In these notes we review the foundations of Banach–Poisson geometry and explain how in this framework one obtains a unified approach to the Hamiltonian and the quantum mechanical description of the physical systems. Our considerations will be based on the notion of Banach Lie–Poisson space (see Odzijewicz and Ratiu [25]) and the notion of the coherent state map (see Odzijewicz [22]), which appear to be the crucial instrument for the clarifying what is the quantization of the classical physical (Hamiltonian) system.
In these notes we review the foundations of Banach–Poisson geometry and explain how in this framework one obtains a unified approach to the Hamiltonian and the quantum mechanical description of the physical systems. Our considerations will be based on the notion of Banach Lie–Poisson space (see Odzijewicz and Ratiu [25]) and the notion of the coherent state map (see Odzijewicz [22]), which appear to be the crucial instrument for the clarifying what is the quantization of the classical physical (Hamiltonian) system.
Coherent quantum physics is quantum physics in terms of a coherent space and an appropriate coherent product. The kinematical structure and the meaning of the quantities are given by the symmetries (invertible coherent maps) of the coherent space. If Z is a coherent manifold, a canonical symplectic form is often canonically determined by the coherent product through the coherent action principle discussed in Section 6.1. In a quantum mechanical context, Z is indeed a classical phase space or an extended phase space-typically a symplectic manifold, a Poisson manifold, or a circle or line bundle over such a manifold that incorporates the classical action variable (encoding the Berry phase under quantization). For example, the Aharonov-Bohm effect [3] needs the bundle formulation. A coherent space and its quantum space provide a classical and a quantum view of the same physical system, discussed in Section 6.2. Section 6.3 shows that symmetries of coherent spaces can be quantized, that is, promoted to linear operators on the quantum space. This leads to quantum dynamics, which in special (completely integrable) situations can be solved in closed form in terms of classical motions on the underlying coherent space, if the latter has a compatible manifold structure. Close relations to concepts from geometric quantization and Kähler manifolds are pointed out in Section 6.4. In order that the quantum space of a coherent space Z can describe physics, one needs not only a distinguished class of coherent states but a more general concept of state. In Sections 6.5-6.6, we give a general abstract setting for states in Lie ∗-algebras, emphasize the essential mathematical features and the close analogy between classical and quantum physics. We illustrate these generalities with a number of examples in Section 6.7. The coherent action principle is put to use in Section 6.8 for numerical quantum physics and an application to quantum chaos. Spectral issues can, in favorable cases, be handled in terms of dynamical Lie algebras, discussed in Section 6.9.
Noncanonical quantization schemes have been proposed in quantum physics long time ago. Recalling some of them I associate these investigations to the quantum mechanical im-plications of the canonically inequivalent Hamilton formula-tions of classical Newtonian dynamics. As the simplest illus-tration of such alternative Hamiltonian descriptions I consider one dimensional system of two particles interacting harmoni-cally. Description of the motion of their center of mass is stan-dard and guarantees the Galilean covariance but the internal motion is described as a noncanonical oscillator for which the Hamiltonian and the total energy are not related by a simple proportionality. Alternative Hamiltonians lead to alternative Poisson structures which may be considered as classical ana-logues of the noncanonical quantum commutation rules. Gen-Concepts of Physics, Vol. I (2004) 11 erated alternative quantizations are consistent with the same Heisenberg equations of motion, i.e., they satisfy the Wigner principle of quantization. For the one dimensional harmonic oscillator the simplest noncanonical algebraic description is given in terms of the Lie algebra so(p, q), p+ q = 3. In such a case the Hamiltonian is still a linear function while the energy is a quadratic polynomial of the main quantum number. This leads to nonstandard termodynamical properties obeyed by such a noncanonical oscillator. The 3-dimensional harmonic oscillator also has a noncanonical description given in terms of the simple Lie algebra, so(p, q), p+ q = 5 in the case under consideration. The most important physical consequence of such a description is the noncommutativity of the coordinate operators, interpreted to be an implication of the noncommu-tative geometry of the underlying spacetime.
Path integrals are by and large defined directly in terms of the configuration space representation of the quantum entity's degrees of freedom and employ the Lagrangian description of the quantum entity; most of the path integrals in this book follow this approach. The Hamiltonian provides another independent approach for defining path integrals and is discussed in this chapter. Two important path integrals, which are directly based on the Hamiltonian, are the following: (a) one that is defined on the degree of freedom's phase space , defined as the tensor product of the degree of freedom space and its canonical conjugate momentum space; and (b) path integrals using the coherent state basis instead of the coordinate basis. Path integrals defined on phase space, or for coherent states, are both based on the Hamiltonian. To put in the foreground the role of the Hamiltonian in quantum mechanics, the canonical equations connecting the Lagrangian to the Hamiltonian are discussed. A brief review of Hamiltonian mechanics, also called the canonical equations, is given in Section 5.1 and the connection of symmetries with conservation laws is discussed in Section 5.2. The Hamiltonian is derived from the Lagrangian in Section 5.3, for both Minkowski and Euclidean time. Phase space path integrals are defined in Section 5.4. Canonical quantization based on the Poisson brackets is discussed in Section 5.5, and Dirac brackets required for quantizing constrained systems are derived in Section 5.7. Coherent states and their path integrals are discussed in Sections 5.10 to 5.14.
Following previous works by E. Prugovečki [Physica A 91A, 202 (1978) and Stochastic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Space–time (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986)] on common features of classical and quantum mechanics, we develop a unified mathematical framework for classical and quantum mechanics (based on L2-spaces over classical phase space), in order to investigate to what extent quantum mechanics can be obtained as a simple modification of classical mechanics (on both logical and analytical levels). To obtain this unified framework, we split quantum theory in two parts: (i) general quantum axiomatics (a system is described by a state in a Hilbert space, observables are self-adjoints operators, and so on) and (ii) quantum mechanics proper that specifies the Hilbert space as L2(Rn); the Heisenberg rule [pi,qj]=−iℏδij with p=−iℏ∇, the free Hamiltonian H=−ℏ2Δ/2m and so on. We show that general quantum axiomatics (up to a supplementary “axiom of classicity”) can be used as a nonstandard mathematical ground to formulate physical ideas and equations of ordinary classical statistical mechanics. So, the question of a “true quantization” with “ℏ” must be seen as an independent physical problem not directly related with quantum formalism. At this stage, we show that this nonstandard formulation of classical mechanics exhibits a new kind of operation that has no classical counterpart: this operation is related to the “quantization process,” and we show why quantization physically depends on group theory (the Galilei group). This analytical procedure of quantization replaces the “correspondence principle” (or canonical quantization) and allows us to map classical mechanics into quantum mechanics, giving all operators of quantum dynamics and the Schrödinger equation. The great advantage of this point of view is that quantization is based on concrete physical arguments and not derived from some “pure algebraic rule” (we exhibit also some limit of the correspondence principle). Moreover spins for particles are naturally generated, including an approximation of their interaction with magnetic fields. We also recover by this approach the semi-classical formalism developed by E. Prugovečki [Stochastic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Space–time (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986)].
This Element explores the formal and conceptual foundations of phase space formulations of classical and quantum mechanics. It provides an overview of the core mathematical and physical content of Hamiltonian mechanics, stochastic phase space mechanics, contact Hamiltonian mechanics, and open and closed quantum mechanics on phase space. The formal material is unified via three interpretative themes relating to structured possibility spaces, Liouville's theorem and its failure, and the classical and quantum notions of open and closed systems. This Element book is intended for researchers and graduate students in the philosophy and foundations of physics with an interest in the conceptual foundations of physical theory.
Classical mechanics has a natural mathematical setting in symplectic geometry and it may be asked if the same is true for quantum mechanics. More precisely, is it possible to capture certain quantum idiosyncrasies within the symplectic framework of classical mechanics? Beginning with Dirac, the idea of quantizing a classical system involved associating the phase space variables with Hermitian operators which act on some Hilbert space, as well as associating the Poisson bracket on the phase space with the commutator for the operators. Mathematically the phase space is associated with some symplectic manifold M and the non-degenerate 2-form ω, which comes with M. Geometric prequantization is a process by which one does this in a mathematically "rigorous" manner and we shall attempt to just introduce the methods here. We do this by exploring this contruction for (R2n,∑i=1ndpi∧dqi) which avoids using complex line bundles in any non-trivial way. One should note however that the Hilbert space one obtains is in fact too "big", in the sense that it has too many functions in order to correspond with actual physically significant Hilbert spaces. Geometric quantization remedies this situation but it should be noted that not all manifolds are prequantizable. We shall not discuss either of these issues however.