Theory of Quantum History Entangled in Time-like Direction
<Previous Page | 1 | 2
SourceCodeOf_HumanGenome > Line Integral in Function Space @ 2013/5/26 16:32 |
---|
ξ(□, x) represents a function which
is a point in the function space for each x. So, ξ is a parametric representation of a line in the function space, and x is a parameter of it. By thinking of t as an index of a coordinate in the function space, η(x) = √{α∫dt [∂ξ(t,x)/∂x]2} is understood as ds/dx where ds is the length of a line element. η(x) is chosen to be 1 in the definition of the probability formula. [dar(f; a, a + 1/α)]pre Φ[χ] = ∫dx η(x) f(x)* Φ[ξ(□,x)] = ∫dx f(x)* Φ[ξ(□,x)] --- Last edited at 2013/05/31/17:34JST |
Edit Delete Reply |
SourceCodeOf_HumanGenome > Twist Remove Normalization @ 2013/5/27 11:23 |
---|
I suppose that a general definition
of the twist remove normalization for a functional Φ is
given by the condition: ∫Dχ Φ[χ]* Φ[χ] = 1, (d/dε) ∫Dχ Φ[χ]* Φ[χ(□ - ε)] |ε = 0 = 0, where χ(□ - ε) is a function such that [χ(□ - ε)](t) = χ(t - ε) for all t. Possibly, a general definition of the twist remove normalization for a functional Φ is given by the condition: ∫Dχ Φ[χ]* Φ[χ] = 1, limε → 0 ∫Dχ Φ[χ]* Φ[χ(□ - ε)] = 1 because the phase factor exp[-⊿t(i/h)<j|H]|j>] in Problems in Grammatical Physics > Quantum Field Theory on the Time-Axis > Quadratic Formula corresponds not to (d/dε) ∫Dχ Φ[χ]* Φ[χ(□ - ε)] |ε = 0 but to limε → 0 ∫Dχ Φ[χ]* Φ[χ(□ - ε)]. Possibly, the twist remove normalization may not be necessary for Φ in the case that we use exp∫dt instead of Πt. --- Last edited at 2013/05/28/16:05JST |
Edit Delete Reply |
SourceCodeOf_HumanGenome > Examine Probability Formula @ 2013/5/28 16:29 |
---|
Φ[χ] = Σj exp[α∫dt
φj(χ(t), t)], [dar(f; a, a + 1/α)]pre Φ[χ] = ∫dx f(x)* Φ[ξ(□, x)] = ∫dx f(x)* Σj exp[α∫dt φj(ξ(t, x), t)] = Σj ∫dx f(x)* exp[α∫aa+1/α dt φj(x, t)] exp[α∫t'<a or t'≧a+1/α dt' φj(χ(t'), t')] dar(f; a, a + 1/α) Φ[χ(a,a+1/α)] = [dar(f; a, a + 1/α)]pre Φ[χ] = Σj ∫dx f(x)* exp[α∫aa+1/α dt φj(x, t)] exp[α∫t'<a or t'≧a+1/α dt' φj(χ(t'), t')] = Σj ∫dx f(x)* exp[α∫aa+1/α dt φj(x, t)] exp[α∫-∞a dt' φj(χ(a,a+1/α)(t'), t') + α∫a∞ dt' φj(χ(a,a+1/α)(t'), t'+1/α)] ≒ Σj ∫dx f(x)* exp φj(x, a) exp[ Σk<0 φj(χ(a,a+1/α)(a + k/α), a + k/α) + Σk≧0 φj(χ(a,a+1/α)(a + k/α), a + (k + 1)/α)] ∵ α ≫ 1 dar(f; a, a + 1/α) Φ[χ] ≒ Σj ∫dx f(x)* exp φj(x, a) exp[ Σk<0 φj(χ(a + k/α), a + k/α) + Σk≧0 φj(χ(a + k/α), a + (k + 1)/α)] Let exp φj be a solution of the old Schrodinger equation for each j. Let {exp φ1(□, t), exp φ2(□, t), ・・・} be an orthonormal basis of the state space of the old quantum mechanics for each t. ∫Dχ dar(g; b, b + 1/α) Φ[χ]・{dar(f; a, a + 1/α) Φ[χ]}* ≒ Σj,j' [Πk∫dχ(a+k/α)] ∫dx' g(x')* exp φj'(x', b) exp[ Σk'<0 φj'(χ(b + k'/α), b + k'/α) + Σk'≧0 φj'(χ(b + k'/α), b + (k' + 1)/α)] {∫dx f(x)* exp φj(x, a) exp[ Σk<0 φj(χ(a + k/α), a + k/α) + Σk≧0 φj(χ(a + k/α), a + (k + 1)/α)]}* = Σj,j' ∫dx' g(x')* exp φj'(x', b) ∫dx f(x) [exp φj(x, a)]* Πk<0 ∫dχ(a+k/α) [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + k/α)]* [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + k/α)] Π0≦k<α(b-a) ∫dχ(a+k/α) [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + (k + 1)/α)]* [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + k/α)] Πk≧α(b-a) ∫dχ(a+k/α) [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + k/α)]* [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + k/α)] = Σj,j' ∫dx' g(x')* exp φj'(x', b) ∫dx f(x) [exp φj(x, a)]* (δj,j')∞ Π0≦k<α(b-a) ∫dχ(a+k/α) [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + (k + 1)/α)]* [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + k/α)] = Σj <g|j,b><j,a|f> Π0≦k<α(b-a) <j,a+(k+1)/α|j,a+k/α> ≒ Σj <g|j,b><j,a|f> ∵ ※ = Σj <g|U(b,a)|j,a><j,a|f> = <g|U(b,a)|f> if α(b - a) ∈ N. ---※--- Π0≦k<α(b-a) ∫dχ(a+k/α) [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + (k + 1)/α)]* [exp φj(χ(a + k/α), a + k/α)] = Π0≦k<α(b-a) <j,a+(k+1)/α|j,a+k/α> ≒ Π0≦k<α(b-a) <j,a+k/α|j,a+k/α> ∵the twist remove normalization = <j,a|j,a>α(b-a) = 1 --- However, notice that the new grammar version of the Schrödinger equation has no solution such that Φ[χ] = Σj exp[α∫dt φj(χ(t), t)]. A few approximations caused by the finiteness of α shift the result from the one in the old quantum mechanics. Such an approximation is not needed if α is infinity. I don't think that it is a prediction of the new theory distinct from the old quantum mechanics. I think that it should be understood as the fact that a quantum history and a measurement are less related to each other than in the old quantum mechanics. A prediction of the new theory distinct from the old quantum mechanics will be caused by the entanglement of a quantum history in a time-like direction. --- Last edited at 2013/06/03/16:48JST |
Edit Delete Reply |
<Previous Page | 1 | 2