DOCSLIB.ORG

Quantum Mechanics of the Electron Particle-Clock

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Quantum Mechanics of the Electron Particle-Clock Quantum Mechanics of the electron particle-clock David Hestenes Department of Physics, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona 85287-1504∗ Understanding the electron clock and the role of complex numbers in quantum mechanics is grounded in the geometry of spacetime, and best expressed with Spacetime Algebra (STA). The efficiency of STA is demonstrated with coordinate-free applications to both relativistic and non- relativistic QM. Insight into the structure of Dirac theory is provided by a new comprehensive analysis of local observables and conservation laws. This provides the foundation for a comparative analysis of wave and particle models for the hydrogen atom, the workshop where Quantum Mechanics was designed, built and tested. PACS numbers: 10,03.65.-w Keywords: pilot waves, zitterbewegung, spacetime algebra I. INTRODUCTION The final Section argues for a realist interpretation of the Dirac wave function describing possible particle De Broglie always insisted that Quantum Mechanics is paths. a relativistic theory. Indeed, it began with de Broglie`s relativistic model for an electron clock. Ironically, when Schr¨odingerintroduced de Broglie`s idea into his wave II. SPACETIME ALGEBRA equation, he dispensed with both the clock and the rela- tivity! Spacetime Algebra (STA) plays an essential role in the This paper aims to revitalize de Broglie's idea of an formulation and analysis of electron theory in this paper. electron clock by giving it a central role in physical inter- Since thorough expositions of STA are available in many pretation of the Dirac wave function. In particular, we places [2{4], a brief description will suffice here, mainly aim for insight into structure of the wave function and to establish notations and define terms. fibrations of particle paths it determines. This opens up STA is an associative algebra generated by spacetime new questions about physical interpretation. vectors with the property that the square of any vector We begin with a synopsis of Spacetime Algebra (STA), is a (real) scalar. Thus for any vector a we can write which is an essential tool in all that follows. 2 2 Section III applies STA in a review of Real Dirac theory a = aa = "jaj ; (1) and provides a rigorous new analysis of its physical inter- where " is the signature of a and jaj is a positive scalar. pretation in terms of local observables. That facilitates As usual, we say that a is timelike, lightlike or spacelike if the study of electron paths in subsequent sections. its signature is positive (" = 1), null (" = 0), or negative Section IV discusses a new approach to Born's statis- (" = −1). tical interpretation of the Dirac wave function dubbed From the geometric product ab of two vectors it is con- Born-Dirac theory. It includes a relativistic extension of venient to define two other products. The inner product de Broglie-Bohm Pilot Wave theory to interpret the Dirac a · b is defined by wave function as describing a fibration (or ensemble) of possible particle paths. Spin dependence of the so-called a · b = 1 (ab + ba) = b · a ; (2) Quantum potential is made explicit and generalized. 2 Section V presents a new relativistic particle model while the outer product a ^ b is defined by for electron states in the hydrogen atom. This corrects errors and deficiencies of Old Quantum Theory to make it 1 a ^ b = 2 (ab − ba) = −b ^ a : (3) consistent with the Dirac equation. It invites comparison with the standard Darwin model for hydrogen discussed The three products are therefore related by in Section IVD. Thereby it opens up new possibilities for experimental test and theoretical analysis. ab = a · b + a ^ b : (4) Section VI discusses modifications of Dirac theory to fully incorporate electron zitter. This serves as an intro- This can be regarded as a decomposition of the product duction to a more definitive model of the electron clock ab into symmetric and skewsymmetric parts, or alterna- developed in a subsequent paper [1]. tively, into scalar and bivector parts. For physicists unfamiliar with STA, it will be helpful to note its isomorphism to Dirac algebra over the reals. To that end, let fγµ; 0; 1; 2; 3g be a right-handed orthonor- ∗Electronic address: [email protected]; URL: http://geocalc. mal frame of vectors with γ0 in the forward light cone. clas.asu.edu/ The symbols γµ have been selected to emphasize direct PREPRINT July 2018 2 1 correspondence with Dirac's γ-matrices. In accordance F ^ a = 2 (F a + aF ); (12) with (2), the components gµν of the metric tensor are given by so that 1 gµν = γµ · γν = 2 (γµγν + γν γµ) : (5) F a = F · a + F ^ a (13) This will be recognized as isomorphic to a famous formula expresses a decomposition of F a into vector and pseu- of Dirac's. Of course, the difference here is that the γµ dovector parts. For F = b ^ c it follows that are vectors rather than matrices. The unit pseudoscalar i for spacetime is related to the (b ^ c) · a = b(c · a) − c(b · a) : (14) frame fγν g by the equation Many other useful identities can be derived to facilitate i = γ0γ1γ2γ3 = γ0 ^ γ1 ^ γ2 ^ γ3 : (6) coordinate-free computations. They will be introduced as needed throughout the paper. It is readily verified from (6) that i2 = −1, and the geo- Any fixed timelike vector such as fγ0g defines an iner- metric product of i with any vector is anticommutative. tial frame that determines a unique separation between By multiplication the γµ generate a complete basis of 4 space and time directions. Algebraically, this can be ex- k-vectors for STA, consisting of the 2 = 16 linearly in- pressed as the \spacetime split" of each vector x designat- dependent elements ing a spacetime point (or event) into a time component 1; γ ; γ ^ γ ; γ i; i : (7) x · γ0 = ct and a spatial position vector x ≡ x ^ γ0 as µ µ ν µ specified by the geometric product Obviously, this set corresponds to 16 base matrices for the Dirac algebra, with the pseudoscalar i corresponding xγ0 = ct + x : (15) to the Dirac matrix γ5. The entire spacetime algebra is obtained from linear We call this a γ0-split when it is important to specify the combinations of basis k-vectors in (7). A generic element generating vector. The resulting quantity ct + x is called M of the STA, called a multivector, can thus be written a paravector in the expanded form This \split" maps a spacetime vector into the STA subalgebra of even multivectors where, by \regrading," 4 the bivector part can be identified as a spatial vector. X M = α + a + F + bi + βi = hMik ; (8) Accordingly, the even subalgebra is generated by a frame k=0 of \spatial vectors" fσk ≡ γkγ0; k = 1; 2; 3g, so that where α and β are scalars, a and b are vectors, and F σ σ σ = γ γ γ γ = i: (16) is a bivector. This is a decomposition of M into its k- 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 vector parts, with k = 0; 1; 2; 3; 4, where h:::ik means \k- Obviously, this rendition of the STA even subalgebra is vector part." Of course, hMi0 = α, hMi1 = a, hMi2 = F , isomorphic to the Pauli algebra, though the Pauli alge- hMi3 = bi, hMi4 = βi. It is often convenient to drop the bra is not a subalgebra of the Dirac algebra because the subscript on the scalar part, writing hMi = hMi0: matrix dimensions are different. We say that a k-vector is even (odd) if the integer k We use boldface letters exclusively to denote spatial is even (odd). Accordingly, any multivector can be ex- vectors determined by a spacetime split. Spatial vectors pressed as the sum of even and odd parts. A multivector generate a coordinate-free spatial geometric algebra with is said to be \even" if its parts are even k-vectors. The the geometric product even multivectors compose a subalgebra of the STA. We will be using the fact that spinors can be represented as ab = a · b + a ^ b = a · b + ia × b; (17) even multivectors. Computations are facilitated by the operation of re- where a×b = −i(a^b) is the usual vector cross product. version. For M in the expanded form (8) the reverse Mf For the even part hMi+ = Q of the multivector M, a can be defined by spacetime split gives us Mf = α + a − F − bi + βi : (9) Q = z + F; (18) For arbitrary multivectors M and N where scalar and pseudoscalar parts combine in the form of a complex number (^MN) = NeM:f (10) z = α + iβ; (19) It is useful to extend the definitions of inner and outer products to multivectors of higher grade. Thus, for bivec- and the bivector part splits into the form of a \complex tor F and vector a we can define inner and outer products vector" 1 ~ F · a = 2 (F a − aF ); (11) F = E + iB = −F: (20) PREPRINT July 2018 3 Thus, the even subalgebra in STA has the formal struc- Note that the cross product on the right is distinguished ture of complex quaternions. However, the geometric from the commutator product on the left of this equation interpretation of the elements is decidedly different from by a boldface of the product symbol. Also, it should the usual one assigned to quaternions. Specifically, the be understood that the equivalence of commutator and bivector iB corresponds to a \real vector" in the quater- outer products in this equation does not generally obtain nion literature. This difference stems from a failure to for arbitrary multivectors.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Unit 1 Old Quantum Theory
    UNIT 1 OLD QUANTUM THEORY Structure Introduction Objectives li;,:overy of Sub-atomic Particles Earlier Atom Models Light as clectromagnetic Wave Failures of Classical Physics Black Body Radiation '1 Heat Capacity Variation Photoelectric Effect Atomic Spectra Planck's Quantum Theory, Black Body ~diation. and Heat Capacity Variation Einstein's Theory of Photoelectric Effect Bohr Atom Model Calculation of Radius of Orbits Energy of an Electron in an Orbit Atomic Spectra and Bohr's Theory Critical Analysis of Bohr's Theory Refinements in the Atomic Spectra The61-y Summary Terminal Questions Answers 1.1 INTRODUCTION The ideas of classical mechanics developed by Galileo, Kepler and Newton, when applied to atomic and molecular systems were found to be inadequate. Need was felt for a theory to describe, correlate and predict the behaviour of the sub-atomic particles. The quantum theory, proposed by Max Planck and applied by Einstein and Bohr to explain different aspects of behaviour of matter, is an important milestone in the formulation of the modern concept of atom. In this unit, we will study how black body radiation, heat capacity variation, photoelectric effect and atomic spectra of hydrogen can be explained on the basis of theories proposed by Max Planck, Einstein and Bohr. They based their theories on the postulate that all interactions between matter and radiation occur in terms of definite packets of energy, known as quanta. Their ideas, when extended further, led to the evolution of wave mechanics, which shows the dual nature of matter
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1206.1084V3 [Quant-Ph] 3 May 2019
    Overview of Bohmian Mechanics Xavier Oriolsa and Jordi Mompartb∗ aDepartament d'Enginyeria Electr`onica, Universitat Aut`onomade Barcelona, 08193, Bellaterra, SPAIN bDepartament de F´ısica, Universitat Aut`onomade Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, SPAIN This chapter provides a fully comprehensive overview of the Bohmian formulation of quantum phenomena. It starts with a historical review of the difficulties found by Louis de Broglie, David Bohm and John Bell to convince the scientific community about the validity and utility of Bohmian mechanics. Then, a formal explanation of Bohmian mechanics for non-relativistic single-particle quantum systems is presented. The generalization to many-particle systems, where correlations play an important role, is also explained. After that, the measurement process in Bohmian mechanics is discussed. It is emphasized that Bohmian mechanics exactly reproduces the mean value and temporal and spatial correlations obtained from the standard, i.e., `orthodox', formulation. The ontological characteristics of the Bohmian theory provide a description of measurements in a natural way, without the need of introducing stochastic operators for the wavefunction collapse. Several solved problems are presented at the end of the chapter giving additional mathematical support to some particular issues. A detailed description of computational algorithms to obtain Bohmian trajectories from the numerical solution of the Schr¨odingeror the Hamilton{Jacobi equations are presented in an appendix. The motivation of this chapter is twofold.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Trajectories: Real Or Surreal?
    entropy Article Quantum Trajectories: Real or Surreal? Basil J. Hiley * and Peter Van Reeth * Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK * Correspondence: [email protected] (B.J.H.); [email protected] (P.V.R.) Received: 8 April 2018; Accepted: 2 May 2018; Published: 8 May 2018 Abstract: The claim of Kocsis et al. to have experimentally determined “photon trajectories” calls for a re-examination of the meaning of “quantum trajectories”. We will review the arguments that have been assumed to have established that a trajectory has no meaning in the context of quantum mechanics. We show that the conclusion that the Bohm trajectories should be called “surreal” because they are at “variance with the actual observed track” of a particle is wrong as it is based on a false argument. We also present the results of a numerical investigation of a double Stern-Gerlach experiment which shows clearly the role of the spin within the Bohm formalism and discuss situations where the appearance of the quantum potential is open to direct experimental exploration. Keywords: Stern-Gerlach; trajectories; spin 1. Introduction The recent claims to have observed “photon trajectories” [1–3] calls for a re-examination of what we precisely mean by a “particle trajectory” in the quantum domain. Mahler et al. [2] applied the Bohm approach [4] based on the non-relativistic Schrödinger equation to interpret their results, claiming their empirical evidence supported this approach producing “trajectories” remarkably similar to those presented in Philippidis, Dewdney and Hiley [5]. However, the Schrödinger equation cannot be applied to photons because photons have zero rest mass and are relativistic “particles” which must be treated differently.
    [Show full text]
  • The Stueckelberg Wave Equation and the Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Electron
    The Stueckelberg wave equation and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron A. F. Bennett College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences Oregon State University 104 CEOAS Administration Building Corvallis, OR 97331-5503, USA E-mail: [email protected] Abstract. The parametrized relativistic quantum mechanics of Stueckelberg [Helv. Phys. Acta 15, 23 (1942)] represents time as an operator, and has been shown elsewhere to yield the recently observed phenomena of quantum interference in time, quantum diffraction in time and quantum entanglement in time. The Stueckelberg wave equation as extended to a spin–1/2 particle by Horwitz and Arshansky [J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 15, L659 (1982)] is shown here to yield the electron g–factor g = 2(1+ α/2π), to leading order in the renormalized fine structure constant α, in agreement with the quantum electrodynamics of Schwinger [Phys. Rev., 73, 416L (1948)]. PACS numbers: 03.65.Nk, 03.65.Pm, 03.65.Sq Keywords: relativistic quantum mechanics, quantum coherence in time, anomalous magnetic moment 1. Introduction The relativistic quantum mechanics of Dirac [1, 2] represents position as an operator and time as a parameter. The Dirac wave functions can be normalized over space with respect to a Lorentz–invariant measure of volume [2, Ch 3], but cannot be meaningfully normalized over time. Thus the Dirac formalism offers no precise meaning for the expectation of time [3, 9.5], and offers no representations for the recently– § observed phenomena of quantum interference in time [4, 5], quantum diffraction in time [6, 7] and quantum entanglement in time [8]. Quantum interference patterns and diffraction patterns [9, Chs 1–3] are multi–lobed probability distribution functions for the eigenvalues of an Hermitian operator, which is typically position.
    [Show full text]
  • Walther Nernst, Albert Einstein, Otto Stern, Adriaan Fokker
    Walther Nernst, Albert Einstein, Otto Stern, Adriaan Fokker, and the Rotational Specific Heat of Hydrogen Clayton Gearhart St. John’s University (Minnesota) Max-Planck-Institut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte Berlin July 2007 1 Rotational Specific Heat of Hydrogen: Widely investigated in the old quantum theory Nernst Lorentz Eucken Einstein Ehrenfest Bohr Planck Reiche Kemble Tolman Schrödinger Van Vleck Some of the more prominent physicists and physical chemists who worked on the specific heat of hydrogen through the mid-1920s. See “The Rotational Specific Heat of Molecular Hydrogen in the Old Quantum Theory” http://faculty.csbsju.edu/cgearhart/pubs/sel_pubs.htm (slide show) 2 Rigid Rotator (Rotating dumbbell) •The rigid rotator was among the earliest problems taken up in the old (pre-1925) quantum theory. • Applications: Molecular spectra, and rotational contri- bution to the specific heat of molecular hydrogen • The problem should have been simple Molecular • relatively uncomplicated theory spectra • only one adjustable parameter (moment of inertia) • Nevertheless, no satisfactory theoretical description of the specific heat of hydrogen emerged in the old quantum theory Our story begins with 3 Nernst’s Heat Theorem Walther Nernst 1864 – 1941 • physical chemist • studied with Boltzmann • 1889: lecturer, then professor at Göttingen • 1905: professor at Berlin Nernst formulated his heat theorem (Third Law) in 1906, shortly after appointment as professor in Berlin. 4 Nernst’s Heat Theorem and Quantum Theory • Initially, had nothing to do with quantum theory. • Understand the equilibrium point of chemical reactions. • Nernst’s theorem had implications for specific heats at low temperatures. • 1906–1910: Nernst and his students undertook extensive measurements of specific heats of solids at low (down to liquid hydrogen) temperatures.
    [Show full text]
  • Bohmian Mechanics Versus Madelung Quantum Hydrodynamics
    Ann. Univ. Sofia, Fac. Phys. Special Edition (2012) 112-119 [arXiv 0904.0723] Bohmian mechanics versus Madelung quantum hydrodynamics Roumen Tsekov Department of Physical Chemistry, University of Sofia, 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria It is shown that the Bohmian mechanics and the Madelung quantum hy- drodynamics are different theories and the latter is a better ontological interpre- tation of quantum mechanics. A new stochastic interpretation of quantum me- chanics is proposed, which is the background of the Madelung quantum hydro- dynamics. Its relation to the complex mechanics is also explored. A new complex hydrodynamics is proposed, which eliminates completely the Bohm quantum po- tential. It describes the quantum evolution of the probability density by a con- vective diffusion with imaginary transport coefficients. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is guilty for the quantum mys- tery and many strange phenomena such as the Schrödinger cat, parallel quantum and classical worlds, wave-particle duality, decoherence, etc. Many scientists have tried, however, to put the quantum mechanics back on ontological foundations. For instance, Bohm [1] proposed an al- ternative interpretation of quantum mechanics, which is able to overcome some puzzles of the Copenhagen interpretation. He developed further the de Broglie pilot-wave theory and, for this reason, the Bohmian mechanics is also known as the de Broglie-Bohm theory. At the time of inception of quantum mechanics Madelung [2] has demonstrated that the Schrödinger equa- tion can be transformed in hydrodynamic form. This so-called Madelung quantum hydrodynam- ics is a less elaborated theory and usually considered as a precursor of the Bohmian mechanics. The scope of the present paper is to show that these two theories are different and the Made- lung hydrodynamics is a better interpretation of quantum mechanics than the Bohmian me- chanics.
    [Show full text]
  • Feynman Quantization
    3 FEYNMAN QUANTIZATION An introduction to path-integral techniques Introduction. By Richard Feynman (–), who—after a distinguished undergraduate career at MIT—had come in as a graduate student to Princeton, was deeply involved in a collaborative effort with John Wheeler (his thesis advisor) to shake the foundations of field theory. Though motivated by problems fundamental to quantum field theory, as it was then conceived, their work was entirely classical,1 and it advanced ideas so radicalas to resist all then-existing quantization techniques:2 new insight into the quantization process itself appeared to be called for. So it was that (at a beer party) Feynman asked Herbert Jehle (formerly a student of Schr¨odinger in Berlin, now a visitor at Princeton) whether he had ever encountered a quantum mechanical application of the “Principle of Least Action.” Jehle directed Feynman’s attention to an obscure paper by P. A. M. Dirac3 and to a brief passage in §32 of Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics 1 John Archibald Wheeler & Richard Phillips Feynman, “Interaction with the absorber as the mechanism of radiation,” Reviews of Modern Physics 17, 157 (1945); “Classical electrodynamics in terms of direct interparticle action,” Reviews of Modern Physics 21, 425 (1949). Those were (respectively) Part III and Part II of a projected series of papers, the other parts of which were never published. 2 See page 128 in J. Gleick, Genius: The Life & Science of Richard Feynman () for a popular account of the historical circumstances. 3 “The Lagrangian in quantum mechanics,” Physicalische Zeitschrift der Sowjetunion 3, 64 (1933). The paper is reprinted in J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Quantum Potential And''causal''trajectories For
    REFERENCE IC/88/161 \ ^' I 6 AUG INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR / Co THEORETICAL PHYSICS THE QUANTUM POTENTIAL AND "CAUSAL" TRAJECTORIES FOR STATIONARY STATES AND FOR COHERENT STATES A.O. Barut and M. Bo2ic INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION IC/88/161 I. Introduction International Atomic Energy Agency During the last decade Bohm's causal trajectories based on the and concept of the so called "quantum potential" /I/ have been evaluated United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization in a number of cases, the double slit /2,3/, tunnelling through the INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS barrier /4,5/, the Stern-Gerlach magnet /6/, neutron interferometer /8,9/, EPRB experiment /10/. In all these works the trajectories have been evaluated numerically for the time dependent wave packet of the Schrodinger equation. THE QUANTUM POTENTIAL AND "CAUSAL" TRAJECTORIES FOR STATIONARY STATES AND FOR COHERENT STATES * In the present paper we study explicitly the quantum potential and the associated trajectories for stationary states and for coherent states. We show how the quantum potential arises from the classical A.O. Barut ** and M. totii *** action. The classical action is a sum of two parts S ,= S^ + Sz> one International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy. part Sj becomes the quantum action, the other part S2 is shifted to the quantum potential. We also show that the two definitions of causal ABSTRACT trajectories do not coincide for stationary states. We show for stationary states in a central potential that the quantum The content of our paper is as follows. Section II is devoted to action S is only a part of the classical action W and derive an expression for the "quantum potential" IL in terms of the other part.
    [Show full text]
  • The Concept of the Photon—Revisited
    The concept of the photon—revisited Ashok Muthukrishnan,1 Marlan O. Scully,1,2 and M. Suhail Zubairy1,3 1Institute for Quantum Studies and Department of Physics, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 2Departments of Chemistry and Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544 3Department of Electronics, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan The photon concept is one of the most debated issues in the history of physical science. Some thirty years ago, we published an article in Physics Today entitled “The Concept of the Photon,”1 in which we described the “photon” as a classical electromagnetic field plus the fluctuations associated with the vacuum. However, subsequent developments required us to envision the photon as an intrinsically quantum mechanical entity, whose basic physics is much deeper than can be explained by the simple ‘classical wave plus vacuum fluctuations’ picture. These ideas and the extensions of our conceptual understanding are discussed in detail in our recent quantum optics book.2 In this article we revisit the photon concept based on examples from these sources and more. © 2003 Optical Society of America OCIS codes: 270.0270, 260.0260. he “photon” is a quintessentially twentieth-century con- on are vacuum fluctuations (as in our earlier article1), and as- Tcept, intimately tied to the birth of quantum mechanics pects of many-particle correlations (as in our recent book2). and quantum electrodynamics. However, the root of the idea Examples of the first are spontaneous emission, Lamb shift, may be said to be much older, as old as the historical debate and the scattering of atoms off the vacuum field at the en- on the nature of light itself – whether it is a wave or a particle trance to a micromaser.
    [Show full text]
  • Photon Wave Mechanics: a De Broglie - Bohm Approach
    PHOTON WAVE MECHANICS: A DE BROGLIE - BOHM APPROACH S. ESPOSITO Dipartimento di Scienze Fisiche, Universit`adi Napoli “Federico II” and Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Napoli Mostra d’Oltremare Pad. 20, I-80125 Napoli Italy e-mail: [email protected] Abstract. We compare the de Broglie - Bohm theory for non-relativistic, scalar matter particles with the Majorana-R¨omer theory of electrodynamics, pointing out the impressive common pecu- liarities and the role of the spin in both theories. A novel insight into photon wave mechanics is envisaged. 1. Introduction Modern Quantum Mechanics was born with the observation of Heisenberg [1] that in atomic (and subatomic) systems there are directly observable quantities, such as emission frequencies, intensities and so on, as well as non directly observable quantities such as, for example, the position coordinates of an electron in an atom at a given time instant. The later fruitful developments of the quantum formalism was then devoted to connect observable quantities between them without the use of a model, differently to what happened in the framework of old quantum mechanics where specific geometrical and mechanical models were investigated to deduce the values of the observable quantities from a substantially non observable underlying structure. We now know that quantum phenomena are completely described by a complex- valued state function ψ satisfying the Schr¨odinger equation. The probabilistic in- terpretation of it was first suggested by Born [2] and, in the light of Heisenberg uncertainty principle, is a pillar of quantum mechanics itself. All the known experiments show that the probabilistic interpretation of the wave function is indeed the correct one (see any textbook on quantum mechanics, for 2 S.
    [Show full text]
  • Theory and Experiment in the Quantum-Relativity Revolution
    Theory and Experiment in the Quantum-Relativity Revolution expanded version of lecture presented at American Physical Society meeting, 2/14/10 (Abraham Pais History of Physics Prize for 2009) by Stephen G. Brush* Abstract Does new scientific knowledge come from theory (whose predictions are confirmed by experiment) or from experiment (whose results are explained by theory)? Either can happen, depending on whether theory is ahead of experiment or experiment is ahead of theory at a particular time. In the first case, new theoretical hypotheses are made and their predictions are tested by experiments. But even when the predictions are successful, we can’t be sure that some other hypothesis might not have produced the same prediction. In the second case, as in a detective story, there are already enough facts, but several theories have failed to explain them. When a new hypothesis plausibly explains all of the facts, it may be quickly accepted before any further experiments are done. In the quantum-relativity revolution there are examples of both situations. Because of the two-stage development of both relativity (“special,” then “general”) and quantum theory (“old,” then “quantum mechanics”) in the period 1905-1930, we can make a double comparison of acceptance by prediction and by explanation. A curious anti- symmetry is revealed and discussed. _____________ *Distinguished University Professor (Emeritus) of the History of Science, University of Maryland. Home address: 108 Meadowlark Terrace, Glen Mills, PA 19342. Comments welcome. 1 “Science walks forward on two feet, namely theory and experiment. ... Sometimes it is only one foot which is put forward first, sometimes the other, but continuous progress is only made by the use of both – by theorizing and then testing, or by finding new relations in the process of experimenting and then bringing the theoretical foot up and pushing it on beyond, and so on in unending alterations.” Robert A.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Mechanics I - Iii
    QUANTUM MECHANICS I - III PHYS 516 - 518 Jan 1 - Dec. 31, 2015 Prof. R. Gilmore 12-918 X-2779 [email protected] office hours: 2:00 ! \1" Course Schedule: (Winter Quarter) MWF 11:00 - 11:50, Disque 919 Objective: To provide the foundations for modern physics. Course Requirements and Obligations Course grading will be based on assigned homework problem sets and a midterm and final exam. Texts Two texts and one supplement will be used for this course. The first text has been chosen from among many admirable texts because it provides a more comprehensive treatment of quantum physics discovered since 1970 than other texts. The second text will be used primarily during the second quarter of this course (PHYS517). It provides hands-on experience for solving binding and scattering problems in one dimension and potentials involving periodic poten- tials, again in one dimension. The third text (optional) is strongly recommended for those who feel their undergratuate experience in this beautiful subject may be deficient in some way. It is out of print but a limited number of copies are often available through Amazon in the event our book store has sold out of their reprinted copies. 1 David H. McIntyre Quantum Mechanics NY: Pearson, 2012 ISBN-10: 0-321-76579-6 R. Gilmore Elementary Quantum Mechanics in One Dimension Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004 ISBN 0-8018-8015-7 R. H. Dicke and J. P. Wittke Introduction to Quantum Mechanics Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1960 ISBN 0-? If it becomes a hardship to acquire this fine text, you can get about the same information from another, later, fine text: David J.
    [Show full text]