3

We know that the state of a quantum particle defined on the real line is represented by its wave function $\psi(x)$ that is the position probability amplitude. We also know that the momentum probability amplitude $\phi(p)$ is a Fourier transformation of $\psi(x)$, where $p=\hbar k$ and $k$ is the Fourier conjugate variable of $x$. Moreover, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle dictates how well the functions $\psi$ and $\phi$ can be localized simultaneously: $\Delta_{x_0} (\psi)\Delta_{p_0} (\phi)\geq \hbar / 2$, where $x_0$ and $p_0$ are the corresponding expectation values.

How to mathematically show that the both functions $\psi$ and $\phi$ can be sharply localized if the constant $\hbar$ becomes arbitrary small positive number?

When this becomes clear, it is easy to obtain an arbitrary well localized "classical" spacetime curve from the Ehrenfest theorem. Perhaps this approach is much more convenient than the path integral solution to classical limit.

Hulkster
  • 735
  • I don't think there is an answer to this question: the origin of uncertainty principle is due to random nature of wave function collapse, and as far as the postulates of QM is concerned, there is no "mechanism" for this process. To get to the classical limit, ideally we will need to know the mechanism of measurements and then take the limit appropriately – KP99 Jan 24 '23 at 12:44
  • It is not that simple, there is a whole area dedicated to this. It is called semiclassical theory. – Trebor Jan 30 '23 at 09:27

1 Answers1

8

In general, it is not true that the uncertainties both become small as $\hbar \to 0$ - for instance, $\Delta x$ might not be function of $\hbar$ at all and $\Delta p$ a linear function of $\hbar$, so that $\lim_{\hbar \to 0} \Delta x = \Delta x\neq 0$. This is the case for example when you start with a Gaußian $\psi(x) = \mathrm{e}^{(x-x_0)^2/(2\Delta x^2)}$ with fixed $\Delta x$. Nothing in the formalism of quantum mechanics says that wavefunctions must functionally depend on $\hbar$ at all.

This is a basic reason why the classical limit of quantum mechanics is not merely taking $\hbar \to 0$ and doing nothing else. See this question and its linked questions for more discussion of what this limit actually means and when it provides a meaningful transition to classical mechanics. Note also that Ehrenfest's theorem does not in general produce classical results because $\langle V(x)\rangle \neq V(\langle x\rangle)$ and if you think that $\langle x\rangle$ should be the classical position then it is $V(\langle x\rangle)$ that would have to appear in the "classical" equation of motion, but the theorem only gives you $\langle V(x)\rangle$.

More specifically to the question, the usual examples for states that "become classical" as $\hbar \to 0$ in the sense that both uncertainties diminish are coherent states, whose simplest versions have $\Delta x = \Delta p = \sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{2}}$ so that both uncertainties go to 0 as $\hbar \to 0$.

ACuriousMind
  • 124,833
  • 1
    Does a particle in the "classical" path of the path integral formalism have sharp values in $x$ and $p$ ? To me it makes no sense to speak about classical limit if the state variables aren't well localized. – Hulkster Jan 24 '23 at 12:07
  • @Hulkster I don't know how that comment is supposed to be related to my answer. If you want to ask a question about path integrals please ask a separate question about path integrals. – ACuriousMind Jan 24 '23 at 12:10
  • OK, sorry. It would be so intuitive to imagine the classical limit as a state that is squeezed both in $x$ and $p$. – Hulkster Jan 24 '23 at 12:14