DOCSLIB.ORG

Einstein's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics L

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Einstein's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics L Einstein's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics L. E. Ballentine Citation: American Journal of Physics 40, 1763(1972); doi: 10.1119/1.1987060 View online: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1987060 View Table of Contents: http://aapt.scitation.org/toc/ajp/40/12 Published by the American Association of Physics Teachers Articles you may be interested in Einstein’s opposition to the quantum theory American Journal of Physics 58, 673 (1990); 10.1119/1.16399 Probability theory in quantum mechanics American Journal of Physics 54, 883 (1986); 10.1119/1.14783 The Shaky Game: Einstein, Realism and the Quantum Theory American Journal of Physics 56, 571 (1988); 10.1119/1.15540 QUANTUM MEASUREMENTS American Journal of Physics 85, 5 (2017); 10.1119/1.4967925 Einstein’s boxes American Journal of Physics 73, 164 (2005); 10.1119/1.1811620 Development of concepts in the history of quantum theory American Journal of Physics 43, 389 (1975); 10.1119/1.9833 an Association of Physics Teachers Explore the AAPT Career Center - access hundreds of physics education and other STEM teaching jobs at two-year and four-year colleges and universities. http://jobs.aapt.org December 1972 Einstein’s Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics L. E. BALLENTINE his own interpretation of the theory are less well Physics Department known. Indeed, Heisenberg’s essay “The Develop­ Simon Fraser University ment of the Interpretation of the Quantum Burnaby, B.C., Canada Theory,”2 in which he replied in detail to many (Received 23 May 1972; revised 27 June 1972) critics of the Copenhagen interpretation, takes no account of Einstein’s specific arguments. Einstein Einstein’s arguments concerning the interpretation of is said merely to belong to a group which “ex­ quantum mechanics are reviewed and contrasted with cer­ presses rather its general dissatisfaction with the tain misconceptions regarding his attitude toward the quantum theory, without making definite counter­ theory. He considered Born’s statistical interpretation to be proposals, either physical or philosophical in the only satisfactory one, and he was not a supporter of nature.” We shall see that this latter remark is hidden-variable theories such as that of Bohm. His criticism of the interpretation accepted, at least tacitly, by many certainly false. physicists was that the quantum state function does not Einstein’s attitude is best expressed in his provide a description of an individual system but rather of “Reply to Criticisms,”3 to which we shall return an ensemble of similar systems. This criticism was not later. There he sums up his argument as follows based merely upon his famous remark that God does not play dice, but upon some definite physical arguments (p. 671): which did not assume determinism. One arrives at very implausible theoretical conceptions, if one attempts to maintain the thesis that the statistical quantum theory is in principle capable of producing a complete description of an individual physical system. On the other hand, those difficulties of theoretical interpretation disappear, if one views the quantum-mechanical description as the description of ensembles of systems. We see here that he did indeed make a definite INTRODUCTION counterproposal to the Copenhagen interpretation, and that he regarded quantum mechanics as a What was Einstein’s attitude toward the satisfactory theory provided one gives up the claim statistical quantum theory? A widespread myth that a quantum state function constitutes a (difficult to trace but quite real) holds that he complete description of an individual system. misunderstood or rejected quantum mechanics on How, then, could such ignorance, misinforma­ rather vague philosophical grounds, that he dis­ tion, and pernicious myths about Einstein have regarded the statistical quantum theory merely come to be? Presumably it is because he did not because he did not believe in a God who plays dice. participate actively in the development of the new In a preface to a British Broadcasting Corporation quantum mechanics (after 1925) except as a series1 about Einstein, Christopher Sykes speaks critic, and because he did not publish a systematic of, “The main and most pernicious [myth] account of quantum theory from his own point of concerns the last phase of his life . (the view. But from his publications and his cor­ period spent in the United States of America) respondence with contemporary physicists, we when he was sometimes regarded as a man of can obtain a clear picture of his attitude toward enfeebled energy and even decaying mind. quantum mechanics. That Einstein criticized the Copenhagen inter­ We shall frequently refer to The Bom—Einstein pretation of quantum mechanics is well known, Letters (BEL)4 and to Letters on Wave Mechanics although the nature of his critical arguments and (LWM).6 A useful bibliography of Einstein’s A JP Volume Ifi / 1763 writing is contained in Ref. 3, and a more complete continuously, whereas Bom gave an interpreta­ list has been compiled by Boni, Russ, and Law­ tion in terms of discrete events and transition rence.8 probabilities. In fact, the interpretation of quantum theory was not at all settled at that time FIRST IMPRESSION and it was to be the main topic of discussion at the Modern quantum mechanics originated in 1925 Solvay Conference the following year. from two independent starting points, Heinsen- berg’s “matrix mechanics” and Schrodinger’s THE SOLVAY CONFERENCE “wave mechanics.” Although the two formalisms The Fifth Solvay Conference, held in Brussels were shown to be equivalent by Schrodinger in from 24 to 29 October 1927, provided an op­ 1926, they appeared to be very different in their portunity for the leading physicists of the day to original form. discuss the new quantum theory. Einstein’s only Now Einstein had earlier suggested that contribution to the official proceedings was one Louis deBroglie’s thesis, which postulated waves comment in the general discussion.11 He considered associated with material particles, should be taken the situation pictured in Fig. 1. Let S be a screen seriously. So it is not at all surprising that he with a small opening 0, and let P be a photographic responded favorably to Schrodinger’s paper. film in the form of a large hemisphere. Suppose Somewhat surprising is his remark,7 “I am con­ that electrons fall on S and that some of them vinced that you have made a decisive advance pass through 0. Because of the smallness of the with your formulation of the quantum condition, opening 0, the deBroglie-Schrodinger wave just as I am equally convinced that the Heisen­ appropriate to the quantum mechanical descrip­ berg-Born route is off the track.”7 tion will be diffracted at 0, and a spherical wave Here he was referring to the fact that, if two will propagate towards P. noninteracting systems are regarded as one system, Einstein then distinguished two possible points then their energies are clearly additive according of view. to Schrodinger’s theory. Einstein believed (in­ correctly) that the same was not true in the Idea I:1* “The deBroglie-Schrodinger waves matrix formalism. We may presume that he was do not correspond to a single electron, but to a not aware of Schrodinger’s demonstration8 of cloud of electrons extended in space. The theory equivalence between the two formalisms because does not give any information about the individual that paper was published on 4 May 1926. processes, but only about the ensemble of an Earlier, in a letter9 to Mrs. Born dated 7 March infinity of elementary processes.” 1926, Einstein had said, “The Heisenberg-Born Idea I I : “The theory has the pretention to be a concepts leave us all breathless, and have made a complete theory of individual processes.” Al­ deep impression on all theoretically oriented though the particle may initially be described by people.” But on 4 December 1926 he wrote to a small wave packet, the wave will be diffracted Born,10 “Quantum mechanics is certainly impos­ at 0, and will cover the whole of the film P. ing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not really bring us any closer to the secret of the ‘old one.’ I, at any rate, am convinced that He is not playing at dice.” No doubt the publication of Schrodinger’s work between these two letters influenced Einstein to change his attitude, but since the equivalence of the two formalisms had been demonstrated this is hardly a sufficient reason. Here we must remember that a formalism requires a physical interpretation before it becomes til a theory. Schrodinger interpreted the | ^ |2 as a Fig. 1. Electrons incident on screen S at 0 are diffracted real extended charge distribution which evolves and recorded on the photographic film P. 1764 / December 1972 Einstein’s Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics According to Idea I, purely statistical, | ^ |2 that allowed by Heisenberg’s uncertainty relations. expresses the probability that a particle of the Although Einstein did not succeed in producing an cloud should exist at a particular place. example, it is known today that in certain situa­ According to Idea II, | ^ |2 expresses the tions it is possible to measure two noncommuting probability that at a certain instant one and the observables simultaneously with a precision same particle is found at the specified place. Hence unrestricted by Heisenberg’s relations, but con­ it should be possible for one particle to be detected trary to the belief held in 1927, the foundations at two or more places on the film. This objectionable of quantum mechanics are not shaken by this conclusion can be avoided only if we suppose there fact.15 For quantum mechanics, properly under­ is a very peculiar action-at-a-distance mechanism stood, does not prohibit or restrict simultaneous which prevents the extended wave from producing measurement of noncommuting observables, but an action at more than one place on the film.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Quantum Trajectory Distribution for Weak Measurement of A
    Quantum Trajectory Distribution for Weak Measurement of a Superconducting Qubit: Experiment meets Theory Parveen Kumar,1, ∗ Suman Kundu,2, † Madhavi Chand,2, ‡ R. Vijayaraghavan,2, § and Apoorva Patel1, ¶ 1Centre for High Energy Physics, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India 2Department of Condensed Matter Physics and Materials Science, Tata Institue of Fundamental Research, Mumbai 400005, India (Dated: April 11, 2018) Quantum measurements are described as instantaneous projections in textbooks. They can be stretched out in time using weak measurements, whereby one can observe the evolution of a quantum state as it heads towards one of the eigenstates of the measured operator. This evolution can be understood as a continuous nonlinear stochastic process, generating an ensemble of quantum trajectories, consisting of noisy fluctuations on top of geodesics that attract the quantum state towards the measured operator eigenstates. The rate of evolution is specific to each system-apparatus pair, and the Born rule constraint requires the magnitudes of the noise and the attraction to be precisely related. We experimentally observe the entire quantum trajectory distribution for weak measurements of a superconducting qubit in circuit QED architecture, quantify it, and demonstrate that it agrees very well with the predictions of a single-parameter white-noise stochastic process. This characterisation of quantum trajectories is a powerful clue to unraveling the dynamics of quantum measurement, beyond the conventional axiomatic quantum
    [Show full text]
  • Tsekov, R., Heifetz, E., & Cohen, E
    Tsekov, R., Heifetz, E., & Cohen, E. (2017). Derivation of the local- mean stochastic quantum force. Fluctuation and Noise Letters, 16(3), [1750028]. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219477517500286 Peer reviewed version Link to published version (if available): 10.1142/S0219477517500286 Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via World Scientific at http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219477517500286. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/research-policy/pure/user-guides/ebr-terms/ Derivation of the Local-Mean Stochastic Quantum Force Roumen Tsekov Department of Physical Chemistry, University of Sofia, 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria Eyal Heifetz Department of Geosciences, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel Eliahu Cohen H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1TL, U.K (Dated: May 16, 2017) Abstract We regard the non-relativistic Schr¨odinger equation as an ensemble mean representation of the stochastic motion of a single particle in a vacuum, subject to an undefined stochastic quantum force. The local mean of the quantum force is found to be proportional to the third spatial derivative of the probability density function, while its associated pressure is proportional to the second spatial derivative. The latter arises from the single particle diluted gas pressure, and this observation allows to interpret the quantum Bohm potential as the energy required to put a particle in a bath of fluctuating vacuum at constant entropy and volume.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Born Rule in Weak Measurements
    Understanding the Born Rule in Weak Measurements Apoorva Patel Centre for High Energy Physics, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 31 July 2017, Open Quantum Systems 2017, ICTS-TIFR N. Gisin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 (1984) 1657 A. Patel and P. Kumar, Phys Rev. A (to appear), arXiv:1509.08253 S. Kundu, T. Roy, R. Vijayaraghavan, P. Kumar and A. Patel (in progress) 31 July 2017, Open Quantum Systems 2017, A. Patel (CHEP, IISc) Weak Measurements and Born Rule / 29 Abstract Projective measurement is used as a fundamental axiom in quantum mechanics, even though it is discontinuous and cannot predict which measured operator eigenstate will be observed in which experimental run. The probabilistic Born rule gives it an ensemble interpretation, predicting proportions of various outcomes over many experimental runs. Understanding gradual weak measurements requires replacing this scenario with a dynamical evolution equation for the collapse of the quantum state in individual experimental runs. We revisit the framework to model quantum measurement as a continuous nonlinear stochastic process. It combines attraction towards the measured operator eigenstates with white noise, and for a specific ratio of the two reproduces the Born rule. This fluctuation-dissipation relation implies that the quantum state collapse involves the system-apparatus interaction only, and the Born rule is a consequence of the noise contributed by the apparatus. The ensemble of the quantum trajectories is predicted by the stochastic process in terms of a single evolution parameter, and matches well with the weak measurement results for superconducting transmon qubits. 31 July 2017, Open Quantum Systems 2017, A. Patel (CHEP, IISc) Weak Measurements and Born Rule / 29 Axioms of Quantum Dynamics (1) Unitary evolution (Schr¨odinger): d d i dt |ψi = H|ψi , i dt ρ =[H,ρ] .
    [Show full text]
  • A Simple Approach to Measurement in Quantum Mechanics
    A Simple Approach To Measurement in Quantum Mechanics Anthony Rizzi Institute for Advanced Physics, [email protected] Abstract: A simple way, accessible to undergraduates, is given to understand measurements in quantum mechanics. The ensemble interpretation of quantum mechanics is natural and provides this simple access to the measurement problem. This paper explains measurement in terms of this relatively young interpretation, first made rigorous by L. Ballentine starting in the 1970’s. Its facility is demonstrated through a detailed explication of the Wigner Friend argument using the Stern-Gerlach experiment. Following a recent textbook, this approach is developed further through analysis of free particle states as well as the Schrödinger cat paradox. Some pitfalls of the Copenhagen interpretation are drawn out. Introduction The measurement problem in quantum mechanics confounds students and experts. arXiv:quant-ph/ 09 Feb 2020 The problem arose near the founding of the formal discipline of quantum mechanics with especially the debates between Einstein and Bohr. There is much notable history, but since I do not aim to give an exhaustive history, only the necessary points of an outline, I only note the following points. Einstein held, among other things, the most basic form of ensemble interpretation saying: “The attempt to conceive the quantum-theoretical description as the complete description of the individual systems leads to unnatural theoretical interpretations, which become immediately unnecessary if one accepts the interpretation that the description refers to ensembles of systems and not to individual systems.”1 Heisenberg and Bohr, both working in Copenhagen, Denmark, made a working model of measurement which developed into the somewhat ill defined Copenhagen interpretation.
    [Show full text]
  • Jhep01(2021)118
    Published for SISSA by Springer Received: July 7, 2020 Revised: October 31, 2020 Accepted: December 3, 2020 Published: January 20, 2021 JHEP01(2021)118 The path integral of 3D gravity near extremality; or, JT gravity with defects as a matrix integral Henry Maxfield and Gustavo J. Turiaci Department of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: We propose that a class of new topologies, for which there is no classical solution, should be included in the path integral of three-dimensional pure gravity, and that their inclusion solves pathological negativities in the spectrum, replacing them with a nonperturbative shift of the BTZ extremality bound. We argue that a two dimensional calculation using a dimensionally reduced theory captures the leading effects in the near extremal limit. To make this argument, we study a closely related two-dimensional theory of Jackiw-Teitelboim gravity with dynamical defects. We show that this theory is equivalent to a matrix integral. Keywords: 2D Gravity, Black Holes, Conformal Field Theory, Nonperturbative Effects ArXiv ePrint: 2006.11317 Open Access, c The Authors. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2021)118 Article funded by SCOAP3. Contents 1 Introduction2 1.1 The spectrum of 3D pure gravity2 1.2 3D gravity in the near-extremal limit5 1.3 JT gravity with defects6 1.4 Outline of paper7 JHEP01(2021)118 2 The path integral of 3D gravity7 2.1 Dimensional reduction7 2.2 The classical solutions: SL(2; Z) black holes.9 2.3 Kaluza-Klein
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Mechanics II Course Topics
    Chem 7940 Quantum Mechanics II Spring 2013 Chemistry 7940 Quantum Mechanics II Spring 2013 Course topics Last revised: January 15, 2013 1. Density matrix • Pure vs mixed states. Ensemble interpretation. • Reduced density matrices. • Correlation & entanglement. Bell’s theorem. • Equations of motion. Analogy with classical mechanics. • Relaxation and decoherence. • Generalized measurements, quantum information theory, and all that. 2. Time-dependent phenomena • Evolution operator. Propagators and Green’s functions. • Three pictures: Schr¨odinger, Heisenberg, interaction. • 2-level system. Rotating wave approximation. Bloch equations. • Time-dependent perturbation theory. Harmonic perturbations. Resonant phenomena. Tran- sitions to a continuum. Fermi’s Golden rule. • Sudden approximation. • Adiabatic approximation. Geometric phases. • Perturbation theory for the density operator. Linear response. 3. Path integral formulation of quantum mechanics (brief) • Derivation of the sum-over-paths expression for the propagator. • Semiclassical limit of the path integral. • Path integral formulation of quantum statistical mechanics: polymer beads, and all that. 4. Molecule-field interactions • Brief review: Maxwell’s equations, scalar and vector potentials, gauge transformations, free field, and all that. • Derivation of Hamiltonian for charged particle in field. • Perturbation in dipole approximation. • A and B coefficients. Selection rules. Sum rules. • Electric quadrupole and magnetic dipole transitions. • High-order perturbation theory and multiphoton processes. • Nonlinear spectroscopy. • Electric and magnetic properties of molecules (brief). • Quantizing the EM field. Photons. Spontaneous emission revisited. 1 of 2 Chem 7940 Quantum Mechanics II Spring 2013 5. Quantum mechanics of the continuum: Scattering theory • Particle flux and scattering cross sections. • Green’s functions and the scattering problem. • Born approximation. • Partial wave analysis of wavefunction for central scattering potential.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is an Essentially Quantum Mechanical Effect?
    What is an Essentially Quantum Mechanical Effect? Osvaldo Pessoa Jr. [email protected] Mestrado em Ensino, História e Filosofia das Ciências Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana / Universidade Federal da Bahia Abstract When asking whether consciousness is an “essentially quantum effect”, one must first lay down criteria for considering an effect quantum mechanical. After a brief survey of the interpretations of quantum theory, three such sufficient criteria are proposed and examined: wave-particle duality (or collapse), entanglement (“non-locality”), and quantum condensation (involving “identical” particles). A fourth criteria could involve the use of quantum field theories, but this problem is left open. If a quantum effect played an essential role in the brain, it would probably follow the first criterion, since the entanglement of many particles would be rapidly washed out by decoherence, and there is no strong evidence for the existence of biological condensates. 1. Prologue In the last decade, many thinkers have defended the view that the mind-brain problem can only be solved if one takes into account the quantum-mechanical nature of the brain (Hameroff & Penrose 1996). In opposition to them, many others have sustained the “astonishing hypothesis” that the mind results from the organization of matter and energy in the brain, in a way that does not involve any essentially quantum mechanical effect (Crick 1994; Grush & Churchland 1995). Without having to take sides here in this ultimately empirical question, I would like to examine the issue of what is the meaning of the notion of an “essentially quantum effect” (1). To simplify the discussion, let us adopt a physicalist (materialist) view of the mind-brain issue, although the consequences drawn here might be adapted to a dualist view.
    [Show full text]
  • Examining the Quantum Measurement Problem Through the Yoruba Philosophy of Ifa Divination
    O. RÚMILÀ NÍ ÓÒ WÀÁ BÁ NÍ : EXAMINING THE QUANTUM MEASUREMENT PROBLEM THROUGH THE YORUBA PHILOSOPHY OF IFA DIVINATION by Jacob Stanton, Sc.B. Advisor: Stephon Alexander Brown University May 2020 A thesis is submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of: BACHELOR OF SCIENCE i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1 Introduction to Quantum Mechanics .................... 1 1.1 Philosophy of Classical Physics........................ 1 1.2 Introduction to Quantum Mechanics: Wave Functions, Operators, and Uncertainty .................................. 3 1.3 Measurement ................................. 7 1.4 The Measurement Problem.......................... 8 1.5 Summary.................................... 11 2 Yoruba Philosophy ............................... 12 2.1 Introduction to Ifa Philosophy........................ 12 2.2 Ori: Destiny.................................. 13 2.3 Egun: Ancestors................................ 14 2.4 Divination: Measurement........................... 15 2.5 Summary.................................... 17 3 Hidden Variables a Solution to the Quantum Measurement Problem 18 3.1 Hidden Variable Theories........................... 18 3.2 Bell’s Inequalities............................... 19 3.3 De Broglie-Bohm Theory........................... 20 3.4 Summary.................................... 22 4 Quatum Measurement Through the Lens of Yoruba Philosophy . 23 4.1 Towards a Ifa interpretation of Quantum Mechanics............ 23 4.2 Conclusion................................... 27 ii REFERENCES .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Trapped Ions and Laser Cooling Selected Publications of the Ion Storage Group of the Time and Frequency Division
    NATL INST Of STAND & TECH R.IC, A111D3 TSbMfiO NIST Technical Note 1353 NIST jpUBllCATlONS*;:; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE / National Institute of Standards and Technology Selected publications of the Edited by: James C. Bergquist Storage Group John J. Bollinger e and Frequency Division Wayne M. Itano J, Boulder, Colorado David J. Wineland /S & 3 '^1 Trapped Ions and Laser Cooling Selected publications of the Ion Storage Group of the Time and Frequency Division Edited by James C. Bergquist John J. Bollinger / ^ Wayne M. Itano , David J. Wineland"^ Time and Frequency Division Physics Laboratory National Institute of Standards and Technology Boulder, Colorado 80303-3328 Supported in part by U.S. Office of Naval Research 800 North Quincy Arlington, Virginia 22217 April 1992 *" *^TE3 o* U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Barbara Hackman Franklin, Secretary TECHNOLOGY ADMINISTRATION, Robert M. White, Under Secretary for Technology NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY, John W. Lyons, Director National Institute of Standards and Technology Technical Note Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol., Tech. Note 1353, 204 pages (April 1992) CODEN:NTNOEF U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1992 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325 PREFACE This collection of papers represents the work of the Ion Storage Group, Time and Frequency Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology from October 1988 to February 1992. It follows the collections of papers contained in NBS Technical Note 1086, Trapped Ions and Laser Cooling (June 1985) and NIST Technical Note 1324 Trapped Ions and Laser Cooling II (September 1988). Although the primary goal of this work has been the development of techniques necessary for achieving high resolution spectroscopy, we have also been able to investigate related areas of research.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Mechanics II Spring 2005
    Chem 794 Quantum Mechanics II Spring 2005 Chemistry 794 Quantum Mechanics II Spring 2005 Course outline 1. Density matrix • Pure vs mixed states. Ensemble interpretation. • Reduced density matrices. Entanglement. • Equations of motion. Analogy with classical mechanics. • Relaxation and decoherence. 2. Time-dependent phenomena • Evolution operator. Propagator and Green’s functions. • Three pictures: Schr¨odinger, Heisenberg, interaction. • 2-level system. Rotating wave approximation. Bloch equations. • Time-dependent perturbation theory. Harmonic perturbations. Resonant phenom- ena. Transitions to continuum; Golden rule. • Sudden approximation. • Adiabatic approximation. • Perturbation theory for density operator. Linear response. 3. Path integral formulation of quantum mechanics 4. Molecule-field interactions • Maxwell’s equations, scalar and vector potentials, gauge transformations, free field, and all that. • Hamiltonian for charged particle in field. • Perturbation in dipole approximation. • A and B coefficients. Selection rules. Sum rules. • Electric quadrupole and magnetic dipole transitions. • High-order perturbation theory and multiphoton processes. • Nonlinear spectroscopy. • Electric properties of molecules. Polarizability. • Magnetic properties of molecules. Magnetic susceptibility. Diamagnetism & para- magnetism. 5. Scattering Theory • Particle flux and scattering cross sections. G.S. Ezra 1 Cornell University Chem 794 Quantum Mechanics II Spring 2005 • Green’s functions and scattering problem. • Born approximation. • Partial wave
    [Show full text]
  • An Alternative Interpretation of Statistical Mechanics
    An Alternative Interpretation of Statistical Mechanics C.D. McCoy∗y 26 September 2016 Abstract Abstract: I propose an interpretation of classical statistical mechanics that centers on taking seriously the idea that probability measures are complete statistical mechanical states. I show how this leads naturally to the idea that the stochasticity of statistical mechanics is associated directly with the ob- servables of the theory rather than with the microstates (as traditional accounts would have it). The usual assumption that microstates necessarily have representational significance in the theory is there- fore dispensable, a consequence which reveals interesting possibilities for investigating inter-theoretic explanations of the foundational questions of statistical mechanics. Word Count: 9753 1 Introduction Commonly lamented in the literature on the foundations of statistical mechanics is the lack of a canon- ical formalism on which to base foundational discussions. Unlike in non-relativistic quantum mechan- ics, general relativity, or classical mechanics, “what we find in [statistical mechanics] is a plethora of different approaches and schools, each with its own programme and mathematical apparatus, none of which has a legitimate claim to be more fundamental than its competitors” (Frigg, 2008, 101). Because of this, “the philosophical foundations of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics can seem a bewil- dering labyrinth” writes Callender (2011, 83), and, indeed, it seems to many workers in the field that “consequently we have no choice but to dwell on its history” (Uffink, 2007, 923) when investigating the foundations of the theory. While that history has indeed witnessed many approaches to the foundations of statistical mechanics, a common theme emerges in a considerable number of the debates, a theme emphasized throughout Sklar’s panoptic survey of the field, Physics and Chance.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards a Realistic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Providing A
    Towards a realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics providing a model of the physical world Emilio Santos Departamento de F´ısica. Universidad de Cantabria. Santander.Spain October 31, 2018 Abstract It is argued that a realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics is possible and useful. Current interpretations, from “Copenhagen” to “many worlds” are critically revisited. The difficulties for intuitive models of quantum physics are pointed out and possible solutions proposed. In particular the existence of discrete states, the quantum jumps, the alleged lack of objective properties, measurement theory, the probabilistic character of quantum physics, the wave-particle du- ality and the Bell inequalities are analyzed. The sketch of a realistic picture of the quantum world is presented. It rests upon the assump- tion that quantum mechanics is a stochastic theory whose randomness derives from the existence of vacuum fields. They correspond to the vacuum fluctuations of quantum field theory, but taken as real rather than virtual. arXiv:1203.5688v4 [quant-ph] 3 Oct 2014 1 Introduction Quantum mechanics is extremely efficient for the prediction of experimental results. In contrast, the interpretation of the quantum formalism has been the subject of continuous debate since the very begining of the theory[1], [2], [3], [4], [5] and it lasts until today[6], [7], [8]. Is there a real problem? Feynman believed that a problem exists when he stated: “Nobody under- stands quantum mechanics”[9], and many people agree with that opinion. 1 The fact is that none of the different interpretations proposed till now offers a clear intuitive picture of the quantum world. Nevertheless most physicists do not worry for the lack of a picture and embrace a pragmatic approach, good enough in practice.
    [Show full text]