Electron−Nuclear Coupling in the Classical Limit for the Electronic Degrees of Freedom†

2001 ◽  
Vol 105 (12) ◽  
pp. 2708-2715 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Remacle ◽  
R. D. Levine
Physics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 739-746
Author(s):  
Andres Mauricio Kowalski ◽  
Angelo Plastino ◽  
Gaspar Gonzalez

In this paper, a reference to the semiclassical model, in which quantum degrees of freedom interact with classical ones, is considered. The classical limit of a maximum-entropy density matrix that describes the temporal evolution of such a system is analyzed. Here, it is analytically shown that, in the classical limit, it is possible to reproduce classical results. An example is classical chaos. This is done by means a pure-state density matrix, a rather unexpected result. It is shown that this is possible only if the quantum part of the system is in a special class of states.


2021 ◽  
pp. 295-309
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Brooker

“The Debye theory of solid-state heat capacities” gives a careful account of the Debye cut-off. We start by looking at a monatomic linear chain, leading to degrees of freedom and the equipartition of energy at the high-temperature (classical) limit. Reasonable approximations lead more naturally to the Born–von Karman model than to Debye, but Debye follows via a further reasonable step.


We explore the semi-classical structure of the Wigner functions Ψ( q,p ) representing bound energy eigenstates | Ψ 〉 for systems with f degrees of freedom. If the classical motion is integrable, the classical limit of Ψ is a delta function on the f -dimensional torus to which classical trajectories corresponding to |Ψ〉 are confined in the 2 f -dimensional phase space. In the semi-classical limit of Ψ ( ℏ small but not zero) the delta function softens to a peak of order Ψ−  f and the torus develops fringes of a characteristic ‘Airy’ form. Away from the torus,Ψ can have semi-classical singularities that are not delta functions; these are discussed (in full detail when f = 1) using Thom's theory of catastrophes. Brief consideration is given to problems raised when is calculated in a representation based on operators derived from angle coordinates and their conjugate momenta. When Ψ the classical motion is non-integrable, the phase space is not filled with tori and existing semi-classical methods fail. We conjecture that (a) For a given value of non-integrability parameter ⋲ ,the system passes through three semi-classical régimes as ℏ diminishes. (b) For states |Ψ〉 associated with regions in phase space filled with irregular trajectories, Ψ will be a random function confined near that region of the ‘energy shell’ explored by these trajectories (this region has more thanks dimensions). (c) For ⋲ ≠ 0, ℏ blurs the infinitely fine classical path structure, in contrast to the integrable case ⋲ = 0, where ℏ imposes oscillatory quantum detail on a smooth classical path structure.


Author(s):  
A.M. Kowalski ◽  
Angelo Plastino ◽  
Gaspar Gonzalez Acosta

We work with reference to a well-known semiclassical model, in which quantum degrees of freedom interact with classical ones. We show that, in the classical limit, it is possible to represent classical results (e.g., classical chaos) by means a pure-state density matrix.


2021 ◽  
pp. 191-213
Author(s):  
Jessica M. Wilson

Wilson considers whether ordinary (inanimate) objects are either Weakly or Strongly emergent. First, she argues that ordinary objects are at least Weakly emergent: first, by lights of a degrees of freedom (DOF)-based account, reflecting that quantum DOF are eliminated from those of ordinary objects in the classical limit; second, by lights of a functional realization account, reflecting a conception of artifacts as associated with sortal properties and distinctive functional roles; third, by lights of a determinable-based account, reflecting that ordinary objects have metaphysically indeterminate boundaries, which are best treated by appeal to a determinable-based account of metaphysical indeterminacy. While the Strong emergence of ordinary objects remains an open empirical possibility, the best such case involves artifacts: artifacts might be Strongly emergent, if the states of consciousness that determine what powers are possessed by artifacts are Strongly emergent, as is explored in Chapter 7.


2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (08) ◽  
pp. 1274-1277 ◽  
Author(s):  
FRANCESCO CIANFRANI ◽  
GIOVANNI MONTANI

The notion of a classical particle is inferred from Dirac quantum fields on a curved space-time, by an eikonal approximation and a localization hypothesis for amplitudes. This procedure allows to define a semi-classical version of the spin-tensor from internal quantum degrees of freedom, which has a Papapetrou-like coupling with the curvature.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Damiano Anselmi

Under certain assumptions, it is possible to make sense of higher derivative theories by quantizing the unwanted degrees of freedom as fakeons, which are later projected away. Then the true classical limit is obtained by classicizing the quantum theory. Since quantum field theory is formulated perturbatively, the classicization is also perturbative. After deriving a number of properties in a general setting, we consider the theory of quantum gravity that emerges from the fakeon idea and study its classicization, focusing on the FLRW metric. We point out cases where the fakeon projection can be handled exactly, which include radiation, the vacuum energy density and the combination of the two, and cases where it cannot, which include dust. Generically, the classical limit shares many features with the quantum theory it comes from, including the impossibility to write down complete, “exact” field equations, to the extent that asymptotic series and nonperturbative effects come into play.


In this chapter we discuss theories which are rigorous in their formulation but which in order to be useful need to be modified by introducing approximations of some kind. The approximations we are interested in are those which involve introduction of classical mechanical concepts, that is, the classical picture and/or classical mechanical equations of motion in part of the system. At this point, we wish to distinguish between “the classical picture,” which is obtained by taking the classical limit ħ → 0 and the appearance of “classical equations of motion.” The latter may be extracted from the quantum mechanical formulation without taking the classical limit—but, as we shall see later by introducing a certain parametrization of quantum mechanics. Thus there are two ways of introducing classical mechanical concepts in quantum mechanics. In the first method, the classical limit is defined by taking the limit ħ → 0 either in all degrees of freedom (complete classical limit) or in some degrees of freedom (semi-classical theories). We note in passing that the word semi-classical has been used to cover a wide variety of approaches which have also been referred to as classical S-matrix theories, quantum-classical theories, classical path theory, hemi-quantal theory, Wentzel Kramer-Brillouin (WKB) theories, and so on. It is not the purpose of this book to define precisely what is behind these various acronyms. We shall rather focus on methods which we think have been successful as far as practical applications are concerned and discuss the approximations and philosophy behind these. In the other approach, the ħ-limit is not taken—at least not explicitly— but here one introduces “classical” quantities, such as, trajectories and momenta as parameters, and derives equations of motion for these parameters. The latter method is therefore one particular way of parameterizing quantum mechanics. We discuss both of these approaches in this chapter. The Feynman path-integral formulation is one way of formulating quantum mechanics such that the classical limit is immediately visible [3]. Formally, the approach involves the introduction of a quantity S, which has a definition resembling that of an action integral [101].


1966 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 373
Author(s):  
Y. Kozai

The motion of an artificial satellite around the Moon is much more complicated than that around the Earth, since the shape of the Moon is a triaxial ellipsoid and the effect of the Earth on the motion is very important even for a very close satellite.The differential equations of motion of the satellite are written in canonical form of three degrees of freedom with time depending Hamiltonian. By eliminating short-periodic terms depending on the mean longitude of the satellite and by assuming that the Earth is moving on the lunar equator, however, the equations are reduced to those of two degrees of freedom with an energy integral.Since the mean motion of the Earth around the Moon is more rapid than the secular motion of the argument of pericentre of the satellite by a factor of one order, the terms depending on the longitude of the Earth can be eliminated, and the degree of freedom is reduced to one.Then the motion can be discussed by drawing equi-energy curves in two-dimensional space. According to these figures satellites with high inclination have large possibilities of falling down to the lunar surface even if the initial eccentricities are very small.The principal properties of the motion are not changed even if plausible values ofJ3andJ4of the Moon are included.This paper has been published in Publ. astr. Soc.Japan15, 301, 1963.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document