Abstract We present Feynman’s path integral derivation of the Schrödinger equation. The van Hove formulation of non-relativistic scattering is presented. We then give a full quantum mechanical treatment of non-relativistic scattering. Both the interaction of the beams with the apparatus and the scattering process itself are treated quantum mechanically. In the spirit of Schrödinger, particle trajectories do not appear, with all of the physics being contained in the phases of the wave function.
Abstract We present Feynman’s path integral derivation of the Schrödinger equation. The van Hove formulation of non-relativistic scattering is presented. We then give a full quantum mechanical treatment of non-relativistic scattering. Both the interaction of the beams with the apparatus and the scattering process itself are treated quantum mechanically. In the spirit of Schrödinger, particle trajectories do not appear, with all of the physics being contained in the phases of the wave function.
Abstract The equation of motion in the standard formulation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, the Schrödinger equation, is based on the Hamiltonian. In contrast, in Feynman’s path-integral formulation of quantum mechanics, the equation of motion is the propagation equation, which is based on the Lagrangian. That these two different equations of motion are equivalent was shown by Feynman, who provided a derivation of the Schrödinger equation from the propagation equation. Surprisingly, however, while in classical mechanics there exists a simple relationship between the Hamiltonian and the Lagrangian, there is nothing in Feynman’s derivation that gives any indication of this relationship. Here I show that the equations of motion in the Hamiltonian and Lagrangian formulations of quantum mechanics are, in fact, simply related to each other.
In 1948, Richard Feynman published the first paper on his new approach to non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Before Feynman's work there were two mathematical formulations of quantum mechanics. Schrödinger's formulation was based on PDE (the Schrödinger equation) and states representation by wave functions, so it was in the framework of analysis and differential equations. The other formulation was Heisenberg's matrix algebra. Initially, they were thought to be competing. The proponents of one claimed that the other was “ wrong. ” Within a couple of years, John von Neumann had proved that they are equivalent.\nAlthough Feynman's theory was not fundamentally new, it nonetheless offered an entirely fresh and different perspective: via a precise formulation of Bohr's correspondence principle, it made quantum mechanics similar to classical mechanics in a precise sense. In addition, Feynman's approach made it possible to explain physical experiments, and, via diagrams, link them directly to computations. What resulted was a very powerful device for computing energies and scattering amplitudes - the famous Feynman's diagrams.\nIn his formulation, Feynman aimed at representing the solution to the non-relativistic Schrödinger equation in the form of an “ average ” over histories or paths of a particle. This solution is commonly known as the Feynman path integral. It plays an important role in the theory but appears as a postulate based on intuition coming from physics rather than a justified mathematical object. This is why Feynman's vision has caught the attention of many mathematicians as well as physicists.\nThe papers of Gelfand, Cameron, and Nelson are among the first, and more substantial, attempts to supply Feynman's theory with a rigorous mathematical foundation. These attempts were followed by many others, but unfortunately all of them were not quite satisfactory. The difficulty comes from a need to define a measure on an infinite-dimensional space of continuous functions that represent all possible paths of a particle. This Feynman's measure has to produce an integral with the properties requested by Feynman. In particular, the expression for the Feynman measure has to involve the non-absolutely integrable Fresnel integrands. The non-absolute integrability of the Fresnel integrands makes the measure fail to be positive and to have the countably additive property. Thus, a well-defined measure in the case of the Feynman path integral does not exist.\nExtensive research has been done on the methods of relating the Feynman path integral to the integral with respect to the Wiener measure. The method of analytic continuation in mass defines the Feynman path integral as a certain limit of the Wiener integrals. Unfortunately, this method can be used as definition for only almost all values of the mass parameter in the Schrödinger equation. For physicists, this is not a satisfactory result and needs to be improved.\nIn this work we examine those questions which originally led to the Feynman path integral. By now we know that Feynman's “ dream ” cannot be realized as a positive and countably additive measure on the path-space. Here, we offer a new way out by modifying Feynman's question, and thereby achieving a solution to the Schrödinger equation via a different kind of averages in the path-space.\nWe give our version of the question that Feynman “ should have asked ” in order to realize the elusive path integral. In our formulation, we get a Feynman path integral as a limit of linear functionals, as opposed to the more familiar inductive limits of positive measures, traditionally used for constructing the Wiener measure, and related Gaussian families. We adapt here an approach pioneered by Patrick Muldowney. In it, Muldowney suggested a Henstock integration technique in order to deal with the non-absolute integrability of the kind of Fresnel integrals which we need in our solution to Feynman's question. By applying Henstock's theory to Fresnel integrals, we construct a complex-valued “ probability distribution functions ” on the path-space. Then we use this “ probability ” distribution function to define the Feynman path integral as an inductive limit. This establishes a mathematically rigorous Feynman limit, and at the same time, preserves Feynman's intuitive idea in resulting functional. In addition, our definition, and our solution, do not place any restrictions on any of the parameters in the Schrödinger equation, and have a potential to offer useful computational experiments, and other theoretical insights.
It is shown how the time-dependent Schrödinger equation may be simply derived from the dynamical postulate of Feynman's path integral formulation of quantum mechanics and the Hamilton–Jacobi equation of classical mechanics. Schrödinger's own published derivations of quantum wave equations, the first of which was also based on the Hamilton–Jacobi equation, are also reviewed. The derivation of the time-dependent equation is based on an a priori assumption equivalent to Feynman's dynamical postulate. de Broglie's concepts of ‘matter waves’ and their phase and group velocities are also critically discussed.
The Schrödinger equation is fundamental in quantum mechanics as it makes it possible to determine the wave function from energies and to use this function in the mean calculation of variables, for example, as the most likely position of a group of one or more massive particles. In this paper, we present a survey on some theories involving the Schrödinger equation and the Feynman path integral. We also consider a Feynman–Kac-type formula, as introduced by Patrick Muldowney, with the Henstock integral in the description of the expectation of random walks of a particle. It is well known that the non-absolute integral defined by R. Henstock “fixes” the defects of the Feynman integral. Possible applications where the potential in the Schrödinger equation can be highly oscillating, discontinuous or delayed are mentioned in the end of the paper.
Feynman's path integral formulation arose from his attempt to incorporate the Lagrangian framework into quantum mechanics, offering what he regarded as a more fundamental perspective than the Hamiltonian approach, particularly in the context of quantum electrodynamics. Inspired by an analogy proposed by P. A. M. Dirac, Feynman showed that Schrödinger's equation could be recovered by promoting this analogy to an equality, up to a constant factor. This insight laid the foundation for the path integral formalism. In this article, we first outline the historical development of dynamical frameworks in physics and then trace Feynman's reasoning as he constructed his formulation, beginning with the double-slit experiment and its interpretation. We subsequently derive the Schrödinger equation from the path integral and demonstrate the conservation of probability. These final sections aim to provide students with a clear link between this elegant yet less commonly presented approach and the more standard methods typically taught in undergraduate courses.
The Feynman path integral formulation of quantum mechanics is a path integral representation for a propagator or probability amplitude in going between two points in space-time. The wave function is expressed in terms of an integral equation from which the Schrodinger equation can be derived. On taking the limit h — 0, the method of stationary phase can be applied and Newton's second law of motion is obtained. Also, the condition the phase vanishes leads to the Hamilton - Jacobi equation. The secondary objective of this paper is to study ways of relating quantum mechanics and classical mechanics. The Ehrenfest theorem is applied to a particle in an electromagnetic field. Expressions are found which are the hermitian Lorentz force operator, the hermitian torque operator, and the hermitian power operator.