What is psi function? (newbie)

In summary, the wavefunction is a model that describes the probability of measuring a particle at any given position in space. It is based on the (one-dimensional time dependent) Schroedinger equation, which has the form: psi\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + V\Psi. If you were to make a measurement, the probability of finding the particle at point x at time t, P(x,t), is given by (if we assume that the wavefunction is normalized): P(x,t) = |\Psi (x,
  • #1
zebbler
7
0
Newbie being me. I am interested in figuring out whether there are many posible outcomes to a situation or one singular future and I think understanding psi function might help me grasp the subject deeper. My problem is math, but I am willing to try to break it down as much as I can and try to get it. Any explanations, pointers, references would welcome and appreciated.

Zebbler
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I believe you're talking about a quantum-mechanical wavefunction, usually represented by the greek letter psi.

The wavefunction is just a function that describes the probability of measuring a particle at any given position in space.

- Warren
 
  • #3
What is this probability based on? What kind of factors, let's say, do you need to consider when you need to figure out the probabily of particle A being in one spot or another?
 
  • #4
One of the equations that gves the wavefunction is the (one-dimensional time dependent to keep things simplier) Schroedinger equation, which has the form:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + V\Psi[/tex]

Psi is the wave function, i is the square root of -1, x is postion, h-bar is the Dirac constant (or the rationailzed Planck constant if you like), t is time, m is mass and V (V(x) if you like) is the potential.

If you were to make a measuremnt, the proabilty of finding the particle at point x at time t, P(x,t), is given by (if we assume that the wavefunction is normalized):

[tex]P(x,t) = |\Psi (x,t)|^2[/tex]
 
  • #5
jcsd said:
One of the equations that gves the wavefunction is the (one-dimensional time dependent to keep things simplier) Schroedinger equation, which has the form:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + V\Psi[/tex]

Psi is the wave function, i is the square root of -1, x is postion, h-bar is the Dirac constant (or the rationailzed Planck constant if you like), t is time, m is mass and V (V(x) if you like) is the potential.

If you were to make a measuremnt, the proabilty of finding the particle at point x at time t, P(x,t), is given by (if we assume that the wavefunction is normalized):

[tex]P(x,t) = |\Psi (x,t)|^2[/tex]

Can we measure Psi-function in any experiment or it is abstract mathematical model of the smeared objects?
Why smeared object is local when we measuring?
 
  • #6
You cannot directly measure the wavefunction; however, the wavefunction contains all the information about a particle. You can use the wavefunction to predict the possible outcomes of any measurement, but you cannot measure the wavefunction itself.

The wavefunction is a model.

- Warren
 
  • #7
chroot said:
You cannot directly measure the wavefunction; however, the wavefunction contains all the information about a particle. You can use the wavefunction to predict the possible outcomes of any measurement, but you cannot measure the wavefunction itself.

The wavefunction is a model.

- Warren

Why Psi-function is smeared on whole space but microobject is local when we its measurement?
Is it good model?
 
  • #8
According to the model, the particle does not really have a defined position until it is measured. Indeed, repeated measurements do not necessarily find the particle in the same place each time; nor do parallel measurements on many identical systems.

The model is the best physical model to have ever been devised -- it accurately predicts the results of experiments better than any model ever created, to many, many decimal places.

- Warren
 
  • #9
cartuz said:
Can we measure Psi-function in any experiment or it is abstract mathematical model of the smeared objects?
Why smeared object is local when we measuring?

As Chroot implies, in the Copenhagen interpretation , physical significsance shouldn't be attached to the wavefunction, only the possible outxome of measuremnets it predicts. Tgough of course the Copenhagen interpretation in't the only interpretation and other interpretation DO atach physical significance to the wavefunction, but it's a good rule of thumb.
 
  • #10
chroot said:
According to the model, the particle does not really have a defined position until it is measured. Indeed, repeated measurements do not necessarily find the particle in the same place each time; nor do parallel measurements on many identical systems.

The model is the best physical model to have ever been devised -- it accurately predicts the results of experiments better than any model ever created, to many, many decimal places.

- Warren

Why the microobject is local when we are measurement its position but Psi-function smeared in infinite space?
We can think that microobject is local but our device for measurement not ideal. For example the analogy of this situation is foto-picture of moving particle with very long time exposition.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
I believe I already answered the question, cartuz.

And no, the implications of quantum mechanics have nothing to do with the ability (or inability) of our measuring equipment -- that's a common (and naive) misconception. According to the model, particles simply do not have precisely defined positions until measurements are performed.

- Warren
 
  • #12
chroot said:
I believe I already answered the question, cartuz.

And no, the implications of quantum mechanics have nothing to do with the ability (or inability) of our measuring equipment -- that's a common (and naive) misconception. According to the model, particles simply do not have precisely defined positions until measurements are performed.

- Warren

Your statements jcsd regarded as Copenhagen interpretation. This interpretation is not ideal. There is many question.
The first. We can to measure the particle in point A in the initial time. Throw very shot time we can to observe the particle in infinite far point B. Than the velocity of particle moving is more then constant C - light velocity.
The second. In this interpretation is destroy the Conservation Energy Law. Really, the particle with small energy can moving throw barrier with bigger energy.
The next. We must write all classical laws in therm of amplitude probability or in therm of Psi-functions.
The next. In this case without measurement does not exist coordinates, momentum, energy and ...
And there is more else.
And you are named this is the best description.
We can think that Statistical Physics with Stochastic Classical gravitational fields, with Newton Laws and with classical probability but not quantum Psi-function is will be better to describe the the microobjects as classical test particles. I'm sorry.
 
  • #13
Riiiiiight. I don't really care what you *think*. Don't post any personal theories here.

- Warren
 
  • #14
The wave function psi is the "solution" to the shrodinger equation: HP=EP
where H is the hamiltonian operator, P is the psi function, and E is energy. The time independent shrodinger equation shows that for a system, say a particle in a 1 dimensional box, the psi function is a function of sines and cosines. A postulate of QM is that once you know what the psi function is you know everything there is to know about that particular system, but unfortunately, the psi function can only be solved for the hydrogen atom and hydrogen-like atoms. Trying to solve the S. equation for say a He is impossible, as of yet, becuase it boils down to solving a 3 body differential equation which has not yet been solved. As a result wave functions have just been approximated for the He atom and all the rest of the other elements in the periodic table. The wave function can only tell you the probabilty of where to find a particle, it can not give you the exact location of a particle because it is impossible according to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. A strange result of QM shows that for a simple model like the particle in a 1-dimensional box, there is a point where the probability of find a particle is zero. That is the particle is going from point A to point B, but there is a point in between A and B where the probability of finding the particle is zero, which means the particle is going from A to B without going through all the points in between A and B. Spooky Huh?
 
  • #15
cartuz said:
Your statements jcsd regarded as Copenhagen interpretation. This interpretation is not ideal. There is many question.
The first. We can to measure the particle in point A in the initial time. Throw very shot time we can to observe the particle in infinite far point B. Than the velocity of particle moving is more then constant C - light velocity.
The second. In this interpretation is destroy the Conservation Energy Law. Really, the particle with small energy can moving throw barrier with bigger energy.
The next. We must write all classical laws in therm of amplitude probability or in therm of Psi-functions.
The next. In this case without measurement does not exist coordinates, momentum, energy and ...
And there is more else.
And you are named this is the best description.
We can think that Statistical Physics with Stochastic Classical gravitational fields, with Newton Laws and with classical probability but not quantum Psi-function is will be better to describe the the microobjects as classical test particles. I'm sorry.

This is very peculiar. You started out by asking what the Psi function was and suddenly you are telling us that the Copenhagen Interpretation is wrong?

Were you lying to us about your knowledge of quantum physics orginally or have you just learned the equivalent of several years of graduate study overnight?

Classical physics, even with statistical physics is NOT sufficient- for one thing it doesn't explain "tunneling" which is the basis for all the transistors built into the computer on which you are reading this. If you don't believe that quantum physics works, you had better turn off your computer now!

"We can to measure the particle in point A in the initial time. Throw very shot time we can to observe the particle in infinite far point B."

What makes you say that? Certainly such an experiment has never been done. There is nothing in any form or "interpretation" of quantum physics that suggests such a thing.

"The second. In this interpretation is destroy the Conservation Energy Law. Really, the particle with small energy can moving throw barrier with bigger energy."

No, it doesn't. Indeed that is one of the things that PROVES that classical mechanics is not enough. It is experimentally verified that particles "with small energy" CAN move through barrier "with bigger energy"- those transistor things I was talking about before do that all the time. In order to do that using classical mechanics the particle WOULD have to violate conservation of energy. Using quantum mechanics, we can have a psi field that has non-zero portions on both sides of the barrier WITHOUT being in the barrier itself- no violation of conservation of energy!
 
  • #16
HallsofIvy said:
Classical physics, even with statistical physics is NOT sufficient- for one thing it doesn't explain "tunneling" which is the basis for all the transistors built into the computer on which you are reading this. If you don't believe that quantum physics works, you had better turn off your computer now!

Thank you for your post, HallsofIvy.
Excuse me if I write unpleasantly. It is because my English is not excellent. Yes, you are right in the most part of your post.
But I do not know, can I write my opinion?
1.If we use Quantum Mechanic in Copengagen Interpretation (CI) we must have famous postulates and axioms.Everybody author think on word Quantum a different sense and 70 years of existing this theory we have not the systems of axioms. Everybody use a different form of axioms.
2. If we use CI, we must translate all classical physics to this term from Newton's Laws which we must formulate with probability theory. Yes, we can to describe classical laws in the term of probability but I do not see its. And is it will good description?
Another way is to think that World is Classical but not Quantum. Classical Physics can not to describe only quantum interference! But it is possible if we postulate the Random Background Fields! And than no problems.
 
  • #17
The interpretation is irrelevant. The physics is the same regardless of what interpretation you choose (Copenhagen, many worlds, etc.). The predictions of experimental outcomes do not depend on the interpretation used. The interpretation is just something fun for philosophers to think about.

- Warren
 
  • #18
Quantum Cosmologists think about interpretations as well.

http://www.hep.upenn.edu/~max/everett.html has a paper of possible interest. It starts off with an informal poll of preferred interpretations. Amusingly, it makes reference to a "shut-up-and-calculate interpretation''.
 
  • #19
I can see classical World only because all device for the measurement is classical. Where is Quantum World? We can suppose that it is exist. Is it true? Is Quantum World exist really?
From abstract Quantum Phylosophy which based Quantum axioms is follows many and very strange outcomes:
1. Quantum teleportation.
I think it is fantasy only and experimental demonstration of this effect is demonstration of correlation two random process.
2. Quantum objects is non-local.
We can to describe this effect as two classical test particles in random background fields. Then correlation between its will be non-zero.
 
  • #20
cartuz said:
I can see classical World only because all device for the measurement is classical. Where is Quantum World? We can suppose that it is exist. Is it true? Is Quantum World exist really?
From abstract Quantum Phylosophy which based Quantum axioms is follows many and very strange outcomes:
1. Quantum teleportation.
I think it is fantasy only and experimental demonstration of this effect is demonstration of correlation two random process.
2. Quantum objects is non-local.
We can to describe this effect as two classical test particles in random background fields. Then correlation between its will be non-zero.

You forgot to add one extremely important example of the clearest signature of quantum effects: SUPERCONDUCTIVITY.

To quote Carver Mead of CalTech in his PNAS paper:

"Although superconductivity was discovered in 1911, the recognition that superconductors manifest quantum phenomena on a macroscopic scale came too late to play a role in the formulation of quantum mechanics. Through modern experimental methods, however, superconducting structures give us direct access to the quantum nature of matter. The superconducting state is a coherent state formed by the collective interaction of a large fraction of the free electrons in a material. Its properties are dominated by known and controllable interactions within the collective ensemble. The dominant interaction is collective because the properties of each electron depend on the state of the entire ensemble, and it is electromagnetic because it couples to the charges of the electrons. Nowhere in natural phenomena do the basic laws of physics manifest themselves with more crystalline clarity."[1]

I have always tried to emphasize that some of the most convincing evidence of QM (and SR's) validity does not come from some esoteric phenomena, but rather from condensed matter physics/material sciences.

Zz.

[1] C. Mead, PNAS v94, p.6013 (1997) or try here: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/94/12/6013.pdf
 
Last edited:
  • #21
ZapperZ said:
You forgot to add one extremely important example of the clearest signature of quantum effects: SUPERCONDUCTIVITY.

To quote Carver Mead of CalTech in his PNAS paper:

"Although superconductivity was discovered in 1911, the recognition that superconductors manifest quantum phenomena on a macroscopic scale came too late to play a role in the formulation of quantum mechanics. Through modern experimental methods, however, superconducting structures give us direct access to the quantum nature of matter. The superconducting state is a coherent state formed by the collective interaction of a large fraction of the free electrons in a material. Its properties are dominated by known and controllable interactions within the collective ensemble. The dominant interaction is collective because the properties of each electron depend on the state of the entire ensemble, and it is electromagnetic because it couples to the charges of the electrons. Nowhere in natural phenomena do the basic laws of physics manifest themselves with more crystalline clarity."[1]

I have always tried to emphasize that some of the most convincing evidence of QM (and SR's) validity does not come from some esoteric phenomena, but rather from condensed matter physics/material sciences.

Zz.

[1] C. Mead, PNAS v94, p.6013 (1997) or try here: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/94/12/6013.pdf

I do not interested Supercoductivity. But I will read [1]. But I think it is about Berry phase, may be. If I remember, Berry Phase is geometrical phase which can demonstrate a classical property of curved space. For example, if we take Fuko oscillator and will be moving on the Eath and return in the start point then the direction of Fuko oscillation will turn. It is demonstration of the moving in the curved geometry. It is classical effect.
I will read [1]. Thank you.
 
  • #22
Cartuz:
Also look into Bell's inequalities and the Aspect experiment.
Something fun: "Bertlemen socks" (spelling may be wrong)
 
  • #23
cartuz said:
I do not interested Supercoductivity. But I will read [1]. But I think it is about Berry phase, may be. If I remember, Berry Phase is geometrical phase which can demonstrate a classical property of curved space. For example, if we take Fuko oscillator and will be moving on the Eath and return in the start point then the direction of Fuko oscillation will turn. It is demonstration of the moving in the curved geometry. It is classical effect.
I will read [1]. Thank you.

It isn't a "Berry" phase, nor does it have anything to do with "Foucault" pendulum. Since you claim that your "English" is bad, I will try to overlook what I perceive to be some very ignorant comment that you just made. I really do not care if you are "interested" in superconductivity or not. But if you make a claim asking where is the evidence of quantum phenomena, then you should at least be AWARE of other phenomena that would make your claim look utterly silly.

Zz.
 
  • #24
Superconductivity, superfluidity, tunneling, etc. are all examples of quantum mechanics that are observable macroscopically.

- Warren
 
  • #25
nice

Thanks for all the relevant and irrelevant replies to my original question! :)

I will go through this a bunch of times, until I have a firmer grasp on the psi function.

In layman's terms, any ideas about why there are only possibilities of location (until measured all being real at once?) as opposed to a single (if not calculable) location? Are there flaws with the above statement? What does the above implicate for our philosophical understanding of reality?
 
  • #26
You are entering the area of interpretation. Traditionally, most physicists have tried to ignore these questions (in my opinion, because they didn't have good answers to them) and even dismissed them as "metaphysical". This school of thought is known as the Copenhagen Interpretation. You will find some people in this forum that adhere to that interpretation.
Although many would dissagree, I think you could consider the many possible outcomes of a measurement as "potentialities" or even "coexisting realities" of which you will only perceive one at the time you make the measurement.
I do think there are profound philosofical implications.
You may want to look (Google?) into the following topics:
"Many worlds interpretation"
"Schodringer's Cat"
"Measurement problem"
 
  • #27
In layman's terms, any ideas about why there are only possibilities of location (until measured all being real at once?) as opposed to a single (if not calculable) location?

To convince you of how bizarre the world has to be if we take this possibility seriously I'll add:

"EPR Paradox"
"Bell inequalities"
"Kochen-Specker Theorem"

and to show that such an interpretation is nevertheless possible, I will add:

"Bohmian Mechanics"

You can find good articles on all these things at theStanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

I also won't hesitate to recommend

Baggott, J., 2004, Beyond Measure: Modern Physics, Philosophy and the Meaning of Quantum Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

or his earlier book "The meaning of quantum theory"

yet again to anybody who is learning QM and is having difficulty understanding what it all means (which should be everyone by the way).
 
  • #28
Bohmian theory answered all those paradoxes
 
  • #29
Bohmian theory answered all those paradoxes

That sounds a bit strong. I would say that Bohmian theory provided one possible resolution of all those paradoxes. It did so by giving up locality and noncontextuality, which is not the preferred way to go for many physicists.

More seriously, it has problems at the level of quantum field theory. A consistent particle ontology seems to be ruled out and a field ontology has problems with fermionic systems. One needs to introduce grassman valued probability measures, and it seems difficult to prescribe an 'ignorance' interpretation to these since they can be negative.
 
  • #30
gravenewworld said:
but unfortunately, the psi function can only be solved for the hydrogen atom and hydrogen-like atoms.
Actually the conclusion has gone too far. As I recall, Bose Einstein Condensate is a many-body ensemble and can be described by Gross Pitaeviskii equation, which is a kind of nonlinear Schrodinger equations. And this equation can be solved if certain assumptions are made.
 
  • #31
How long will this thread stay up for? What can cause its deletion?
 
  • #32
zebbler:

It'll stay up forever. Why would it be deleted?

- Warren
 
  • #33
I was concerned that it could be deleted as a part of this website's general upkeep. I use another similar website. It has an option for the person who started a thread to delete it.

It's really good news for me however that this thread will not be deleted, so I can refer back to it for book recommendations and other advice.

thanks.
 

1. What is the psi function?

The psi function, also known as the digamma function, is a mathematical function that is used in various fields such as physics, statistics, and engineering. It is defined as the logarithmic derivative of the gamma function and is denoted by the Greek letter psi (Ψ).

2. What is the purpose of the psi function?

The psi function is used to solve various mathematical problems, such as calculating integrals and solving differential equations. It also has applications in probability and statistics, particularly in the field of Bayesian analysis.

3. How is the psi function calculated?

The psi function can be calculated using various methods, such as numerical approximation or using special mathematical functions such as the polygamma function. It can also be calculated using series expansions or through the use of computer software, such as MATLAB or Mathematica.

4. What are some real-life applications of the psi function?

The psi function has many real-life applications, such as in physics for calculating the energy levels of atoms and molecules, in statistics for analyzing data, and in engineering for solving differential equations. It also has applications in finance, biology, and computer science.

5. Is the psi function related to psychic abilities?

No, the psi function has no relation to psychic abilities. It is a purely mathematical function that is used in various fields of science and has no connection to supernatural abilities.

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Differential Equations
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
894
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
749
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
3
Views
741
Replies
17
Views
2K
Back
Top