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

arXiv:hep-th/0110151 · Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General

Duality and the geometry of quantum mechanics

J. M. Isidro

Published Mar 28, 2002• 11 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

A recent notion in theoretical physics is that not all quantum theories arise from quantizing a classical system. Also, a given quantum model may possess more than just one classical limit. There is strong evidence for these facts in string duality and M-theory, and it has been suggested that they should also have a counterpart in quantum mechanics. In view of these developments we propose dequantization , a mechanism to render a quantum theory classical. Specifically, we present a geometric procedure to dequantize a given quantum mechanics (regardless of its classical origin, if any) to possibly different classical limits, whose quantization gives back the original quantum theory. The standard classical limit ℏ→0 arises as a particular case of our approach.

DOI
10.1088/0305-4470/35/14/311

Related papers

On the Equivalence Principle of Quantum Mechanics

J. M. Isidro

A recent concept in theoretical physics, motivated in string duality and M-theory, is the notion that not all quantum theories arise from quantising a classical system. Also, a given quantum model may possess more than just one classical limit. In view of these developments, we analyse some general properties that quantum mechanics must satisfy, if it is not to be formulated as a quantisation of a given classical mechanics. Instead, our approach to quantum mechanics is modelled on a statement that is close in spirit to the equivalence principle of general relativity, thus bearing a strong resemblance with the equivalence principle of quantum mechanics formulated by Faraggi-Matone.

arXiv:quant-ph/0105012•May 3, 2001•1 citation

Geometric quantization and algebraic Lagrangian geometry

Nikolai Andreevich Tyurin

Introduction The main theme of this survey is the quantization of classical mechanical systems in terms of algebraic geometry. The aim is thus to relate questions of mathematics and theoretical physics. We first recall briefly the main problems and methods which turn us to study the new subject. Quantization itself is the main problem of theoretical physics. The need to introduce and develop it was dictated by the creators of quantum theory. According to the ‘Copenhagen philosophy’, the physical predictions of a quantum theory must be formulated in terms of classical concepts (the first sentence of Woodhouse; here we quote the beginning of this survey). Thus in addition to the usual structures (Hilbert space, unitary transformations, selfadjoint operators …, see, for example, Landau and Lifschitz) any reasonable quantum theory has to admit an appropriate passage to a classical limit under which quantum observables are transferred to their classical analogues. However, as Dirac pointed out at the beginning of the quantum age, the correspondence between quantum theory and classical theory should be based not just on numerical coincidences taking place in the limit h → ∞, but on an analogy between their mathematical structures. Classical theory does approximate the quantum theory, but it does more – it supplies a framework for some interpretation of quantum theory. Using this idea, we can in general understand a quantization procedure as a correspondence between classical and quantum theories. In this sense, quantization of the classical mechanical systems is a movement in one direction, while taking the quasiclassical limit goes in the opposite direction.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Jan 18, 2007•15 citations

Duality and Quantum Mechanics

J. M. Isidro

This Festschrift in honour of J. A. de Azcarraga gives an introduction to the concept of duality, i.e., to the relativity of the notion of a quantum, in the context of the quantum mechanics of a finite number of degrees of freedom. Although the concept of duality arises in string and M--theory, Vafa has argued that it should also have a counterpart in quantum mechanics, before moving on to second quantisation, fields, strings and branes. We illustrate our analysis with the case when classical phase space is complex projective space, but our conclusions can be generalised to other complex, symplectic phase spaces, both compact and noncompact.

arXiv:quant-ph/0310092•Oct 14, 2003•1 citation

Duality, Quantum Mechanics and (Almost) Complex Manifolds

J. M. Isidro

The classical mechanics of a finite number of degrees of freedom requires a symplectic structure on phase space [Formula: see text], but it is independent of any complex structure. On the contrary, the quantum theory is intimately linked with the choice of a complex structure on [Formula: see text]. When the latter is a complex-analytic manifold admitting just one complex structure, there is a unique quantization whose classical limit is [Formula: see text]. Then the notion of coherence is the same for all observers. However, when [Formula: see text] admits two or more nonbiholomorphic complex structures, there is one different quantization per different complex structure on [Formula: see text]. The lack of analyticity in transforming between nonbiholomorphic complex structures can be interpreted as the loss of quantum-mechanical coherence under the corresponding transformation. Observers using one complex structure perceive as coherent the states that other observers, using a different complex structure, do not perceive as such. This is the notion of a quantum-mechanical duality transformation: the relativity of the notion of a quantum.

arXiv:quant-ph/0304143•Modern Physics Letters A•Sep 3, 2003•8 citations

Quantum-Mechanical Dualities on the Torus

José M. Isidro

On classical phase spaces admitting just one complex-differentiable structure, there is no indeterminacy in the choice of the creation operators that create quanta out of a given vacuum. In these cases the notion of a quantum is universal, i.e., independent of the observer on classical phase space. Such is the case in all standard applications of quantum mechanics. However, recent developments suggest that the notion of a quantum may not be universal. Transformations between observers that do not agree on the notion of an elementary quantum are called dualities. Classical phase spaces admitting more than one complex-differentiable structure thus provide a natural framework to study dualities in quantum mechanics. As an example we quantise a classical mechanics whose phase space is a torus and prove explicitly that it exhibits dualities.

•Oct 27, 2003•1 citation

Enhanced quantization: a primer

John R. Klauder

Although classical mechanics and quantum mechanics are separate disciplines, we live in a world where Planck’s constant ℏ > 0, meaning that the classical and quantum world views must actually coexist . Traditionally, canonical quantization procedures postulate a direct linking of various c -number and q -number quantities that lie in disjoint realms, along with the quite distinct interpretations given to each realm. In this paper we propose a different association of classical and quantum quantities that renders classical theory a natural subset of quantum theory letting them coexist as required. This proposal also shines light on alternative linking assignments of classical and quantum quantities that offer different perspectives on the very meaning of quantization. In this paper we focus on elaborating the general principles, while elsewhere we have published several examples of what this alternative viewpoint can achieve; these examples include removal of singularities in classical solutions to certain models, and an alternative quantization of several field theory models that are trivial when quantized by traditional methods but become well defined and nontrivial when viewed from the new viewpoint.

arXiv:1204.2870•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Jun 26, 2012•54 citations
A recent notion in theoretical physics is that not all quantum theories arise from quantizing a classical system. Also, a given quantum model may possess more than just one classical limit. There is strong evidence for these facts in string duality and M-theory, and it has been suggested that they should also have a counterpart in quantum mechanics. In view of these developments we propose dequantization , a mechanism to render a quantum theory classical. Specifically, we present a geometric procedure to dequantize a given quantum mechanics (regardless of its classical origin, if any) to possibly different classical limits, whose quantization gives back the original quantum theory. The standard classical limit ℏ→0 arises as a particular case of our approach.
A recent concept in theoretical physics, motivated in string duality and M-theory, is the notion that not all quantum theories arise from quantising a classical system. Also, a given quantum model may possess more than just one classical limit. In view of these developments, we analyse some general properties that quantum mechanics must satisfy, if it is not to be formulated as a quantisation of a given classical mechanics. Instead, our approach to quantum mechanics is modelled on a statement that is close in spirit to the equivalence principle of general relativity, thus bearing a strong resemblance with the equivalence principle of quantum mechanics formulated by Faraggi-Matone.
Introduction The main theme of this survey is the quantization of classical mechanical systems in terms of algebraic geometry. The aim is thus to relate questions of mathematics and theoretical physics. We first recall briefly the main problems and methods which turn us to study the new subject. Quantization itself is the main problem of theoretical physics. The need to introduce and develop it was dictated by the creators of quantum theory. According to the ‘Copenhagen philosophy’, the physical predictions of a quantum theory must be formulated in terms of classical concepts (the first sentence of Woodhouse; here we quote the beginning of this survey). Thus in addition to the usual structures (Hilbert space, unitary transformations, selfadjoint operators …, see, for example, Landau and Lifschitz) any reasonable quantum theory has to admit an appropriate passage to a classical limit under which quantum observables are transferred to their classical analogues. However, as Dirac pointed out at the beginning of the quantum age, the correspondence between quantum theory and classical theory should be based not just on numerical coincidences taking place in the limit h → ∞, but on an analogy between their mathematical structures. Classical theory does approximate the quantum theory, but it does more – it supplies a framework for some interpretation of quantum theory. Using this idea, we can in general understand a quantization procedure as a correspondence between classical and quantum theories. In this sense, quantization of the classical mechanical systems is a movement in one direction, while taking the quasiclassical limit goes in the opposite direction.
This Festschrift in honour of J. A. de Azcarraga gives an introduction to the concept of duality, i.e., to the relativity of the notion of a quantum, in the context of the quantum mechanics of a finite number of degrees of freedom. Although the concept of duality arises in string and M--theory, Vafa has argued that it should also have a counterpart in quantum mechanics, before moving on to second quantisation, fields, strings and branes. We illustrate our analysis with the case when classical phase space is complex projective space, but our conclusions can be generalised to other complex, symplectic phase spaces, both compact and noncompact.
The classical mechanics of a finite number of degrees of freedom requires a symplectic structure on phase space [Formula: see text], but it is independent of any complex structure. On the contrary, the quantum theory is intimately linked with the choice of a complex structure on [Formula: see text]. When the latter is a complex-analytic manifold admitting just one complex structure, there is a unique quantization whose classical limit is [Formula: see text]. Then the notion of coherence is the same for all observers. However, when [Formula: see text] admits two or more nonbiholomorphic complex structures, there is one different quantization per different complex structure on [Formula: see text]. The lack of analyticity in transforming between nonbiholomorphic complex structures can be interpreted as the loss of quantum-mechanical coherence under the corresponding transformation. Observers using one complex structure perceive as coherent the states that other observers, using a different complex structure, do not perceive as such. This is the notion of a quantum-mechanical duality transformation: the relativity of the notion of a quantum.
On classical phase spaces admitting just one complex-differentiable structure, there is no indeterminacy in the choice of the creation operators that create quanta out of a given vacuum. In these cases the notion of a quantum is universal, i.e., independent of the observer on classical phase space. Such is the case in all standard applications of quantum mechanics. However, recent developments suggest that the notion of a quantum may not be universal. Transformations between observers that do not agree on the notion of an elementary quantum are called dualities. Classical phase spaces admitting more than one complex-differentiable structure thus provide a natural framework to study dualities in quantum mechanics. As an example we quantise a classical mechanics whose phase space is a torus and prove explicitly that it exhibits dualities.
Although classical mechanics and quantum mechanics are separate disciplines, we live in a world where Planck’s constant ℏ > 0, meaning that the classical and quantum world views must actually coexist . Traditionally, canonical quantization procedures postulate a direct linking of various c -number and q -number quantities that lie in disjoint realms, along with the quite distinct interpretations given to each realm. In this paper we propose a different association of classical and quantum quantities that renders classical theory a natural subset of quantum theory letting them coexist as required. This proposal also shines light on alternative linking assignments of classical and quantum quantities that offer different perspectives on the very meaning of quantization. In this paper we focus on elaborating the general principles, while elsewhere we have published several examples of what this alternative viewpoint can achieve; these examples include removal of singularities in classical solutions to certain models, and an alternative quantization of several field theory models that are trivial when quantized by traditional methods but become well defined and nontrivial when viewed from the new viewpoint.