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:quant-ph/0201084 · Fortschritte der Physik

Quantum Mechanics from a Heisenberg-type Equality

Michael J. W. Hall, Marcel Reginatto

Published May 1, 2002• 20 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The usual Heisenberg uncertainty relation, ΔX ΔP ≥ ℏ/2, may be replaced by an exact equality for suitably chosen measures of position and momentum uncertainty, which is valid for all wavefunctions. This exactuncertainty relation, δX ΔPnc ≡ ℏ/2, can be generalised to other pairs of conjugate observables such as photon number and phase, and is sufficiently strong to provide the basis for moving from classical mechanics to quantum mechanics. In particular, the assumption of a nonclassical momentum fluctuation, having a strength which scales inversely with uncertainty in position, leads from the classical equations of motion to the Schrödinger equation.

DOI
10.1002/1521-3978(200205)50:5/7<646::aid-prop646>3.0.co;2-7

Related papers

Quantum Mechanics from a Heisenberg-type Equality

Michael J. W. Hall, Marcel Reginatto

The usual Heisenberg uncertainty relation, ΔX ΔP ≥ ℏ/2, may be replaced by an exact equality for suitably chosen measures of position and momentum uncertainty, which is valid for all wavefunctions. This exact uncertainty relation, δX ΔPnc ≡ ℏ/

•Jan 1, 2002•22 citations

Exact uncertainty relations: technical details

Michael J. W. Hall

The Heisenberg inequality ΔX ΔP \geq \hbar/2 can be replaced by an exact equality, for suitably chosen measures of position and momentum uncertainty, which is valid for all wavefunctions. The significance of this "exact" uncertainty relation is discussed, and results are generalised to angular momentum and phase, photon number and phase, time and frequency, and to states described by density operators. Connections to optimal estimation of an observable from the measurement of a second observable, Wigner functions, energy bounds, and entanglement are also given.

arXiv:quant-ph/0103072•Mar 14, 2001•0 citations

Schrodinger equation from an exact uncertainty principle

Hall, M J W, Reginatto, M

An exact uncertainty principle, formulated as the assumption that a classical ensemble is subject to random momentum fluctuations of a strength which is determined by and scales inversely with uncertainty in position, leads from the classical equations of motion to the Schrodinger equation. Thus there is an exact formulation of the uncertainty principle which precisely captures the essence of what is "quantum" about quantum mechanics.

•Feb 13, 2001•81 citations

Exact uncertainty relations

Michael J. W. Hall

The Heisenberg inequality $\ensuremath{\Delta}X\ensuremath{\Delta}P>~\ensuremath{\Elzxh}/2$ can be replaced by an exact equality, for suitably chosen measures of position and momentum uncertainty, which is valid for all wave functions. The statistics of complementary observables are thus connected by an ``exact'' uncertainty relation. Results may be generalized to angular momentum and phase, photon number and phase, time and frequency, and to states described by density operators. Connections to energy bounds, entanglement, Wigner functions, and optimal estimation of an observable from the measurement of a second observable are also given.

arXiv:quant-ph/0107149•Physical Review A•Oct 4, 2001•89 citations

Schrödinger equation from an exact uncertainty principle

Michael J. W. Hall, Marcel Reginatto

An exact uncertainty principle, formulated as the assumption that a classical ensemble is subject to random momentum fluctuations of a strength which is determined by and scales inversely with uncertainty in position, leads from the classical equations of motion to the Schrödinger equation.

arXiv:quant-ph/0102069•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Mar 28, 2002•108 citations

Quantum Mechanics

Hitoshi Kitada

I consider in this book a formulation of Quantum Mechanics. Usually QM is formulated based on the notion of time and space, both of which are thought a priori given quantities or notions. However, when we try to define the notion of velocity or momentum, we encounter a difficulty as we will see in chapter 1. The problem is that if the notion of time is given a priori, the velocity is definitely determined when given a position, which contradicts the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg. We then set the basis of QM on the notion of position and momentum operators as in chapter 2. Time of a local system then is defined approximately as a ratio $|x|/|v|$ between the space coordinate $x$ and the velocity $v$. In this formulation of QM, we can keep the uncertainty principle, and time is a quantity that does not have precise values unlike the usually supposed notion of time has. The feature of local time is that it is a time proper to each local system, which is defined as a finite set of quantum mechanical particles. We now have an infinite number of local times that are unique and proper to each local system. Based on the notion of local time, the motion inside a local system is described by the usual Schrödinger equation. We investigate such motion in a given local system in part II. This is a usual quantum mechanics. After some excursion of the investigation of local motion, we consider in part III the relative relation or motion between plural local systems. In the final part IV, we will prove that there is at least one Universe wave function $ϕ$ in which all local systems have local motions and thus local times. This concludes our formulation of Quantum Mechanics.

arXiv:quant-ph/0410061•Oct 8, 2004•0 citations
The usual Heisenberg uncertainty relation, ΔX ΔP ≥ ℏ/2, may be replaced by an exact equality for suitably chosen measures of position and momentum uncertainty, which is valid for all wavefunctions. This exactuncertainty relation, δX ΔPnc ≡ ℏ/2, can be generalised to other pairs of conjugate observables such as photon number and phase, and is sufficiently strong to provide the basis for moving from classical mechanics to quantum mechanics. In particular, the assumption of a nonclassical momentum fluctuation, having a strength which scales inversely with uncertainty in position, leads from the classical equations of motion to the Schrödinger equation.
The Heisenberg inequality ΔX ΔP \geq \hbar/2 can be replaced by an exact equality, for suitably chosen measures of position and momentum uncertainty, which is valid for all wavefunctions. The significance of this "exact" uncertainty relation is discussed, and results are generalised to angular momentum and phase, photon number and phase, time and frequency, and to states described by density operators. Connections to optimal estimation of an observable from the measurement of a second observable, Wigner functions, energy bounds, and entanglement are also given.
The Heisenberg inequality $\ensuremath{\Delta}X\ensuremath{\Delta}P>~\ensuremath{\Elzxh}/2$ can be replaced by an exact equality, for suitably chosen measures of position and momentum uncertainty, which is valid for all wave functions. The statistics of complementary observables are thus connected by an ``exact'' uncertainty relation. Results may be generalized to angular momentum and phase, photon number and phase, time and frequency, and to states described by density operators. Connections to energy bounds, entanglement, Wigner functions, and optimal estimation of an observable from the measurement of a second observable are also given.
I consider in this book a formulation of Quantum Mechanics. Usually QM is formulated based on the notion of time and space, both of which are thought a priori given quantities or notions. However, when we try to define the notion of velocity or momentum, we encounter a difficulty as we will see in chapter 1. The problem is that if the notion of time is given a priori, the velocity is definitely determined when given a position, which contradicts the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg. We then set the basis of QM on the notion of position and momentum operators as in chapter 2. Time of a local system then is defined approximately as a ratio ∣x∣/∣v∣|x|/|v|∣x∣/∣v∣ between the space coordinate xxx and the velocity vvv. In this formulation of QM, we can keep the uncertainty principle, and time is a quantity that does not have precise values unlike the usually supposed notion of time has. The feature of local time is that it is a time proper to each local system, which is defined as a finite set of quantum mechanical particles. We now have an infinite number of local times that are unique and proper to each local system. Based on the notion of local time, the motion inside a local system is described by the usual Schrödinger equation. We investigate such motion in a given local system in part II. This is a usual quantum mechanics. After some excursion of the investigation of local motion, we consider in part III the relative relation or motion between plural local systems. In the final part IV, we will prove that there is at least one Universe wave function ϕϕϕ in which all local systems have local motions and thus local times. This concludes our formulation of Quantum Mechanics.