- #1
AndreasC
Gold Member
- 547
- 307
So there's this professor who insists that the Heisenberg picture is all the rage and much superior in most ways to the Schrodinger picture. He compares it to how you don't use the Hamilton-Jacobi formulation of classical mechanics as much as the Hamiltonian one.
Alright, I can buy it. I looked on wikipedia and there was this quote about how it is "in some ways more natural" especially in "relativistic contexts". But no examples. I checked some older posts here, and there were some people who were saying there are some problems where one is more convenient than the other. But again no examples.
So, the result is that I am still not sure where one picture is more useful than the other and why. I know the Lagrangian (Feynman) formulation is convenient in some problems for finding the propagator. But it's a bit hard for me to see why choosing between Heisenberg or Schrodinger would provide a significant advantage.
Alright, I can buy it. I looked on wikipedia and there was this quote about how it is "in some ways more natural" especially in "relativistic contexts". But no examples. I checked some older posts here, and there were some people who were saying there are some problems where one is more convenient than the other. But again no examples.
So, the result is that I am still not sure where one picture is more useful than the other and why. I know the Lagrangian (Feynman) formulation is convenient in some problems for finding the propagator. But it's a bit hard for me to see why choosing between Heisenberg or Schrodinger would provide a significant advantage.