Skip to main content
Tweeted twitter.com/StackPhysics/status/1175832266473431040
Question Protected by Qmechanic
Identified the required at least six characters to correct legitimately. (No claim of factual accuracy or pertinency.)
Source Link

1.

Why is the wave function complex? I've collected some layman explanations but they are incomplete and unsatisfactory. However in the book by Merzbacher in the initial few pages he provides an explanation that I need some help with: that the de broglieBroglie wavelength and the wavelength of an elastic wave do not show similar properties under a galileanGalilean transformation. He basically says that both are equivalent under a Guagegauge transform and also, separately by lorentzLorentz transforms. This, accompanied with the observation that $\psi$ is not observable, so there is no "reason for it being real". Can someone give me an intuitive prelude by what is a Guagegauge transform and why does it give the same result as a Lorentz tranformation in a non-relativistic setting? And eventually how in this "grand scheme" the complex nature of the wave function becomes evident.. in a way that a dummy like me can understand.

2.

A wavefunction can be thought of as a scalar field (has a scalar value in every point ($r,t$) given by $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ and also as a ray in Hilbert space (a vector). How are these two perspectives the same (this is possibly something elementary that I am missing out, or getting confused by definitions and terminology, if that is the case I am desperate for help ;)

3.

One way I have thought about the above question is that the wave function can be equivalently written in $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2 $ i.e, Since a wave function is complex, the SchrodingerSchroedinger equation could in principle be be written equivalently as coupled differential equations in two real functions which staisfy the Cauchy Reimann-Riemann conditions. ie, if $$\psi(x,t) = u(x,t) + i v(x,t)$$ and $u_x=v_t$ ; $u_t = -v_x$ and we get $$\hbar \partial_t u = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2v + V v$$ $$\hbar \partial_t v = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2u - V u$$ (..in 1-D) If this is correct what are the interpretations of the $u,v$.. and why isn't it useful. (I am assuming that physical problems always have an analytic $\psi(r,t)$).

1.

Why is the wave function complex? I've collected some layman explanations but they are incomplete and unsatisfactory. However in the book by Merzbacher in the initial few pages he provides an explanation that I need some help with: that the de broglie wavelength and the wavelength of an elastic wave do not show similar properties under a galilean transformation. He basically says that both are equivalent under a Guage transform and also, separately by lorentz transforms. This, accompanied with the observation that $\psi$ is not observable, so there is no "reason for it being real". Can someone give me an intuitive prelude by what is a Guage transform and why does it give the same result as a Lorentz tranformation in a non-relativistic setting? And eventually how in this "grand scheme" the complex nature of the wave function becomes evident.. in a way that a dummy like me can understand.

2.

A wavefunction can be thought of as a scalar field (has a scalar value in every point ($r,t$) given by $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ and also as a ray in Hilbert space (a vector). How are these two perspectives the same (this is possibly something elementary that I am missing out, or getting confused by definitions and terminology, if that is the case I am desperate for help ;)

3.

One way I have thought about the above question is that the wave function can be equivalently written in $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2 $ i.e, Since a wave function is complex, the Schrodinger equation could in principle be be written equivalently as coupled differential equations in two real functions which staisfy the Cauchy Reimann conditions. ie, if $$\psi(x,t) = u(x,t) + i v(x,t)$$ and $u_x=v_t$ ; $u_t = -v_x$ and we get $$\hbar \partial_t u = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2v + V v$$ $$\hbar \partial_t v = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2u - V u$$ (..in 1-D) If this is correct what are the interpretations of the $u,v$.. and why isn't it useful. (I am assuming that physical problems always have an analytic $\psi(r,t)$).

1.

Why is the wave function complex? I've collected some layman explanations but they are incomplete and unsatisfactory. However in the book by Merzbacher in the initial few pages he provides an explanation that I need some help with: that the de Broglie wavelength and the wavelength of an elastic wave do not show similar properties under a Galilean transformation. He basically says that both are equivalent under a gauge transform and also, separately by Lorentz transforms. This, accompanied with the observation that $\psi$ is not observable, so there is no "reason for it being real". Can someone give me an intuitive prelude by what is a gauge transform and why does it give the same result as a Lorentz tranformation in a non-relativistic setting? And eventually how in this "grand scheme" the complex nature of the wave function becomes evident.. in a way that a dummy like me can understand.

2.

A wavefunction can be thought of as a scalar field (has a scalar value in every point ($r,t$) given by $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ and also as a ray in Hilbert space (a vector). How are these two perspectives the same (this is possibly something elementary that I am missing out, or getting confused by definitions and terminology, if that is the case I am desperate for help ;)

3.

One way I have thought about the above question is that the wave function can be equivalently written in $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2 $ i.e, Since a wave function is complex, the Schroedinger equation could in principle be written equivalently as coupled differential equations in two real functions which staisfy the Cauchy-Riemann conditions. ie, if $$\psi(x,t) = u(x,t) + i v(x,t)$$ and $u_x=v_t$ ; $u_t = -v_x$ and we get $$\hbar \partial_t u = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2v + V v$$ $$\hbar \partial_t v = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2u - V u$$ (..in 1-D) If this is correct what are the interpretations of the $u,v$.. and why isn't it useful. (I am assuming that physical problems always have an analytic $\psi(r,t)$).

retagged;
Link
Qmechanic
  • 212.7k
  • 48
  • 589
  • 2.3k
Formatting, edited out edit notices
Source Link
Sklivvz
  • 13.7k
  • 7
  • 65
  • 87

About the complex nature of the wave function  ?

(I have appended two minor confusions to my major question below, as I did not feel I should ask three independent questions as they were related to the complex nature of wave function. I also attribute my screenshots to E Merzbacher Quantum Mechanics and hope I am protected under the fair use policy.1.

  1. Why is the wave function complex?

Why is the wave function complex? I've collected some Laymanlayman explanations but they are incomplete and unsatisfactory. However in the book by Merzbacher in the initial few pages he provides an explanation that I need some help with: that the de broglie wavelength and the wavelength of an elastic wave do not show similar properties under a galilean transformation. He basically says that both are equivalent under a Guage transform and also, separately by lorentz transforms. This, accompanied with the observation that $\psi$ is not observable, so there is no "reason for it being real". Can someone give me an intuitive prelude by what is a Guage transform and why does it give the same result as a Lorentz tranformation in a non-relativistic setting? And eventually how in this "grand scheme" the complex nature of the wave function becomes evident.. in a way that a dummy like me can understand.

2. 

A wavefunction can be thought of as a scalar field (has a scalar value in every point ($r,t$) given by $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ and also as a ray in Hilbert space (a vector). How are these two perspectives the same (this is possibly something elementary that I am missing out, or getting confused by definitions and terminology, if that is the case I am desperate for help ;)

3. 

One way I have thought about the above question is that the wave function can be equivalently written in $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2 $ i.e, Since a wave function is complex, the Schrodinger equation could in principle be be written equivalently as coupled differential equations in two real functions which staisfy the Cauchy Reimann conditions. ie, if $$\psi(x,t) = u(x,t) + i v(x,t)$$ and $u_x=v_t$ ; $u_t = -v_x$ and we get $$\hbar \partial_t u = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2v + V v$$ $$\hbar \partial_t v = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2u - V u$$ (..in 1-D) If this is correct what are the interpretations of the $u,v$.. and why isn't it useful. (I am assuming that physical problems always have an analytic $\psi(r,t)$).

About the complex nature of the wave function  ?

(I have appended two minor confusions to my major question below, as I did not feel I should ask three independent questions as they were related to the complex nature of wave function. I also attribute my screenshots to E Merzbacher Quantum Mechanics and hope I am protected under the fair use policy.

  1. Why is the wave function complex?

I've collected some Layman explanations but they are incomplete and unsatisfactory. However in the book by Merzbacher in the initial few pages he provides an explanation that I need some help with: that the de broglie wavelength and the wavelength of an elastic wave do not show similar properties under a galilean transformation. He basically says that both are equivalent under a Guage transform and also, separately by lorentz transforms. This, accompanied with the observation that $\psi$ is not observable, so there is no "reason for it being real". Can someone give me an intuitive prelude by what is a Guage transform and why does it give the same result as a Lorentz tranformation in a non-relativistic setting? And eventually how in this "grand scheme" the complex nature of the wave function becomes evident.. in a way that a dummy like me can understand.

2. A wavefunction can be thought of as a scalar field (has a scalar value in every point ($r,t$) given by $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ and also as a ray in Hilbert space (a vector). How are these two perspectives the same (this is possibly something elementary that I am missing out, or getting confused by definitions and terminology, if that is the case I am desperate for help ;)

3. One way I have thought about the above question is that the wave function can be equivalently written in $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2 $ i.e, Since a wave function is complex, the Schrodinger equation could in principle be be written equivalently as coupled differential equations in two real functions which staisfy the Cauchy Reimann conditions. ie, if $$\psi(x,t) = u(x,t) + i v(x,t)$$ and $u_x=v_t$ ; $u_t = -v_x$ and we get $$\hbar \partial_t u = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2v + V v$$ $$\hbar \partial_t v = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2u - V u$$ (..in 1-D) If this is correct what are the interpretations of the $u,v$.. and why isn't it useful. (I am assuming that physical problems always have an analytic $\psi(r,t)$)

About the complex nature of the wave function?

1.

Why is the wave function complex? I've collected some layman explanations but they are incomplete and unsatisfactory. However in the book by Merzbacher in the initial few pages he provides an explanation that I need some help with: that the de broglie wavelength and the wavelength of an elastic wave do not show similar properties under a galilean transformation. He basically says that both are equivalent under a Guage transform and also, separately by lorentz transforms. This, accompanied with the observation that $\psi$ is not observable, so there is no "reason for it being real". Can someone give me an intuitive prelude by what is a Guage transform and why does it give the same result as a Lorentz tranformation in a non-relativistic setting? And eventually how in this "grand scheme" the complex nature of the wave function becomes evident.. in a way that a dummy like me can understand.

2. 

A wavefunction can be thought of as a scalar field (has a scalar value in every point ($r,t$) given by $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ and also as a ray in Hilbert space (a vector). How are these two perspectives the same (this is possibly something elementary that I am missing out, or getting confused by definitions and terminology, if that is the case I am desperate for help ;)

3. 

One way I have thought about the above question is that the wave function can be equivalently written in $\psi:\mathbb{R^3}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2 $ i.e, Since a wave function is complex, the Schrodinger equation could in principle be be written equivalently as coupled differential equations in two real functions which staisfy the Cauchy Reimann conditions. ie, if $$\psi(x,t) = u(x,t) + i v(x,t)$$ and $u_x=v_t$ ; $u_t = -v_x$ and we get $$\hbar \partial_t u = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2v + V v$$ $$\hbar \partial_t v = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \partial_x^2u - V u$$ (..in 1-D) If this is correct what are the interpretations of the $u,v$.. and why isn't it useful. (I am assuming that physical problems always have an analytic $\psi(r,t)$).

added 392 characters in body
Source Link
yayu
  • 4.9k
  • 7
  • 37
  • 51
Loading
edited title
Link
yayu
  • 4.9k
  • 7
  • 37
  • 51
Loading
added 6 characters in body; added 94 characters in body
Source Link
yayu
  • 4.9k
  • 7
  • 37
  • 51
Loading
deleted 237 characters in body; deleted 146 characters in body
Source Link
yayu
  • 4.9k
  • 7
  • 37
  • 51
Loading
added 172 characters in body
Source Link
yayu
  • 4.9k
  • 7
  • 37
  • 51
Loading
Source Link
yayu
  • 4.9k
  • 7
  • 37
  • 51
Loading