Two-particle wave function as an integral operator and the random field approach to quantum correlations

2010 ◽  
Vol 164 (3) ◽  
pp. 1156-1162 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Yu. Khrennikov
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (18) ◽  
pp. eabf8096
Author(s):  
Aviv Karnieli ◽  
Nicholas Rivera ◽  
Ady Arie ◽  
Ido Kaminer

Coherent emission of light by free charged particles is believed to be successfully captured by classical electromagnetism in all experimental settings. However, recent advances triggered fundamental questions regarding the role of the particle wave function in these processes. Here, we find that even in seemingly classical experimental regimes, light emission is fundamentally tied to the quantum coherence and correlations of the emitting particle. We use quantum electrodynamics to show how the particle’s momentum uncertainty determines the optical coherence of the emitted light. We find that the temporal duration of Cherenkov radiation, envisioned for almost a century as a shock wave of light, is limited by underlying entanglement between the particle and light. Our findings enable new capabilities in electron microscopy for measuring quantum correlations of shaped electrons. Last, we propose new Cherenkov detection schemes, whereby measuring spectral photon autocorrelations can unveil the wave function structure of any charged high-energy particle.


Author(s):  
M. Jeffery ◽  
J. Huang ◽  
S. Fityus ◽  
A. Giacomini ◽  
O. Buzzi

2021 ◽  
pp. 106138
Author(s):  
Chao Zhao ◽  
Wenping Gong ◽  
Tianzheng Li ◽  
C. Hsein Juang ◽  
Huiming Tang ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Kenneth G. Dyall ◽  
Knut Faegri

The wave function is an elusive and somewhat mysterious object. Nobody has ever observed the wave function directly: rather, its existence is inferred from the various experiments whose outcome is most rationally explained using a wave function interpretation of quantum mechanics. Further, the N-particle wave function is a rather complicated construction, depending on 3N spatial coordinates as well as N spin coordinates, correlated in a manner that almost defies description. By contrast, the electron density of an N-electron system is a much simpler quantity, described by three spatial coordinates and even accessible to experiment. In terms of the wave function, the electron density is expressed as . . . ρ(r) = N ∫ Ψ* (r1,r2,...,rN)Ψ (r1,r2,...,rN)dr2dr3 ...drN (14.1) . . . where the sum over spin coordinates is implicit. It might be much more convenient to have a theory based on the electron density rather than the wave function. The description would be much simpler, and with a greatly reduced (and constant) number of variables, the calculation of the electron density would hopefully be faster and less demanding. We also note that given the correct ground state density, we should be able to calculate any observable quantity of a stationary system. The answer to these hopes is density functional theory, or DFT. Over the past decade, DFT has become one of the most widely used tools of the computational chemist, and in particular for systems of some size. This success has come despite complaints about arbitrary parametrization of potentials, and laments about the absence of a universal principle (other than comparison with experiment) that can guide improvements in the way the variational principle has led the development of wave-function-based methods. We do not intend to pursue that particular discussion, but we note as a historical fact that many important early contributions to relativistic quantum chemistry were made using DFT-like methods. Furthermore, there is every reason to try to extend the success of nonrelativistic DFT methods to the relativistic domain. We suspect that their potential for conquering a sizable part of this field is at least as large as it has been in the nonrelativistic domain.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document