Friday, October 18, 2024

The Spin Chronicles (Part 4): spin up and down

This post is a continuation of "The Spin Chronicles (Part 3): Spin frames". It is purely technical. This previous post ended with:

"In other words, when you rotate an element of O(V) by an SU(2) matrix A, the corresponding lab element rotates, too, by and SO(3) matrix R(A). It’s like a cosmic interlock between spinors and real-world rotations."

Today we will see how this can be realized, and, in fact, is realized, in quantum mechanics. I should say that I am not happy with this way of dealing with spin, but, at the moment, this is the best I can do. What I present here is just one way of dealing with spinors. There are other formulations possible, but, in fact, they are all equivalent and equally unsatisfactory.

I should say that I am not happy with this way of dealing with spin

We will treat V as a Hilbert space, with its scalar product (u|v).

Note: Here, more in the spirit of quantum physics we will use the notation (u|v) instead of (u,v) for the scalar product.

Once we have a Hilbert space, we have linear operators acting on this space. Let us denote the space of linear operators  by L(V). Then L(V) becomes itself a Hilbert space if we define the scalar product by

(A|B) = Tr(A*B),

where (*) denotes the Hermitian conjugation, and "Tr" stands for "trace". In an orthonormal basis operators are represented by matrices, and (*) becomes the ordinary Hermitian conjugation of matrices (complex conjugate and transpose), while trace becomes the sum of diagonal elements of the matrix. Notice that (A|B)* = (B|A), where now (*) is applied to a complex number, and denotes the ordinary complex conjugation, usually denoted by a "bar" over that number. But "bar" is easy in Latex, and not really supported on the web page. So I will stick with the (*) notation.


In L(V) we have, in particular, Hermitian operators. The set of all Hermitian operators is a real vector space. We denote it by H(V). For Hermitian A,B the scalar product (A|B) is real. So H(V) is a real vector space, with a real scalar product. In order to see what kind of scalar product it is, we need a basis in H(A), So, let us construct one. First of all, given any two unit vectors u,v in V, where where "unit" means (u|u) = (v|v) = 1,we denote by |u)(v| the operator in L(V) defined as

|u)(v| w = (v|w) u.

Then (|u)(v|)*= |v)(u|

Then |u)(u| is the orthogonal projection operator on u. It acts, by definition, as

|u)(u| v =(u|v)u

It is Hermitian (thus in H(V)), and idempotent (that means ( |u)(u| )2 = |u)(u|. Its eigenvalues are 1 and 0. Its eigenvectors are u (for eigenvalue 1), and 0 for any non-zero vector orthogonal to u). Sometimes it is easier yo write Pu instead of |u)(u|. So we have Pu=Pu*, and Pu2 = Pu, (Pu|Pu) = 1. We will construct a basis in H(V) from a basis in V. But first let us talk some "physics". Let us think of "spin in a given direction" as a binary quantity. It can be "up" or "down". So, we want to associate with its "measurement" a Hermitian operator with eigenvalues +1 and -1, +1 for "up" and -1 for "down". But which one? The answer, as far as I know, is this: "anyone", but it should be done in a "consistent" way. We can do it as follows: first choose an orthonormal basis e1,e2 in V. Then we have the following (easy to prove) Theorem:

Theorem: Every Hermitian operator with eigenvalues ±1 can be uniquely represented as σ(n) = n1σ1+n2σ2+n3σ3, where
σ1,σ2,σ3 are the Pauli matrices

Pauli matrices

and n is a unit vector in R3. Conversely, if n is a unit vector in R3, then σ(n) represents a Hermitian operator with eigenvalues ±1 in the basis e1,e2. Moreover, if A is any matrix from SU(2), then

A σ(n) A* = σ( R(A)n ).

Now we associate spin "up" in "z" direction in the lab with n =(0,0,1). The formula above allows us to consistently associate Hermitian operator, namely σ(n), with "spin up" in any direction.

Why is that not quite satisfactory? The problem is that we have chosen the particular Pauli matrices above. Why these and not other? If U is any unitary matrix, then the matrices U σi U* would do as well. This seems to tell us that these "spin directions" are in a space that looks and behaves as "our space", but it is not "our space". It is a mystery that needs to be understood. We will continue these considerations in the next post.

 

P.S.4 Time is a function of consciousness. Just one of the "observables", or "dimensions"  of the consciousness topological space. It has nothing to do with space. Space-time is a trap. There are other "observables", infinitely many of them. Consciousness can be organized in many different, incompatible ways. Roughly.

P.S.5.  Gonçalves, Madeira, "The Problem of Time in Quantum Cosmology and Non-chronometric Temporality", with their "binary relational structure" and "magma" - added to my reading list and started reading. But where is consciousness? Only in this sentence:

"According to Einstein (1953, [2004]) the states of consciousness of an individual appear, to that individual, pictured in a series of events in which each particular state, accessible to the individual’s memory, appears to be placed in accordance with an irreducible criterion of a “before” and an “after”. There is, thus, to each individual, a sense of personal time, a subjective time that is not, in itself, and, still according to Einstein (1954, [2004]), measurable, although one can associate numbers to the different events, such that what takes place after something else, always gets a higher number, even if only the ordering of events matters, for the subjective time, and not the particular distance between the two numbers, which means that this time is not metrizable, but, solely expressible upon an ordinal scale."

P.S.6 Recently discovered: Marcin Schroeder,  my ex-PhD student. I was trying to force him to work with simplicial complexes and algebraic topology, but he has chosen  a more ambitious career. His papers about philosophical issues of  information theory on academia.edu - very interesting.

P.S.7. Back to Aristotle, Galileo and Newton (and Cartan) - so I acquired this wonderful book:


Not to mention the fact that my name is listed in the References several times (with those of Blanchard, Canarutto, Janyška and Modugno).

P.S.8. Reading now (p. 409):


P.S.9. 

https://twitter.com/revoltwear/status/1654521604251197440

P.S.10.


P.S. 18-10-24 9:28 Igor Bayak (1.1.6)



 

Wednesday, October 16, 2024

katex test

Math can be inline like \(2^{2x}=4\), or displayed like:

\[2^{3x}=8\]

Saturday, April 8, 2023

p.s. 08-04-23

 P.S.1 07-04-23 17:48 Catched my attention today:

1) J. Acacio de Barros and Federico Holik, Indistinguishability and Negative Probabilities

Abstract

In this paper, we examined the connection between quantum systems’ indistinguishability and signed (or negative) probabilities. We do so by first introducing a measure-theoretic definition of signed probabilities inspired by research in quantum contextuality. We then argue that ontological indistinguishability leads to the no-signaling condition and negative probabilities.

Keywords: indistinguishability; quantum ontology; negative probabilities; signed measure; quasi-set theory; contextuality

2) Jerome R. Busemeyer & Peter D. Bruza

Quantum Models of Cognition and Decision

Cambridge University Press (2012)

Abstract

Much of our understanding of human thinking is based on probabilistic models. This innovative book by Jerome R. Busemeyer and Peter D. Bruza argues that, actually, the underlying mathematical structures from quantum theory provide a much better account of human thinking than traditional models. They introduce the foundations for modelling probabilistic-dynamic systems using two aspects of quantum theory. The first, 'contextuality', is a way to understand interference effects found with inferences and decisions under conditions of uncertainty. The second, 'quantum entanglement', allows cognitive phenomena to be modeled in non-reductionist ways. Employing these principles drawn from quantum theory allows us to view human cognition and decision in a totally new light. Introducing the basic principles in an easy-to-follow way, this book does not assume a physics background or a quantum brain and comes complete with a tutorial and fully worked-out applications in important areas of cognition and decision.

P.S.2. 08-04-23 8:34 "By chance" I remembered this morning Dimitri Chakalov with whom I used to have a number of exchanges in the past




"The Arrow of Spacetime

"The arrow of spacetime suggests non-trivial topology of spacetime by incorporating a Platonic atemporal phenomenon “outside” 4D spacetime, dubbed matrix (p. 4). The local properties of matter and fields are bundled with the global properties of the spacetime en bloc, following the rule ‘think globally act locally’. Hence the entire Universe is animated by the Unmoved Mover and the fifth force, and is modeled as a brain."

"The force of Life is the force of TimeThe Fifth Force. It (not "He") springs from the Unmoved Mover (p. 5 in The Arrow of Spacetime) and empowers the arrow of causalitygravity, and the brain. "

"Let me start with the so-called Axiom of Absolute Set (AAS), which unites the new empty set with the new complemental universal set (Wolfram). It 2 is very important to stress that the new empty set and universal set pertain only to the Platonic World, which we assume (p. 1) to be an atemporal and pre-geometric substance resembling (but not identical to) the human mind."

P.S.2. 08-04-23 9:38

Plotinus


P.S.3. 08-04-23 11:04

Tuesday, October 18, 2022

Test HTML

Oto jak wygląda wstępna wersja kolejnej notki - gdzie pozjadane są polskie ogonki
1 Przypadek oglny Xm;n  
Przez Xm;n bdziemy oznacza Cm+n wyposaone w iloczyn skalarny o syg-  
naturze (m; n). Elementami Xm;n s pary (u 2 Cm; v 2 Cn), iloczyn skalarny  
jest okrelony jako  
â ã â ã  
u
v
u0  
h
;
i = «uyu0 + vyv0:  
(1)  
v0  
Oparatory liniowe dziaajce w Xm;n zapisujemy jako macierze blokowe, dziaajce  
blokowo:  
â
ã â ã  
â
ã
A B  
u
Au + Bv  
=
:
(2)  
C D  
v
Cu + Dv  
Macierz A jest m Å m, macierz D jest n Å n; macierz B jest m Å n, macierz  
C jest n Å n.  
Wprowadmy macierz J zdeÑniowan jako  
â
ã
Im  
0
J =  
:
(3)  
0
In  
Oznaczajc przez (; ) standardowy iloczyn skalarny  
àâ ã â ãá  
u
u0  
;
= uyu0 + vyv0;  
(4)  
(5)  
v
v0  
mamy  
< w; w0 >= «(w; J; w0); (w; w0 2 Xn;m):  
Denoting by Æ the hermitian conjugate with respect to the scalar product  
<; > we have:  
â
ãÆ  
â
ã
A B  
C D  
AÆ «CÆ  
=
;
(6)  
«BÆ DÆ  
where AÆ; BÆ; CÆ; DÆ are ordinary hermitian conjugates (complex conjugate,  
transpose).  
We denote by U(m; n) the group` of unitary matrices in Xm;n. If U =  
[
CA DB ] is in U(n; m), then UUÆ = UÆU = In+m; i.e.  
â
ãÆ â  
ã
â
ã â  
ã
â
ã
A B  
A B  
A B  
AÆ «CÆ  
In  
0
=
=
;
(7)  
(8)  
C D  
C D  
C D «BÆ DÆ  
0 Im  
or  
â
ã â  
ã
â
ã â  
ã
â
ã
AÆ «CÆ A B  
A B  
AÆ «CÆ  
In  
0
=
=
;
«BÆ DÆ  
C D  
C D «BÆ DÆ  
0 Im  
1
which entails:  
AÆA « CÆC = AAÆ « BBÆ = Im;  
DÆD « BÆB = DDÆ « CCÆ = In;  
(9)  
(10)  
(11)  
(12)  
AÆB « CÆD  
= 0  
; BDÆ « ACÆ  
= 0:  
From AÆA = I + CÆC and DÆD = I + BÆB it follows immediately that for  
a unitary matrix A and D are ivertible. We denote by SU(m; n) the group  
of unitary matrices with determinant 1: Notice that the following, easy to  
derive formula holds:  
àâ  
ãá  
A B  
det  
= det(A) det(D«CA«1B) = det(A«BD«1C) det(D): (13)  
C D  
1.1 Rozmaito n-wymiarowych podprzestrzeni dodat-  
nich  
Zbir wszystkich n-wymiarowych podprzestrzeni Xm;n tworzy tzw. rozmaito  
Grassmanna, lub Grassmannian. Nas interesuje podzbir tej rozmaitoci Grass-  
manna do ktrego nale te n-wymiarowe podprzestrzenie na ktrych iloczyn  
skalarny <; > jest dodatnio okrelony. Jedna z takich podprzestrzeni jest  
oczywista - to podprzestrze wektorw postaci [ v0 ] : Przypumy, e Z jest tak  
podprzesztrzeni. Chcemy scharkteryzowa ogln posta jej wektorw.  
Niech zatem [ uv ] 2 Z: Zauwamy, e dla niezerowego wektora z Z . v musi  
by rne od 0, inaczej iloczyn skalarny na Z byby ujemnie okrelony. Dalej,  
przy danym v, u jest jednosnacznie okreslone przez v. W istocie, gdyby [ uv ]  
u0  
i [ ] naleay do Z, to, poniewa Z jest podprzestrzeni liniow, rwnie ich rnica  
v
naleaaby do Z, ta rnica miaaby zerowe v, std cay wektor musiaby by zerowy,  
0
u(v)  
zatem u = u. Zatem wektory z Z s postaci [  
] : atwo zobaczy, e funkcja  
u(v) musi by liniowa. Istnieje zatem jedyna nÅvm macierz Z taka, e u = Zv.  
2

The Spin Chronicles (Part 4): spin up and down

This post is a continuation of " The Spin Chronicles (Part 3): Spin frames ". It is purely technical . This previ...