The argument behind this statement is not the recent development of Quality Physics, but the observation of the role played by some qualitative features of classic concepts in modern science.
As an example, classical and quantum mechanics can be used in which the same equations of motion exist, although in classical mechanics motion is described by functions, and in quantum mechanics the motion is described by operators
Well, in particular since QM is a mysterious thing, the correspondance principle is important as a guide in that the mean value of the dynamical operators in QM correspond to the values found in Classical Mechanics.
Or that the minimum action in Feyman path integral method corresponds to the non interfering wave paths, which means classical paths.
However there is still phenomena in QM with no counterpart in Clasical physics, as tunneling for example.
Not quite the same equations of motion, Poisson bracket in Classical,
but commutator of two operators in quantum, differentiated by a factor of i hbar
Quality physics has no relation to Qualitative physics.
Hi Julius. How do you do? Yes, you are absolutely right that "X". Thanks for your attention, I discovered VF Weisskopf's article: "Quality and Quantity in Quantum Physics" Unfortunately, not available on the Internet. Of course, quantum phenomena are different from the classical ones, but it is amazing that despite the radical change in the views of reality, still some concepts retain the same form or name, eg the form of the equations of Newton and Heisenberg is identical and so on
@Juan Weisz In my answer "X"=Quality physics has no relation to Qualitative physics, sorry:-)
There are many examples of scale invariance of Physical laws. Consider Newtons laws of motion of a particle under a quadratic potential V(x)=- x2/2. Then if we write down explicitly: m d2 x / dt2 = - ∂V / ∂x = x. Now let us make a scale change x --> α x. Newtons Law is invariant under rescaling as α cancels out. If you add a constant piece in V then scale invariance will be maintained. You can also break scale invariance easily. For example add a linear piece in V.
@Hanckowiak
In my view this is a very good question. Physicists feel comfortable standing on the shoulders of their giant precursors, and consequently try as much as possible to profit from their ideas. The correspondence principle is a consequence of this. But it is probably not such a good one when applied to the relation between quantum mechanics and classical mechanics, because the domains of application of these theories are very different. In particular the measuring instrument is crucial within the domain of quantum mechanics. Whereas this role may be ignored in classical theories, does this seem impossible within the domain of quantum mechanics. As is well-known by now, is the quantummechanical formalism considerably changed by duly taking into account the measuring instrument, viz. by generalizing the notion of a quantum mechanical observable from a Hermitian operator to a positive operator-valued measure.
My friends!
""Physicists feel comfortable standing on the shoulders of their giant precursors, and consequently try as much as possible to profit from their ideas", (quote from Willem Marinus). The thoughts of Juan and Biswajoy illustrate this thought well, based on the invariance of the equations found in science, even in the different fields of their applicability. It is fascinating for me, however, that certain ideas are going through not only revolutions made in given branches of science, but also combine different fields of intellectual activity, such as religion and science. The sun treated in some religions as a deity, a center of belief, found its scientific counterpart in the Copernican view of the universe. Indeed, some ideas have a breathtaking power!!?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematical Sciences
- Graphs