We address the paradoxical transformation of a classical-mechanical particle motion when the space and time scales of observation pass below the uncertainty principle threshold. This is analyzed in the language of classical statistical mechanics, considering specifically many-particle systems inhomogeneous along one spatial direction. We employ the density functional formalism in its square-gradient form and find: (i) The macroscopic solution is analogous to the classical trajectory of a particle under a potential of force given by (minus) the free energy density. Whereas, (ii) fluctuations around the solution in (i) are equal to the quantum-mechanical wave functions of a particle under a potential given by the curvature of the free energy density. We illustrate this situation with three textbook examples: A particle in a box, the harmonic oscillator, and the hydrogen atom. We show that their time-independent Schrödinger equation wave functions describe, respectively, the fluctuations of a fluid interface, of critical point fluctuations, and of a confined ideal gas. At large scales, sharp probability distributions make fluctuations irrelevant; the vanishing of the first variation yields the macroscopically observable statistical-mechanical non-uniformity, equivalent to the classical particle trajectory. But at sufficiently small scales, with necessarily very few particles, distributions appear much wider, fluctuations dominate, and one obtains the Schrödinger equation (for the microscopic potential).
We address the paradoxical transformation of a classical-mechanical particle motion when the space and time scales of observation pass below the uncertainty principle threshold. This is analyzed in the language of classical statistical mechanics, considering specifically many-particle systems inhomogeneous along one spatial direction. We employ the density functional formalism in its square-gradient form and find: (i) The macroscopic solution is analogous to the classical trajectory of a particle under a potential of force given by (minus) the free energy density. Whereas, (ii) fluctuations around the solution in (i) are equal to the quantum-mechanical wave functions of a particle under a potential given by the curvature of the free energy density. We illustrate this situation with three textbook examples: A particle in a box, the harmonic oscillator, and the hydrogen atom. We show that their time-independent Schrödinger equation wave functions describe, respectively, the fluctuations of a fluid interface, of critical point fluctuations, and of a confined ideal gas. At large scales, sharp probability distributions make fluctuations irrelevant; the vanishing of the first variation yields the macroscopically observable statistical-mechanical non-uniformity, equivalent to the classical particle trajectory. But at sufficiently small scales, with necessarily very few particles, distributions appear much wider, fluctuations dominate, and one obtains the Schrödinger equation (for the microscopic potential).
Quantum mechanics is often compared with classical mechanics because both may deal with a single particle subject to a potential. Classical mechanics is said to be deterministic describing x(t) and its derivatives i.e showing how a particle moves and accelerates while bound state quantum mechanics produces a real wavefunction W(x) such that W(x)W(x) yields a spatial density profile. The comparison is carried further with the correspondence principle which states that at high energy levels quantum mechanics should mimic classical mechanics. Classical mechanics does not simply describe x(t) and its derivatives i.e. deterministic motion. It also includes two body scattering, force and torque balances for a stationary object etc. In the case of the classical statistical mechanics of an equilibrium ideal gas, the Maxwell-Boltzmann (MB) distribution in the absence of a potential is C1 exp(- pp/(2mT) ). If a potential V(x) is added, one may find P(x) two different ways using Newtonian ideas. The first is to consider the gas as a collective entity like a tiny macroscopic classical object at x. Then one may argue that equilibrium means the system is stationary and apply Newtonian statics i.e. a balance of pressures and -dV/dx to obtain exp(-V(x)/T) as is often done in textbooks. Alternatively, one may consider a single particle and apply Newtonian mechanics differently, namely use a conservation of energy equation: p1p1/2m + V(x1) = p2p2/2m + V(x2). Again one obtains exp(-V(x)/T). The spatial part of probability may be based on Newtonian mechanics indicating that it is not stochastic. The stochastic function is C1 exp(-pp/2mT). Interestingly, however, the two Newtonian approaches are different with respect to a single particle. A collective nonmoving set of particles acts as a stationary object, yet within it each particle seems to be “bouncing” off of an imaginary wall creating pressure. Thus one has an impulse free particle picture yet obtains the correct result exp(-V(x)/T). Alternatively one may think of a single particle accelerating which it does if it is not colliding with other particles. This is a very different picture of the single particle than of one bouncing back and forth hitting an imaginary wall. In fact, there is usually a wall holding the gas together and pressure and bouncing particles are the real picture there, but within the gas one would normally think of a single particle accelerating. Nevertheless there are two scenarios which yield the same result. The idea of pressure balance is more in keeping with an overall statistical picture of the gas. In other words, one may actually ignore the idea of following a single particle as it accelerates. (That is not to say that single particle acceleration does not exist - it does.) Quantum mechanics we argue is a statistical theory. In the case of a single bound particle one has a momentum distribution W(x)=wavefunction = Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx). One may apply conservation of average energy at each x to obtain the time-independent Schrodinger equation. In such a picture, like with the statistical mechanical gas, we argue that one may imagine impulse hits with the potential instead of considering acceleration. The quantity vrms(x) from KEclassical= .5m vrms(x)vrms(x) = -1/2m d/dx dW/dx / W does display acceleration, but this is a mathematical average. As energy levels become higher the correspondence principle is said to apply, but a classical particle exhibits acceleration. The quantum bound state does not, but like in the case of the statistical mechanical gas it may be that two scenarios lead to the same result. In other words, the quantum bound W(x) still has crests and troughs, but with low resolution one may only see an envelope roughly touching W(x)W(x) which matches a classical C2/v(x) where v(x) is classical velocity. Given that quantum mechanics is a statistical theory it may not be necessary to have it explicitly display acceleration.
The Schrodinger equation based on the de Broglie wave is the most fundamental equation of the quantum mechanics. There can be no doubt about it's prediction validity. However, the probabilistic interpretation on the quantum mechanics has insoluble semantic interpretations like reduction of wave packet on observations of physical values. Especially, it is not clear that the wave function which is described by complex function, is whether formality or reality to express the state of particle motion. On this paper, we interpret the wave nature of particle as not the inherency of particle itself, but the motional property of particle in fluctuated space-time due to the kinetic energy and momentum the belief that the kinetic energy and momentum fluctuates the microscopic space-time, and the particle move through the fluctuated space-time adversely. Then, through the particle motion in the Euclidean space-time, the particle will be recognized as if it has the wave nature. We estimate the governing equation of fluctuations of microscopic space-time based on the macroscopic law of motion. On this paper, the equivalence between the governing equation and the Schrodinger equation is indicated.
This paper examines the particle-in-a-box model as a simple but powerful example that highlights the fundamental differences between classical and quantum physics. In classical mechanics, a particle confined between two rigid walls moves with constant velocity and has a uniform probability of being found anywhere in the box; its energy can take any continuous value. In contrast, solving the Schrödinger equation for an infinite potential well yields standing-wave solutions whose wavelengths must satisfy fixed boundary conditions. These constraints produce discrete, quantized energy levels and non-uniform probability distributions, features with no classical analog. Through analytical derivations and numerical simulations using Python, we visualize wave functions, probability densities, and the statistical convergence of random samples toward the theoretical quantum distributions. Comparisons with the classical uniform distribution emphasize how quantum mechanics replaces certainty with probability and continuity with quantization. Finally, we connect the model to real physical systems—such as electrons confined in atoms—to show how this idealized system provides essential insight into the structure and stability of matter.
In this initial paper in a series, we first discuss why classical motions of small particles should be treated statistically. Then we show that any attempted statistical description of any nonrelativistic classical system inevitably yields the multi-coordinate Schrödinger equation, with its usual boundary conditions, as an essential statistical equation for the system. We derive the general "canonical quantization" rule, that the Hamiltonian operator must be the classical Hamiltonian in the N-dimensional metric configuration space defined by the classical kinetic energy of the system, with the classical conjugate momentum N-vector replaced by −iℏ times the vector gradient operator in that space. We obtain these results by using conservation of probability, general tensor calculus, the Madelung transform, the Ehrenfest theorem and/or the Hamilton-Jacobi equation, and comparison with results for the charged harmonic oscillator in stochastic electrodynamics. We also provide two illustrative examples and a discussion of how coordinate trajectories could be compatible with wave properties such as interference, diffraction, and tunneling.
Statistical classical mechanics and quantum mechanics are developed and well-known theories that represent a basis for modern physics. Statistical classical mechanics enable the derivation of the properties of large bodies by investigating the movements of small atoms and molecules which comprise these bodies using Newton's classical laws. Quantum mechanics defines the laws of movement of small particles at small atomic distances by considering them as probability waves. The laws of quantum mechanics are described by the Schrödinger equation. The laws of such movements are significantly different from the laws of movement of large bodies, such as planets or stones. The two described theories are well known and have been well studied. As these theories contain numerous paradoxes, many scientists doubt their internal consistencies. However, these paradoxes can be resolved within the framework of the existing physics without the introduction of new laws. To clarify the paper for the inexperienced reader, we include certain necessary basic concepts of statistical physics and quantum mechanics in this paper without the use of formulas. Exact formulas and explanations are included in the Appendices. The text is supplemented by illustrations to enhance the understanding of the paper. The paradoxes underlying thermodynamics and quantum mechanics are also discussed. The approaches to the solutions of these paradoxes are suggested. The first approach is dependent on the influence of the external observer (environment), which disrupts the correlations in the system. The second approach is based on the limits of the self-knowledge of the system for the case in which both the external observer and the environment are included in the considered system. The concepts of observable dynamics, ideal dynamics, and unpredictable dynamics are introduced. The phenomenon of complex (living) systems is contemplated from the point of view of these dynamics.
In a previous note (1), it was shown that for a ground state oscillator wavefunction, one could analyse the problem in momentum space as a free gas of momentum particles and obtain exp(-p*p/2mT) as fp*fp, fp being the momentum wavefunction. A free energy equal to zero was obtained, with kinetic energy being the energy term in E-TS. This suggests quantum particles scatter (with conservation of momentum) like classical point particles in momentum space, but differ from classical point particles in position space. In particular, one takes a Fourier transform of fp as it seems that each momentum wave carries an exp(ipx) function which is a sort of “baggage” term, possibly due to zitterbewegung. This seems to explain why a free gas in momentum space for the ground state oscillator yields a Gaussian density with W(x)=exp(-ax*x) (W(x)=wavefunction). An oscillator potential is then needed to keep this density with its momentum space pressure in balance. Thus, quantum mechanics and classical statistical mechanics become very similar for this scenario. This begs the question: What about other potentials or oscillator states higher than the ground state? In such a case, it still seems that one may consider “particles colliding in momentum space” with each carrying an exp(ipx) “baggage” term, but one does not have a “classical statistical mechanical” equilibrium scenario any longer. Rather, it seems that one has a net force created by -dV/dx (V(x)=potential) and a difference in pressure d/dx [Average(p*p)d(x)] where d(x) is density. There also seems to be an average velocity (1/W)dW/dx. In momentum space such a velocity would not exist for f(p)=f(-p), but because of the baggage of exp(ipx) it is present i.e. p exp(ipx) - p exp(-ipx). Newton’s law, with force acting on this velocity appears in the equation d/dx [Average(p*p)d(x)]=F(x) d(x). This same equation is equivalent to the gradient of the time-independent Schrodinger equation. For quantum mechanics, one has one particle rather than many as in classical statistical mechanics. Thus, it seems that this “Newton’s law” balance is based on a long term time average. It seems, however, that there should be a period T during which the average can establish itself. After this, one would have periodic time motion where the system keeps scattering back into itself in this characteristic time. This period can be deduced, it seems, from the time-independent Schrodinger equation and is found to be E, the energy.