Arxiv Nonlinear Dynamic Interpretation of Quantum Spin 2018

Nonlinear dynamic interpretation of quantum spin

J.J. Heiner,1, ∗ H.C. Shaw,2, † D.R. Thayer,1, ‡ and J.D. Bodyfelt3, § 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Wyoming, WY United States 2NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD United States 3Centrality, 48 Emily Place, Auckland, New Zealand, 1010 In an effort to provide an alternative method to represent a quantum spin, a precise nonlinear dynamics semi-classical model is used to show that standard quantum spin analysis can be obtained. The model includes a multi-body, anti-ferromagnetic ordering, highly coupled quantum spin and a semi-classical interpretation of the torque on a spin magnetic moment in the presence of a magnetic field. The deterministic nonlinear differential coupling equation is used to introduce chaos, which is necessary to reproduce the correct statistical quantum results.

I. INTRODUCTION

In recent publications it was discussed that it may be possible to understand the quantum mechanical spin states in a similar method used in deterministic chaos [1, 2]. Recently, a 2D nonlinear semi-classical perturbation model of the spin interaction with a magnetic field was developed [3] and expanded to a 3D exact model [4]. Although the latter model lacked the needed chaos and the ability to replicate quantum statistics, it led to the concept that it might be possible to exhibit chaos internally in the spin model in order to reproduce the quantum mechanical spin results. It is thus suggested to treat the quantum spin as a multi-body quantum spin FIG. 1: 2D Geometry for an individual component of the (with many sub-element components). multi-body semi-classical spin model Scientists have questioned and tested if quantum me- chanics is indeed random [5–7], or if our current understanding is not complete [8–10]. If a black box was placed spin down, is given as over a roulette wheel, the outcome would appear random. However, upon lifting the box the realization is the out- 2 come appears to be random due to chaos and sensitivity P↑ = cos θ/2, to initial conditions [11]. Furthermore, recent research (1) P = sin2 θ/2. shows and measures a finite time evolution of a quantum ↓ mechanical state into an excited state (which previously The probabilities shown in equation 1 will be the test- had been considered instantaneous) [12]. It is with this ing criteria for the semi-classical quantum spin model. In viewpoint, that a proposed highly coupled, multi-body, essence, the model will be given a finite time to evolve anti-ferromagnetic ordering, semi-classical quantum spin (the dynamics of which are chaotic) and settle into one model represent a single quantum spin (the evolution of of two states. which happens in a finite time) and that outcomes due to measurement are emergent behavior of chaos [1]. arXiv:1811.02624v1 [quant-ph] 6 Nov 2018 The geometry used to describe the relationship be- II. SEMI-CLASSICAL QUANTUM SPIN tween the quantum spin, µ, and the magnetic field, B, TORQUE IN A MAGNETIC FIELD can be seen in figure 1, where the unit vector of the quantum spin isn ˆ and the magnetic field is constant, pointing in thez ˆ direction. As in past research, the semi-classical quantum spin is given a uniquely modified dual stable equilibrium torque The probability that the quantum spin will collapse model [3, 4]. The classical torque model can be modified in the direction of the magnetic field, spin up, and the to exhibit two stable equilibria: θ = 0 and θ = π. A func- probability that it will collapse in the opposite direction, tion that fills this unique semi-classical torque behavior is,

∗[email protected] †[email protected] ~τsc = µB sin(2θ)m, ˆ (2) ‡[email protected] §[email protected] where 2

nˆ × B~ mˆ = , (3) |nˆ × B~ | and ~µ = |µ|nˆ. This semi-classical torque function is similar to the one used in previous research [3, 4], but the exact curve of the semi-classical torque had little affect on the results. The most important feature is to have two stable equilibria locations as previously described. Although equation 2 implies the energy difference between the two equilibria states is zero, this is not an issue as a first order approximation justification is given in the conclusion section due to the multi-body coupling strength.

III. MULTI-BODY QUANTUM SPIN

There are numerous theories on a maximal elemen- tary particle mass [13–16]; however, there is a lack of a limiting mass theory and in the Quantum Field Theory (QFT) mass can continously approach zero [17]. Never- theless, fundamental/elementry particle mass should be FIG. 2: Multi-body quantum spin model with ferromagnetic dissectable into an infinite number of pieces. The quan- ordering if the blue coupling spring’s equilibrium is the same tum spin will be represented as many sub-element compo- as the distance between the sub-spin components. In the nents that all together comprise the quantum spin. This model the distance between the individual spin components approach also resonates with the concept that the spin goes to zero to approximate a point particle. A slightly per- model should be considered as being infinitely complex turbed spin component is demonstrated in red. [1]. The multi-body quantum spin model with ferromagnetic ordering is shown in figure 2. For simplicity this model is shown; however, an anti-ferromagnetic order- I~α = ~τ , (6) ing model is used in this research. This can be obtained nˆ nˆ by allowing the coupling spring equilibrium to be double where the torque term is the sum of all torques on the an individual quantum spin component length (assuming indivdual spin. Included in the torque terms is a linear the distance between neighboring spin components goes angular dissipation force, i.e. ~τdiss = −b ~ωnˆ , so that to zero). The torque onn ˆ due to nearest neighbor, nn, coupling (with the above assumption) is expressed as ~τnˆ = ~τsc + ~τnn + ~τdiss, (7)

~ and b is a dissipation factor. ~τnn = |µ|nˆ × Fnˆ , (4) An indiviual quantum spin component’s equation of where motions are

nn ˙ −1 X nî − nˆ ~ωnˆ = I (µB sin(2θ)m ˆ F~nˆ = k(|nî − nˆ| − a) , (5) |nî − nˆ| nn i=1 X nî − nˆ + |µ|nˆ × (k(|nˆ − nˆ| − a) ) k is the spring coupling constant, and a is the spring i |nˆ − nˆ| i=1 i (8) equilibrium length (a = 0 for ferromagnetic ordering and + b ~ω ), a = 2|nˆ| = 2 for anti-ferromagnetic ordering). nˆ ~˙ θnˆ = ~ωnˆ . IV. EQUATIONS OF MOTION The dissipation force is held to zero for some time and then turned on to represent the need for the quantum The equation of motion and resulting angular acceler- spin to fully collapse into one of two states: either aligned ˙ ation, ~αnˆ = ~ωnˆ , for an individual quantum spin compo- with the magnetic field, up, or anti-aligned with the field, nent can be represented as down. 3

Population Fraction 1000 x 5000 + 1.0++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++ + +++++++++++ ++++++++ +++++++ ++++++++++ +++++ ++++++++ QM Statistics +++++++++ ++++++ +++++++++ + ++++++++ Semi-Classical +++++++++ ++++++ + +++++++ 0.8 +++++++++ ++++++++ +++++ +++++++++++ ++++++ +++++++++ +++++ ++++++ ++++++ ++++++ +++++ ++++++++ ++++++ +++++++ +++++++ ++++++++ 0.6 ++++++ +++++ ++++++++ +++++++ +++++ +++++++ +++++ +++++ +++++ +++++++ ++++++++ ++++ +++++ ++++++ +++++++++ 0.4 ++++ ++++++ ++++++ +++++++ +++++++ Individual Average +++ +++++ +++++++ ++++++ +++++++++ +++++++ ++++++ ++++++++ +++++++ ++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++ 0.2 ++++++++++ ++++++ +++++++ +++++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++ +++++++ ++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++ ++++++++ +++++++++++++ +++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++ + 0.0 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 0 π/4 π/2 3π/4 π

〈θint〉

FIG. 4: Comparision of the well known quantum spin stat- icstics to the multi-body, anti-ferromagnetic ordering, semi- classical model. Each blue marker represents a fraction pop- FIG. 3: The standard 3D quantum spin 1/2 result is shown as ulation of 5,000 individual runs. well as the 2D probability region for the multi-body quantum spin model. is strong. Although a Lyapunov spectrum has yet to be calcu- V. CODE lated from the Jacobian, a simple divergence separation measurement was taken from two trajectories in phase The Dormand-Prince Runge-Kutta method is used to space differing as |δZ0|: iterate the equations of motion, equation 8, for each individual quantum spin component. λt Initial combined averaged spin orientation values, |δZ(t)| ≈ e |δZ0|., (9) hθinti are divided equally from 0 to π in increments of π/1000. Each individual θi value is given a random value which yielded a positive Lyapunov exponent λ = 1.2. based around hθinti and this happens 1000 times for a to- This shows that indeed the nonlinear semi-classical sys- tal of one million simulations. tem exhibits chaos as required per literature [1] (Since the The random value of each individual spin component, purpose of this paper was to show a semi-classical spin θi, based around hθinti is ±1.2 radians. The visual com- model that replicates quantum statistics, a full analysis parision between this initial uncertainty and the final un- of the chaos will be given in a future publication). certainty for the quantum model is shown in figure 3 (the angles between the two models are to scale). As seen in figure 2, the model does not include wrap VII. CONCLUSION around boundary conditions. At first the model included large N ×N quantum spin components, but it was shortly The multi-body, anti-ferromagnetic ordering, semi- realized that not many sub-elements are needed to obe- classical model as shown in this research shows the ability serve the needed quantum statistics. to replicate quantum mechanical statistics (which up to this point could only be replicated from quantum mechanical wave theory). VI. RESULTS Although an energy difference between the spin up and down state is zero in this research, as seen from equation The semi-classical quantum spin interpretation needs 2, the difference in energy levels, verified readily by the to be compared to quantum statistics if the model is to Zeeman effect, can be interpreted as being small com- be suggested as a good candidate. The needed statistical pared to the coupling of nearest neighbor interactions, replication, equation 1, will be used as a first validation τsc < τnn. Therefore to first order, an energy difference (the probability for the spin to evolve into a spin up state as seen in the torques can be ignored. will be evaluted). Furthermore, this alternative representation for a The best quantum mechanical statistical compari- quantum spin can provide a deeper understanding and a sion to the multi-body with anti-ferromagnetic ordering more realistic local interpretation for two entangled par- model is shown in figure 4. From the figure, the correla- ticles, in a singlet state, commonly known as nonlocal, tion between quantum statistics and the proposed model ’spooky action at a distance’. Although this research 4 included one quantum spin, when applied to the spin 2µB0, and has previously been resolved by virtual photon correlation singlet state (as in the EPR/Bell Inequality mediation. From the semi-classical model shown, since analysis [8, 18]) this research predicts that two opposite this energy difference is small compared to nearest neigh- pairs have statistically opposite outcomes. Thus, entan- bor coupling, the conserving energy differece 2µB0 comes glement incorporates quantum statistics, as seen in spin from nearest neighbor coupling energy. Thus, energy is correlated analyses (such as used in Bell inequality stud- conserved without invoking a virtual interaction. ies); however, this result is due to sensitivity to initial Furthermore, from the uncertainty principle, ∆E ∆t ≥ conditions. Consequently, a nonlocal explaination of en- ~/2, a virtual particle is allowed to borrow energy, ∆E, tanglement is not needed to fully understand spin corre- (in the form of virtual particles) for a restricted amount lation pairs. of time, ∆t, [19]. One observable consequence of invok- As a result of this analysis and a needed follow-up, ing virtual particle mediation is the quantum spin states the semi-classical quantum spin predicts an entanglement that collapse anti-parallel to the magnetic field before lifetime, or more correctly stated, a correlation-like life- one half Rabi cycle, have borrowed energy and their lifetime, due to chaos. For example at a short time after times should be less than quantum spin states that col- creation, particle one will be exposed to something dif- lapse anti-parallel after one half Rabi cycle (the lifetime ferent than particle two. This will introduce a small shift being confined by the uncertainty principle). Although in trajectory phase space. From equation 9, the path of a rabi lifetimes should be dependent on the Rabi cycle due perfectly different outcome will depend on the lyapunov to the uncertainty principle, this has not been observed exponent, and thus a lifetime correlation. [20–22]. Additionally, the theoretical Rabi oscillation probabil- VIII. DISCUSSION ity, equation 10, is symmetric around one half Rabi cycle and matches closely with experiment [23–25]. The current interpretation requires virtual particle mediation The multi-body model has been shown to replicate (for spin states collapsing anti-parallel to the magnetic quantum statistics and provide a more realistic inter- field) for the first half of a Rabi cycle. Since the first pretation of the EPR paradox. The multi-body model half of a Rabi oscillation requires virtual particle media- can also help explain quantum energy tunneling without tion and the other doesn’t, the question naturally arises, the mediation of virtual photons. For example, the Rabi “How can both sides be symmetric, if the process during oscillation probability of going from a spin up state, 1, the collapse is dramatically different?” to a spin down state, 2, while at resonance, ω0, can be explained, where The testing of the nonlinear quantum spin model shown in this research will replicate Rabi oscillations. Although Rabi oscillations are still often misunderstood ω t P = sin2 1 , (10) as purely a quantum effect, since this can be explained as 1→2 2 a semi-classical result from linear dispersion and absorp- tion [26], the state population vector is a classical evo- when exposed to a constant dominant magnetic field and lution in time. Once the evolution has stopped and the a perpendicular oscillating magnetic field perturbation, system is measured, the same quantum statistics shown as: in this research are obtained. This work was supported by the NASA Goddard B~ = B0zˆ + B1(cos ω0t xˆ − sin ω0t yˆ). (11) Space Flight Center under the cooperative agreement #NNX13AJ37A, the University of Wyoming Physics and Here it should be noted that at some time t0, where Astronomy department, the Mount Moran HPC cluster t0 π/2ω1, there exists a non-zero probability that the at the Advanced Research Computing Center [27], and spin will be found in a down state. Energy conservation the Wyoming NASA Space Grant Consortium, NASA is violated because the system has increased in energy by Grant #NNX15AI08H.

[1] Thayer, D.R., and Jafari, F., Int. J. Ad. Res. Phys. Sc. [7] Raﬀaelli, F., et al., Quantum Sci. Technol. 3 025003 2(2) 18-26 (2015) (2018) [2] Thayer, D.R., Int. J. Ad. Res. Phys. Sc. 2(7) 1-18 (2015) [8] Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., and Rosen, N., Phys. Rev. 47 [3] Heiner, J.J., and Thayer, D.R., Int. J. Ad. Res. Phys. 777 (1935) Sc. 4(3) 4-11 (2017) [9] Caves, C.M., Fuchs, C.A., and Schack, R., Phys. Rev. A [4] Heiner, J.J., Bodyfelt, J.D., and Thayer, D.R., submitted 65 022305 (2002) for publication [10] Jaynes, E.T., “Probability in quantum theory” Com- [5] Rauch, D et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(8) 080403 (2018) plexity, entropy and the physics of information 381-403 [6] Bierhorst, P., et al., Nature 556 223-226 (2018) (1990) 5

[11] Gallow, J.D., “A Subjectivist’s Guide to Deterministic [19] Hey, T., and Walters, P., “The New Quantum Universe” Chance” https://philarchive.org/archive/GALASG Cambridge University Press (2004) [12] Ossiander, M., et al., Nature 561 374-377 (2018) [20] Norris, T.B., et al., Phys. Rev. B 50(19) (1994) [13] Markov, M.A., Prog. Theor Phys. Suppl., Commemora- [21] Il’ichev, E., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 097906 (2003) tion Issue for the Thirtieth Anniversary of Meson Theory [22] Batalov, A., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 077401 (2008) and Dr. H. Yukawa, p. 85 (1965); Sov. Phys. JETP 24 [23] Pla, J.J., et al., Nature 489, 541-545 (2012) 584 (1967) [24] Koppens, F.H.L., et al., Nature 442, 766-771 (2006) [14] Kadyshevsky, V.G., Nucl. Phys. B141 477 (1978) [25] Petta, J.R., et al., Science 309(5744), 2180-2184 (2005) [15] Kadyshevsky, V.G. and Mateev, M.D., Phys. Lett. B106 [26] Zhu, Y., Gauthier, D.J., Morin, S.E., Wu, Q., 139 (1981) Carmichael, H.J., and Mossberg, T.W., Phys. Rev. Lett. [16] Rodionov, V.N. Physica Scripta 90(4) 2015 64(21) (1990) [17] Hooft, G, “The Evolution of Quantum Field Theory” The [27] Advanced Research Computing Center. 2012. Mount Standard Theory of Particle Physics Advanced Series on Moran: IBM System X cluster. Laramie, Wy: Univer- Directions in High Energy Physics 26 1-27 (2015) sity of Wyoming. http://n2t.net/ark:/85786/m4159c [18] Bell, J.S., Physics 1 195 (1964)