Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

From Primitives to the Schrödinger Equation

Allen Proxmire

Published May 12, 2026• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The Schrödinger equation iℏ ∂ₜψ = Ĥψ, with non‑relativistic Hamiltonian Ĥ = ℏ²|p̂|²/(2m) + V(x̂), has been quantum mechanics’s central dynamical statement for nearly a century. It governs atomic spectra, molecular bonding, semiconductors, neutron interferometry, and countless other empirical settings. The question is why it has the form it does. In standard QM, the Schrödinger equation is a postulate. The Hilbert space is given. The momentum operator p̂ = −iℏ∇ is given. The kinetic form |p̂|²/(2m) is inherited directly from classical mechanics — quantum theory simply adopts the classical T = p²/(2m) structure without deeper justification. The first‑order time derivative is chosen because empirically it works. Each piece is accepted because the resulting equation matches experiment. This walkthrough shows how the Event Density framework derives the Schrödinger equation, in its full standard form, from a smaller set of structural commitments about what reality is made of at the substrate level. Every element — the Hilbert space, the momentum operator, linearity, first‑order time structure, the kinetic‑plus‑potential form, the factor of 1/(2m) — emerges as a forced consequence rather than a separate postulate. The derivation runs through Stone’s theorem applied twice — once on spatial translation (forcing p̂ = −iℏ∇) and once on time translation (forcing existence and uniqueness of a self‑adjoint generator with automatic linearity and first‑order structure) — closed by Galilean Lie algebra integration that identifies the time‑translation generator with the kinetic‑plus‑potential operator. The factor of 1/(2m) emerges as the chain‑rule Jacobian of the Galilean commutator [Ĥ, K̂ᵢ] = −iℏ p̂ᵢ, not as a borrowing from classical mechanics. The first‑order time derivative is a consequence of operator exponentials, not a chosen feature.

DOI
10.5281/zenodo.20130579

Related papers

From Primitives to the Klein–Gordon Equation

Allen Proxmire

The Klein–Gordon equation, written down in 1926 by Oskar Klein and Walter Gordon (and earlier in unpublished form by Schrödinger himself), is the natural relativistic extension of quantum mechanics for spin‑zero particles: (□ + m²c²/ℏ²) Ψ = 0 where □ = (1/c²) ∂ₜ² − ∇². The equation is second‑order in both time and space, treats them symmetrically, and reduces to the free‑particle Schrödinger equation in the non‑relativistic limit. Its plane‑wave solutions satisfy the relativistic mass‑shell condition E² = p²c² + m²c⁴. Why is a relativistic version needed at all? The Schrödinger equation describes how quantum systems evolve when they’re moving slowly compared to the speed of light — fine for atoms, molecules, and everyday chemistry, where electrons move at less than 1% of c. But the Schrödinger equation is first‑order in time and second‑order in space, treating the two on different footings. Special relativity says space and time are unified into a single four‑dimensional structure where Lorentz transformations mix them, and any equation that privileges time over space breaks Lorentz invariance. A truly fundamental quantum equation must respect this symmetry. Klein–Gordon is the minimal scalar‑field equation that does. The standard derivation runs by analogy: start with the relativistic energy–momentum relation E² = p²c² + m²c⁴, replace E by iℏ∂ₜ and p by −iℏ∇, apply both sides to a wavefunction. This produces the right equation but it’s not really a derivation — it’s a guess motivated by the Schrödinger operator‑substitution procedure. This walkthrough shows how the Event Density framework derives the Klein–Gordon equation from substrate primitives — the same primitives that gave the Born rule, the Schrödinger equation, and the Bell–Tsirelson bound — plus the commitment to Lorentz covariance. The participation measure becomes Lorentz‑covariant. The unique second‑order Lorentz‑scalar differential operator on a scalar field is the d’Alembertian; the minimum‑order Lorentz‑scalar linear equation is therefore (□ + M²) Ψ = 0. Dimensional analysis fixes M² = m²c²/ℏ². Local U(1) gauge invariance forces the covariant derivative and the conserved four‑current. The non‑relativistic limit, via rest‑energy factorization, recovers the free‑particle Schrödinger equation exactly. The structural payoff: the Klein–Gordon equation is what you get when the substrate ontology is pushed through a Lorentz‑covariant reformulation. No new primitives are required. Relativistic and non‑relativistic quantum mechanics are not two theories glued together by analogy; they are the same substrate ontology applied at different velocity regimes. The walkthrough is honest about the known caveats — negative‑energy solutions and the non‑positive‑definite j₀ current — both of which resolve at the Dirac level and at QFT.

•May 12, 2026•0 citations

From Primitives to the Lindblad Master Equation

Allen Proxmire

The Schrödinger equation describes a quantum system that does not interact with anything outside itself. The participation measure evolves unitarily; the norm is preserved; coherent superpositions are maintained indefinitely. This is a useful idealization but it is not what real quantum systems do. Every real quantum system is in contact with its environment — thermal photons, lattice vibrations, stray fields, gas‑phase collisions, observation by experimenters. Coherent superpositions decay; populations relax toward thermal equilibrium; entanglement with the environment proliferates. The closed‑system Schrödinger equation cannot describe these phenomena because, by construction, it has no environment. In 1976, Lindblad — and independently Gorini, Kossakowski, and Sudarshan — proved that the most general Markovian dynamics for a quantum density operator that preserves Hermiticity, trace, and complete positivity has a specific functional form: ∂ₜ ρ̂ = −(i/ℏ)[Ĥ, ρ̂] + ∑_α ( L̂_α ρ̂ L̂_α† − ½{ L̂_α† L̂_α , ρ̂ } ) The first term is the von Neumann equation. The sum is the “dissipator” — jump operators L̂_α mediating environmental coupling. This is the master equation of decoherence theory: qubits coupled to reservoirs, atoms in optical cavities, mesoscopic conductors with electron‑phonon coupling, open‑system everything. The standard derivation traces out the environment and applies the Born–Markov approximation. It works empirically but leaves open: why is Markov valid? Why is Born valid? What is the substrate‑level meaning of the jump operators? This walkthrough shows how the Event Density framework forces the Lindblad form at substrate level rather than deriving it from approximations. The density‑operator description is forced by environmental phase‑independence, derived from substrate primitives, rather than postulated as the natural object after partial‑tracing. Between commitment events, the density operator evolves unitarily — U3 in density‑operator form. The jump operators are the substrate‑level representation of Primitive 11 commitment events: discrete, channel‑selective updates triggered when environmental coupling drives the chain’s individuation. The Markov property is forced by P11’s locality (commitment events do not carry long‑range memory). The anti‑commutator normalization is forced by P04 (bandwidth conservation) plus trace preservation. Complete positivity is automatic from the projector structure of commitment events. The structural payoff: decoherence is not approximate physics derived from a Born–Markov simplification of a more fundamental closed‑system theory. It is what U3 plus substrate primitives produces directly when the chain is non‑isolated. The Lindblad form is forced rather than approximate. Complete positivity, trace preservation, and the Markovian property — usually justified by appeals to physical reasonableness — are forced consequences of bandwidth conservation, environmental phase‑independence, and commitment‑event locality respectively.

•May 12, 2026•0 citations

The Logical Origin of the Schrödinger Equation

H.-K. Chan

This paper derives the non-relativistic time-dependent Schrödinger equation as the logically unavoidable dynamical law for de Broglie matter waves, extending the reconstruction begun in the companion work “The Logical Origin of the de Broglie Matter Wave and its Physical Meaning (the Born Rule)” (Chan, 2026). Starting from the same minimal premises—continuous position in real space, Fourier conjugacy (and the logical uncertainty principle), translation invariance via Noether’s theorem, and probability conservation via statistical energy flux—the Schrödinger equation follows deductively once norm preservation and classical non-relativistic correspondence are enforced. The derivation proceeds in clear stages: Plane-wave solutions for free particles and constant potentials, Quadratic dispersion relation from classical kinematics, Exact local plane-wave structure (defined via phase gradients) that must hold at every point for any smooth wave function, The unique linear differential operator of order ≤ 2 that consistently “glues” these local structures across smooth external potentials V(x,t) while preserving the L²-norm (unitarity). No canonical quantization, operator promotion, commutation relations, or postulated wave equations are used. The Born rule is taken as already established from the prior paper and serves only to constrain unitary evolution. The Schrödinger equation thus emerges not as an empirical postulate or convenient ansatz, but as the mathematically and symmetrically forced description of indivisible particles propagating in continuous, translationally invariant (or smoothly perturbed) space. Domain of validity and natural limitations (non-relativistic kinematics, smooth potentials, single-particle/mean-field regime, closed-system unitarity) are explicitly delineated.

•Mar 24, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Mechanics Derived from the Coulomb Field

Fusao Ishii

Quantum mechanics is defined here as the theoretical framework crystallised at the fifth Solvay Conference of 1927, comprising five postulates: the wavefunction, the canonical commutation relation [x, p] = iℏ, the Born rule, the Schrödinger equation, and the transition probability rule. We present a complete derivation of all five Solvay postulates from purely classical foundations, starting from the directly observable Coulomb field of the electron. The single empirical input is ℏ—measured from pre-Solvay experiments (Planck 1900–1911, Einstein 1905, Casimir 1948/Lamoreaux 1997) without quantum mechanical interpretation, in the same way G was measured by Cavendish (1798) without general relativity. By Einstein’s photoelectric theory (1905) generalized to all electromagnetic fields, the Coulomb field energy is carried in electromagnetic quanta, each carrying both electric and magnetic fields with energy density ϵ0E^2. Lorentz invariance uniquely determines the ZPF spectral energy density u(ω) ∝ ω^3 (Boyer 1969, 1975). The Casimir force measurement gives the total ZPF energy per mode B = ℏ; classical E/B equipartition from Maxwell’s equations gives the electric energy per mode ℏω/2. The central original contribution is the physical justification of the Compton frequency cutoff ωc = mc^2/ℏ: an electron cannot emit an electromagnetic quantum with energy exceeding mc^2, because the residual electron would require negative mass, never observed in nature. By equating two independent expressions for the momentum variance of the ZPF-driven harmonic oscillator—one from the Abraham–Lorentz equation, one from Nelson’s osmotic velocity formula—D = ℏ/2m is derived without any quantum assumption. The ZPF-driven motion is then proved to be Brownian motion in the precise sense of Wiener (1923): all four Wiener conditions are verified from the properties of the ZPF established in Sections 3–4. This answers the question Nelson (1966) explicitly left open: “We do not attempt to give a physical explanation of why the electron should undergo Brownian motion.” The physical explanation is that the electron cannot escape its own Coulomb field. By Itô’s stochastic calculus and Nelson’s theorem, this gives the Schrödinger equation as an effective description valid for timescales Δt ≫ ℏ/mc^2. The transformation ψ = √ρe^(iS/ℏ) linearises the nonlinear Fokker–Planck equation, explaining why superposition holds. All five Solvay postulates emerge as consequences of classical physics plus the single measured constant ℏ. No Solvay postulate is assumed anywhere.

•Jun 16, 2026•0 citations

The Schrödinger Equation as a Theorem

Bodo Warteenberg

The Schrödinger equation iℏ · ∂ψ/∂τ = Ĥψ contains three elements that in standard quantummechanics are not derived but postulated: the imaginary unit i, the reduced Planck actionquantum ℏ, and the Hamiltonian operator Ĥ. This supplement shows that all three follow fromthe fossil causal structure. The phase boundary surface Σ = {x ∈ M | t_m(x) · t_C(x) / t_P² = -1}delivers i through the sign change of the metric time. The action quantum ℏ follows as theminimal action of the closed oriented rotation on Σ. The Hamiltonian Ĥ is directly the fossilenergy density operator ρ_hist. The Schrödinger equation is not a postulate - it is a theorem ofthe fossil causal structure.

•May 17, 2026•0 citations

Perceptions of the Schrodinger Equation

Spyros Efthimiades

The Schrodinger equation has been considered to be a postulate of quantum physics, but it is also perceived and derived heuristically as the quantum equivalent of the classical energy relation. We indicate that the Schrodinger equation cannot be a physical postulate, and we show that the heuristic derivations wrongly consider that the particle kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the momentum operator acting on the wavefunction. The correct term is proportional to the square of the momentum. Analyzing particle interactions, we realize that particles have multiple virtual motions and that each motion is accompanied by a wave that has constant amplitude. Accordingly, we define the wavefunction as the superposition of the virtual waves of the particle. As a result, quantum mechanics becomes a local and global theory, while in the traditional formulation it is a local theory. In several interaction settings we can tell what particle motions arise and explain the outcomes in simple and tangible terms. Most importantly, the mathematical foundation of quantum mechanics becomes clear and justified, and we derive the Schrodinger, Dirac, etc. equations as the conditions the wavefunction must satisfy at each space-time point in order to fulfill the respective total energy equation.

arXiv:1307.6108•Bulletin of the American Physical Society•Jul 23, 2013•0 citations
The Schrödinger equation iℏ ∂ₜψ = Ĥψ, with non‑relativistic Hamiltonian Ĥ = ℏ²|p̂|²/(2m) + V(x̂), has been quantum mechanics’s central dynamical statement for nearly a century. It governs atomic spectra, molecular bonding, semiconductors, neutron interferometry, and countless other empirical settings. The question is why it has the form it does. In standard QM, the Schrödinger equation is a postulate. The Hilbert space is given. The momentum operator p̂ = −iℏ∇ is given. The kinetic form |p̂|²/(2m) is inherited directly from classical mechanics — quantum theory simply adopts the classical T = p²/(2m) structure without deeper justification. The first‑order time derivative is chosen because empirically it works. Each piece is accepted because the resulting equation matches experiment. This walkthrough shows how the Event Density framework derives the Schrödinger equation, in its full standard form, from a smaller set of structural commitments about what reality is made of at the substrate level. Every element — the Hilbert space, the momentum operator, linearity, first‑order time structure, the kinetic‑plus‑potential form, the factor of 1/(2m) — emerges as a forced consequence rather than a separate postulate. The derivation runs through Stone’s theorem applied twice — once on spatial translation (forcing p̂ = −iℏ∇) and once on time translation (forcing existence and uniqueness of a self‑adjoint generator with automatic linearity and first‑order structure) — closed by Galilean Lie algebra integration that identifies the time‑translation generator with the kinetic‑plus‑potential operator. The factor of 1/(2m) emerges as the chain‑rule Jacobian of the Galilean commutator [Ĥ, K̂ᵢ] = −iℏ p̂ᵢ, not as a borrowing from classical mechanics. The first‑order time derivative is a consequence of operator exponentials, not a chosen feature.
The Klein–Gordon equation, written down in 1926 by Oskar Klein and Walter Gordon (and earlier in unpublished form by Schrödinger himself), is the natural relativistic extension of quantum mechanics for spin‑zero particles: (□ + m²c²/ℏ²) Ψ = 0 where □ = (1/c²) ∂ₜ² − ∇². The equation is second‑order in both time and space, treats them symmetrically, and reduces to the free‑particle Schrödinger equation in the non‑relativistic limit. Its plane‑wave solutions satisfy the relativistic mass‑shell condition E² = p²c² + m²c⁴. Why is a relativistic version needed at all? The Schrödinger equation describes how quantum systems evolve when they’re moving slowly compared to the speed of light — fine for atoms, molecules, and everyday chemistry, where electrons move at less than 1% of c. But the Schrödinger equation is first‑order in time and second‑order in space, treating the two on different footings. Special relativity says space and time are unified into a single four‑dimensional structure where Lorentz transformations mix them, and any equation that privileges time over space breaks Lorentz invariance. A truly fundamental quantum equation must respect this symmetry. Klein–Gordon is the minimal scalar‑field equation that does. The standard derivation runs by analogy: start with the relativistic energy–momentum relation E² = p²c² + m²c⁴, replace E by iℏ∂ₜ and p by −iℏ∇, apply both sides to a wavefunction. This produces the right equation but it’s not really a derivation — it’s a guess motivated by the Schrödinger operator‑substitution procedure. This walkthrough shows how the Event Density framework derives the Klein–Gordon equation from substrate primitives — the same primitives that gave the Born rule, the Schrödinger equation, and the Bell–Tsirelson bound — plus the commitment to Lorentz covariance. The participation measure becomes Lorentz‑covariant. The unique second‑order Lorentz‑scalar differential operator on a scalar field is the d’Alembertian; the minimum‑order Lorentz‑scalar linear equation is therefore (□ + M²) Ψ = 0. Dimensional analysis fixes M² = m²c²/ℏ². Local U(1) gauge invariance forces the covariant derivative and the conserved four‑current. The non‑relativistic limit, via rest‑energy factorization, recovers the free‑particle Schrödinger equation exactly. The structural payoff: the Klein–Gordon equation is what you get when the substrate ontology is pushed through a Lorentz‑covariant reformulation. No new primitives are required. Relativistic and non‑relativistic quantum mechanics are not two theories glued together by analogy; they are the same substrate ontology applied at different velocity regimes. The walkthrough is honest about the known caveats — negative‑energy solutions and the non‑positive‑definite j₀ current — both of which resolve at the Dirac level and at QFT.
The Schrödinger equation describes a quantum system that does not interact with anything outside itself. The participation measure evolves unitarily; the norm is preserved; coherent superpositions are maintained indefinitely. This is a useful idealization but it is not what real quantum systems do. Every real quantum system is in contact with its environment — thermal photons, lattice vibrations, stray fields, gas‑phase collisions, observation by experimenters. Coherent superpositions decay; populations relax toward thermal equilibrium; entanglement with the environment proliferates. The closed‑system Schrödinger equation cannot describe these phenomena because, by construction, it has no environment. In 1976, Lindblad — and independently Gorini, Kossakowski, and Sudarshan — proved that the most general Markovian dynamics for a quantum density operator that preserves Hermiticity, trace, and complete positivity has a specific functional form: ∂ₜ ρ̂ = −(i/ℏ)[Ĥ, ρ̂] + ∑_α ( L̂_α ρ̂ L̂_α† − ½{ L̂_α† L̂_α , ρ̂ } ) The first term is the von Neumann equation. The sum is the “dissipator” — jump operators L̂_α mediating environmental coupling. This is the master equation of decoherence theory: qubits coupled to reservoirs, atoms in optical cavities, mesoscopic conductors with electron‑phonon coupling, open‑system everything. The standard derivation traces out the environment and applies the Born–Markov approximation. It works empirically but leaves open: why is Markov valid? Why is Born valid? What is the substrate‑level meaning of the jump operators? This walkthrough shows how the Event Density framework forces the Lindblad form at substrate level rather than deriving it from approximations. The density‑operator description is forced by environmental phase‑independence, derived from substrate primitives, rather than postulated as the natural object after partial‑tracing. Between commitment events, the density operator evolves unitarily — U3 in density‑operator form. The jump operators are the substrate‑level representation of Primitive 11 commitment events: discrete, channel‑selective updates triggered when environmental coupling drives the chain’s individuation. The Markov property is forced by P11’s locality (commitment events do not carry long‑range memory). The anti‑commutator normalization is forced by P04 (bandwidth conservation) plus trace preservation. Complete positivity is automatic from the projector structure of commitment events. The structural payoff: decoherence is not approximate physics derived from a Born–Markov simplification of a more fundamental closed‑system theory. It is what U3 plus substrate primitives produces directly when the chain is non‑isolated. The Lindblad form is forced rather than approximate. Complete positivity, trace preservation, and the Markovian property — usually justified by appeals to physical reasonableness — are forced consequences of bandwidth conservation, environmental phase‑independence, and commitment‑event locality respectively.
This paper derives the non-relativistic time-dependent Schrödinger equation as the logically unavoidable dynamical law for de Broglie matter waves, extending the reconstruction begun in the companion work “The Logical Origin of the de Broglie Matter Wave and its Physical Meaning (the Born Rule)” (Chan, 2026). Starting from the same minimal premises—continuous position in real space, Fourier conjugacy (and the logical uncertainty principle), translation invariance via Noether’s theorem, and probability conservation via statistical energy flux—the Schrödinger equation follows deductively once norm preservation and classical non-relativistic correspondence are enforced. The derivation proceeds in clear stages: Plane-wave solutions for free particles and constant potentials, Quadratic dispersion relation from classical kinematics, Exact local plane-wave structure (defined via phase gradients) that must hold at every point for any smooth wave function, The unique linear differential operator of order ≤ 2 that consistently “glues” these local structures across smooth external potentials V(x,t) while preserving the L²-norm (unitarity). No canonical quantization, operator promotion, commutation relations, or postulated wave equations are used. The Born rule is taken as already established from the prior paper and serves only to constrain unitary evolution. The Schrödinger equation thus emerges not as an empirical postulate or convenient ansatz, but as the mathematically and symmetrically forced description of indivisible particles propagating in continuous, translationally invariant (or smoothly perturbed) space. Domain of validity and natural limitations (non-relativistic kinematics, smooth potentials, single-particle/mean-field regime, closed-system unitarity) are explicitly delineated.
Quantum mechanics is defined here as the theoretical framework crystallised at the fifth Solvay Conference of 1927, comprising five postulates: the wavefunction, the canonical commutation relation [x, p] = iℏ, the Born rule, the Schrödinger equation, and the transition probability rule. We present a complete derivation of all five Solvay postulates from purely classical foundations, starting from the directly observable Coulomb field of the electron. The single empirical input is ℏ—measured from pre-Solvay experiments (Planck 1900–1911, Einstein 1905, Casimir 1948/Lamoreaux 1997) without quantum mechanical interpretation, in the same way G was measured by Cavendish (1798) without general relativity. By Einstein’s photoelectric theory (1905) generalized to all electromagnetic fields, the Coulomb field energy is carried in electromagnetic quanta, each carrying both electric and magnetic fields with energy density ϵ0E^2. Lorentz invariance uniquely determines the ZPF spectral energy density u(ω) ∝ ω^3 (Boyer 1969, 1975). The Casimir force measurement gives the total ZPF energy per mode B = ℏ; classical E/B equipartition from Maxwell’s equations gives the electric energy per mode ℏω/2. The central original contribution is the physical justification of the Compton frequency cutoff ωc = mc^2/ℏ: an electron cannot emit an electromagnetic quantum with energy exceeding mc^2, because the residual electron would require negative mass, never observed in nature. By equating two independent expressions for the momentum variance of the ZPF-driven harmonic oscillator—one from the Abraham–Lorentz equation, one from Nelson’s osmotic velocity formula—D = ℏ/2m is derived without any quantum assumption. The ZPF-driven motion is then proved to be Brownian motion in the precise sense of Wiener (1923): all four Wiener conditions are verified from the properties of the ZPF established in Sections 3–4. This answers the question Nelson (1966) explicitly left open: “We do not attempt to give a physical explanation of why the electron should undergo Brownian motion.” The physical explanation is that the electron cannot escape its own Coulomb field. By Itô’s stochastic calculus and Nelson’s theorem, this gives the Schrödinger equation as an effective description valid for timescales Δt ≫ ℏ/mc^2. The transformation ψ = √ρe^(iS/ℏ) linearises the nonlinear Fokker–Planck equation, explaining why superposition holds. All five Solvay postulates emerge as consequences of classical physics plus the single measured constant ℏ. No Solvay postulate is assumed anywhere.
The Schrödinger equation iℏ · ∂ψ/∂τ = Ĥψ contains three elements that in standard quantummechanics are not derived but postulated: the imaginary unit i, the reduced Planck actionquantum ℏ, and the Hamiltonian operator Ĥ. This supplement shows that all three follow fromthe fossil causal structure. The phase boundary surface Σ = {x ∈ M | t_m(x) · t_C(x) / t_P² = -1}delivers i through the sign change of the metric time. The action quantum ℏ follows as theminimal action of the closed oriented rotation on Σ. The Hamiltonian Ĥ is directly the fossilenergy density operator ρ_hist. The Schrödinger equation is not a postulate - it is a theorem ofthe fossil causal structure.
The Schrodinger equation has been considered to be a postulate of quantum physics, but it is also perceived and derived heuristically as the quantum equivalent of the classical energy relation. We indicate that the Schrodinger equation cannot be a physical postulate, and we show that the heuristic derivations wrongly consider that the particle kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the momentum operator acting on the wavefunction. The correct term is proportional to the square of the momentum. Analyzing particle interactions, we realize that particles have multiple virtual motions and that each motion is accompanied by a wave that has constant amplitude. Accordingly, we define the wavefunction as the superposition of the virtual waves of the particle. As a result, quantum mechanics becomes a local and global theory, while in the traditional formulation it is a local theory. In several interaction settings we can tell what particle motions arise and explain the outcomes in simple and tangible terms. Most importantly, the mathematical foundation of quantum mechanics becomes clear and justified, and we derive the Schrodinger, Dirac, etc. equations as the conditions the wavefunction must satisfy at each space-time point in order to fulfill the respective total energy equation.