems to be no issue in describing a Fokker-Planck-continuity equation as describing classical physics. One may even introduce density(x,t)= W*(x,t)W(x,t) provided one retains classical conditions allowing for discontinuity in density and different W(x,t) values at different times i.e. a discontinuity in W(x,t) at a box wall. If these conditions, however, are not met, then one no longer describes classical physics, but a new kind of physics (quantum physics). Thus one cannot argue that quantum mechanics follows from classical statistical Fokker-Planck-continuity equations. It may follow from these if one adds a set of extra conditions. Given these extra conditions, however, one could derive quantum mechanics without starting with classical density.
The time evolution of the probability and current densities stemming from an initial state of a particle in the form of a wave packet on the left hand side of a square barrier is studied. In particular, the space distribution at a given time of the above densities is given. Furthermore, the evolution in time at the entrance and exit of the barrier is given. The numerical results show repeated reversal in the current density at the barrier entrance, while being unidirectional at the exit. However, the probability entering the barrier over a long time equals the corresponding probability exiting the barrier. Owing to the fact that the wave packet expands on both of its sides, as time goes by, it is possible to have transmission even if the particle’s initial momentum points away from the barrier. The effect, in question, becomes evident in a diagram for the transmission coefficient in terms of the particle initial momentum, over a relatively small region.