Quantum Fictitious Forces

I. BIALYNICKI-BIRULA 1 2 , M. A. CIRONE 2 , J. P. DAHL 2 3

,
T. H. SELIGMAN 4 , F. STRAUB 2 , W. P. SCHLEICH 2

Center for Theoretical Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences,

1

Al. Lotnikow 32/46, 02668 Warsaw, Poland

2
Abteilung fur Quantenphysik, Universitat Ulm,
D-89069 Ulm, Germany
3
Chemical Physics, Department of Chemistry,
Technical University of Denmark, DTU 207, DK2800 Lyngby, Denmark
4
Centro de Ciencias Fsicas, University of Mexico (UNAM), Cuernavaca, Mexico

Abstract: We present Heisenbergs equation of motion for the radial variable of a free
non-relativistic particle in D dimensions. The resulting radial force consists of three
contributions: (i) the quantum fictitious force which is either attractive or repulsive de-
pending on the number of dimensions, (ii) a singular quantum force located at the origin,
and (iii) the centrifugal force associated with non-vanishing angular momentum. More-
over, we use Heisenbergs uncertainty relation to introduce a lower bound for the kinetic
energy of an ensemble of neutral particles. This bound is quadratic in the number of
atoms and can be traced back to the repulsive quantum fictitious potential. All three
forces arise for a free particle: Force without force.

1 Three Pillars of Quantum Mechanics

This paper tries to lay the foundations for a quantum theoretical mechanics,
which is based solely on observable quantities. 1
reads the abstract of Heisenbergs fundamental paper [1] entitled On the quantum the-
oretical translation of kinematical and mechanical relations 2 . What an ambitious plan!
What a daring approach! What a dramatic departure from classical notions:
. . . we recall that in quantum theory it is not possible to associate with the
electron a point in space as a function of time. Nevertheless, in quantum theory,
we can also associate radiation with the electron: this radiation is first described
by the frequencies which appear to be functions of two variables . . . 3 .
1 Unless indicated differently, the English translation is always provided by the authors. The German original reads: In

der Arbeit soll versucht werden, Grundlagen zu gewinnen fur eine quantentheoretische Mechanik, die ausschlielich auf
Beziehungen zwischen prinzipiell beobachtbaren Groen basiert ist.
2 The original title is: Uber quantentheoretische Umdeutung kinematischer und mechanischer Beziehungen.
3 The German text reads: . . . mussen wir uns daran erinnern, da es in der Quantentheorie nicht moglich war, dem

Elektron einen Punkt im Raum als Funktion der Zeit mittels beobachtbarer Groen zuzuordnen. Wohl aber kann dem
Elektron auch in der Quantentheorie eine Ausstrahlung zugeordnet werden; diese Strahlung wird beschrieben erstens durch
die Frequenzen, die als Funktionen zweier Variablen auftreten . . .
With these lines matrix mechanics enters the stage of physics. At this moment Heisenberg
does not yet know that his quantities with two indices are matrices. However, he already
recognizes that two such quantities x(t) and y(t) do not necessarily commute in quantum
theory:
Whereas classically x(t)y(t) is always equal to y(t)x(t), this is in general not
necessarily the case in quantum theory. 4 .
The importance of the commutativity of matrices stands out most clearly in Heisenbergs
equation of motion

dA ih i
= H, A (1)
dt h
for an arbitrary operator A and the Hamiltonian H.
It is remarkable that this equation does not appear in Heisenbergs original paper [1]
submitted on July 29, 1925. It emerges for the first time in the paper On quantum
mechanics 5 by M. Born and P. Jordan [2] submitted on September 27, 1925. The
central role of (1) for quantum theory is emphasized in the Dreimanner Arbeit [3] and
by Heisenberg in his Chicago lectures [4] in the spring of 1929. In the first textbook [5]
on matrix mechanics by Born and Jordan it takes a slightly different form.
Another manifestation of the non-commutativity of matrices is the uncertainty relation
proposed by Heisenberg in his paper [6] entitled: The physical content of quantum
kinematics and mechanics 6 . Here the uncertainty relation does not take the familiar
form

q p h (2)
which now even appears on the stamp issued by the German postal service. Heisenberg
states:
Let q1 be the precision with which the value q is known . . . Let p1 be the precision
with which the value p is determinable . . . then, according to the elementary laws
of the Compton effect p1 and q1 stand in the relation

p1 q1 h. (3)
That this relation is a straightforward mathematical consequence of the rule
pq qp = h/(2i) will be shown below. 7
Two years later H. P. Robertson derived the generalized uncertainty relation [8]
1 h i
A B | h A, B i | (4)
2
for the standard deviations
4 The corresponding German original is: Wahrend klassisch x(t)y(t) stets gleich y(t)x(t) wird, braucht dies in der

Quantentheorie im allgemeinen nicht der Fall zu sein.

5 German original: Zur Quantenmechanik.
6 German title: Uber den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik. For the english

translation we refer to Ref.[7].

7 The German text reads: Sei q die Genauigkeit, mit der der Wert q bekannt ist, . . . p die Genauigkeit, mit der der
1 1
Wert p bestimmbar ist, . . . so stehen nach elementaren Formeln des Comptoneffekts p1 und q1 in der Beziehung p1 q1 h.
Da diese Beziehung in direkter mathematischer Verbindung mit der Vertauschungsrelation pq qp = h/(2i) steht, wird
spater gezeigt werden.
 q
A hA2 i hAi2 (5)
and
q
B hB 2 i hBi2 (6)
of two hermitian operators A and B.
Observables as noncommuting operators, time evolution from the commutation relations
with the Hamiltonian and the uncertainty relation summarize the essential ingredients of
consequences of quantum mechanics. They form the three pillars of our understanding of
the microscopic world form.

2 Outline of Paper
In a series of papers [9][13] we have shown that the quantum kinematics and dynam-
ics of a free particle strongly depends on the number D of dimensions accessible to the
particle. In particular, we have demonstrated [9] that a shell-like wave packet in two
space dimensions first implodes and then explodes. The corresponding wave packet in
three dimensions never implodes but only explodes. These phenomena are consequences
of the quantum fictitious force [10][12] which in 2D is attractive quantum anticentrifu-
gal force [10, 11] but which vanishes for 3D. Another consequence of this force is the
dimensional enhancement [12] of the kinetic energy of an ensemble of particles. Indeed,
for an appropriately prepared ensemble the kinetic energy of the total system is not pro-
portional to the total number N of particles but to N 2 . This effect which is reminiscent
of superradiance [14] is due to the fact that interference depends strongly on the number
of space dimensions [13]. This feature reflects itself in the quantum fictitious force which
for dimensions larger than three is always repulsive. Moreover, its strength is quadratic
in D.
So far our analysis has rested on the Schrodinger picture. In the present paper we use
the Heisenberg picture to shine new light on these phenomena. In particular, we discuss
Heisenbergs equation of motion for the radial coordinate. Moreover, we use the general-
ized uncertainty relation (4) to show that indeed the lower bound of the kinetic energy
depends on the square of the number of dimensions. Throughout the paper we do not
derive but rather motivate the results. The derivations are rather lengthy and will be
published elsewhere.
Our paper is organized as follows. In Sec. 3 we formulate the problem and then turn in
Sec. 4 to Heisenbergs equation of motion for the radial coordinate of a free particle in
D dimensions. We show that a part of the radial force arises from the quantum fictitious
potential which depends quadratically on D. In addition to this force there is one that is
nonzero only at the origin. It results from the singular nature of the radial variable at the
origin. Both forces are a consequence of the non-commutativity of position and momentum
and exist even when the total angular momentum vanishes. The third contribution is the
familiar quantummodified centrifugal force due to a non-vanishing angular momentum.
In Sec. 5 we turn to the problem of dimensional enhancement of kinetic energies. We
start from the commutation relation between the operators of the momentum p~ and the
radial unit vector ~er ~r/r in D dimensions and derive the corresponding generalized
uncertainty relation. This procedure allows us to put a lower bound on the total kinetic
energy which depends quadratically on D. In Sec. 6 we briefly summarize our results.
3 Formulation of Problem
It is quite amusing to realize that Heisenbergs equation of motion and the uncertainty
relation still hold surprises even for simple quantum systems. To bring this out most
clearly we focus on the motion of a free non-relativistic particle in D dimensions described
by the Hamiltonian

p~ 2 h2 (D)
H . (7)
2M 2M
Here M denotes the mass and the momentum
h ~ (D)
p~ (8)
i
is proportional to the Ddimensional gradient ~ (D) expressed in cartesian coordinates
x1 , . . . , xD giving rise to the Ddimensional Laplacian (D) .
Two questions immediately come to mind: (i) What is the physical significance of D > 3
dimensions? (ii) How could there be anything interesting in the physics of a free particle?
The answer to the first question lies in the fact that we interprete the D dimensional
hyper space of the quantum state of a single hypothetical particle as the configuration
space of two or more non-interacting real particles in one two or three dimensions. In this
way we arrive at D = d N where d denotes the dimensions of the space in which N
particles are allowed to move. Even when the particles do not interact with each other
they can be entangled, that is the total wave function does not separate into the individual
one-particle wave functions.
The answer to the second question rests on the special form of the state of the particle.
It is an s-wave, which depends only on the hyper radius
q
r x21 + x22 + . . . + x2D . (9)
Indeed, for such a choice of the wave function interesting effects occur as we show now.

4 Heisenbergs Equations of Motion

In this section we discuss the time evolution of the radial operator. In particular, we
present the operators M r and M r of the radial momentum and the force.

I. Radial Momentum Operator

We start our discussion by considering first the time evolution of the radial operator
q
r x21 + x22 + . . . + x2D . (10)
For this purpose we substitute the Hamiltonian (7) and the operator r into Heisenbergs
equation of motion (1) and arrive at
dr h 1 h (D) i
M = , r . (11)
dt i2
The action of the Laplacian on r creates a singularity at the origin. In order to keep track
of this singularity it is advantageous to introduce the quantity

r 2 + r 2 (12)
perform all calculations for non-zero values of and then let tend to zero.
This approach leads to the formula
!
dr h D1 h h 1 (D1)/2 h
M = + + D(r) = (D1)/2
r + D(r) (13)
dt i 2r r i ir r i
where

1 2
D(r) lim (14)
0 2 (2 + r 2 )3/2

is a distribution [15].
Hence, the time rate of change of the radial operator r consists of two parts: (i) The first
term is a differentiation with respect to the radial variable, (ii) the second contribution
is nonvanishing only at the origin and depends crucially on the number D of dimensions.

II. Radial Force Operator

We now turn to the second derivative of the radial variable, that is the radial acceleration.
When we apply again Heisenbergs equation of motion, that is

d2 r i 2h h ii h2 h (D) h (D) ii
= H, H, r = , , r (15)
dt2 h 4M 2
we arrive after a lengthy algebra at the quantum force

d2 r V (r)
M 2
F = + FQ (r) + Fl (r) (16)
dt r
in radial direction on a free particle. Here we have introduced the abbreviation

h2 (D 1)(D 3)
V (r) (17)
2M 4r2
for the quantum fictitious potential and the contribution
!
h2 D 1 D 2 D 1 D1
FQ (r) {2 + + 4 r D } (18)
2M r r r2 rD1 r r
is a combination of distributions [15].
The quantum modified centrifugal force

h2 1 2
Fl (r) lim{ } (19)
0 M (2 + r2 )1/2 r2
results from the square h2 2 of the angular momentum operator.
We emphasize that the first two terms are always present irrespective of the angular
momentum. Even for s-waves, that is for the case of a vanishing angular momentum, do
we find these two forces in the radial direction.
The potential V defined in (17) vanishes for D = 1 and D = 3 and is negative for D = 2.
Hence, for two dimensions we have an attractive potential, that is an attractive force.
It is due to this attractive force that a shell-like wave function in D = 2 1 = 2 space
dimensions first implodes and then explodes. Since in D = 3 1 = 3 dimensions the
potential and the quantum fictitious force vanishes no such effect exists for this choice of
space.
For D 4 the potential is positive and the corresponding force is repulsive. This feature
would be easy to understand if the angular momentum were non-zero. Indeed, in this case
there would be a centrifugal force pushing the particles apart. However, we emphasize that
this force is present irrespective of angular momentum. Moreover, it depends quadratically
on the number D of dimensions. It becomes important for a large ensemble of particles
where D = d N with 1 N gives rise to the dimensional enhancement [12] of kinetic
energy discussed in the next section.
Moreover, we recognize that due to the term FQ the radial force depends on the behaviour
of the wave function at the origin. Indeed, the distributions in FQ focus on the properties
of the wave function, such as the values of the function and its derivatives at the origin.
This term is the reason why a Gaussian initial wave function does not display the implosion
effect but a wave function with a hole at the origin, such as a Gaussian multiplied by r2
does [9].

5 Dimensional Enhancement of Kinetic Energy

We now show that under appropriate conditions the average kinetic energy of N non-
interacting free particles increases quadratically with N . Here we again assume that the
particles move in a d-dimensional space. Hence, the wave function lives in a D = d N
dimensional hyper space.

I. Lower Bound for Kinetic Energy

We first recall the commutation relation
h i h D 1 h
p~, ~er = p~ ~er ~er p~ = + 2 D(r) (20)
i r i
between the momentum operator p~ and the unit vector ~er ~r/r in radial direction.
When we substitute this expression into the right-hand side of the generalized uncer-
tainty relation (4) and focus on wave functions that behave at the origin such that the
distribution D cannot make a contribution we arrive at

h2 2
(~p ) ~er
2
(D 1)2 hr1 i2 . (21)
4
We emphasize that in this derivation we have used a slight generalization of the generalized
uncertainty relation (4). In Robertsons formulation the operators A and B are scalars,
whereas in our case they are vectors. Nevertheless, Robertsons derivation holds true.
Due to the isotropy of the s-wave we find for the variances

(~p )2 = h~p 2 i h~p i2 = h~p 2 i (22)

and
2
~er = h~er 2 i h~er i2 = h~er 2 i = h1i = 1. (23)
In the last step we have assumed that the state is normalized.
Hence, we arrive at the inequality

h2
hp~ 2 i (D 1)2 hr1 i2 (24)
4
which implies for the average kinetic energy
N 2
p~ 2 X p~ h2 (D 1)2 1 2 1
Ekin h i h j i hr i (D 1)2 E0 (25)
2M j=1 2M 2M 4 4
where we have introduced the energy

h2 1 2
E0
hr i . (26)
2M
When we recall that D = d N and take the limit of large number of particles, that is,
N 1, this inequality takes the form
1 1
Ekin (dN 1)2 E0 d2 N 2 E0 (27)
4 4
Hence, the lower bound of the average kinetic energy is determined by the square of the
number d of space dimensions and the square of the number N of particles.

II. Examples of Wave Functions

Unfortunately the inequality (27) is slightly misleading since it gives the impression that
the quadratic dependence is independent of the form of the wave function. Indeed, the
energy E0 depends on the dimensions of hyper space through the expectation value of
1/r.

II..1. Thermodynamic case

We illustrate this statement for a Gaussian wave function
" 2 #
1 1 r
(r) = N exp . (28)
S (D) 2 r
q
Here N 2/(D/2) rD/2 is the normalization constant arising from the condition
Z Z
1= drrD1 d(D) | (r) |2 (29)
0
R
and S (D) d(D) denotes the surface of the Ddimensional unit sphere. The quantity
r is a measure of the width of the Gaussian. For the special choice of the Gaussian
wavepacket (28) the expectation value hr1 i takes the form
Z " 2 #
1 r 1 ( D1 )
h i = N2 drr(D2) exp = 2
D . (30)
r 0 r r ( 2 )
where denotes the Gamma function.
With the help of the Stirling formula [16]

(z)
= ez z z1/2 2 (31)
we find for D = dN 1 the asymptotic formula
s
( D1
2
) 2
D = (32)
( 2 ) D
which yields the expression
s
1 1 2
h i' . (33)
r r D
for the expectation value.
When we substitute this result into the expression (26) for the minimal energy we find
from the inequality (27)

h2 1 D
Ekin . (34)
2M r2 2
From this analysis we recognize that the square of the expectation value cancels a power
D in the lower bound creating only a linear dependence in D.
It is interesting to note that for the Gaussian wave function (28) the average kinetic energy
satisfies the equal sign as shown in [12]. In this case the kinetic energy is proportional to
the number of particles in complete agreement with thermodynamics.

II..2. Enhancement case

In contrast, the wave function
h i

1 exp 12 r
+ r
(r) = N (D1)/2
(35)
S (D) r
with the two parameters and has a normalization constant N which according to (29)
is determined by the condition
Z " !#
2
1=N dr exp + r . (36)
0 r
and is therefore independent of D. Hence, the expectation value
Z " !#
1 2 1
h i=N dr exp + r (37)
r 0 r r
is independent of D. The lower bound for the kinetic energy given by (25) and (27)
depends quadratically on the number of particles.

6 Conclusions
Quantum mechanics has come a long way. From Heisenbergs deep insight that it is
not the individual Bohr orbits in the atom that matter but their transition frequencies
giving rise to matrices and a noncommutative algebra, via the uncertainty relation to the
formalism we apply today. More than 75 years have passed since Heisenbergs lonely night
at Helgoland giving birth to his fundamental paper. Despite its age and the multitude
of examples quantum mechanics is still full of surprises and open questions. Here we do
not allude to the question of the measurement process or the recent most sophisticated
developments of quantum communication, quantum computing or quantum cryptography.
Even the most elementary system of a free particle in D dimensions can display surprising
features as discussed in this paper and best summarized in the spirit of J. A. Wheeler
by the phrase: Force without force. We are confident that the wonders of quantum
mechanics will never cease to exist.

7 Acknowledgements
We thank G. Alber, M. V. Berry, J. Botero, A. Delgado, M. Fedorov, R. Glauber, D.
Greenberger, M. J. W. Hall, R. F. OConnell, G. Metikas, W. C. Schieve, G. Sumann,
E. C. G. Sudarshan, S. Varro, K. Vogel and J. A. Wheeler for many fruitful discussions.
Moreover, we are grateful to the HumboldtStiftung for organizing this splendid and
stimulating conference in honor of W. Heisenberg. I. B.B., J. P. D. and T. S. acknowledge
the most generous support of the HumboldtStiftung which made this work possible. M.
A. C. and W. P. S. acknowledge financial support from the network QUEST, HPRN-
CT-2000-00121, of the IHP program of the European Union.

References
[1] W. HEISENBERG, Z. Phys. 33, 879 (1925).
[2] M. BORN and P. JORDAN, Z. Phys. 34, 858 (1925).
[3] M. BORN, W. HEISENBERG, and P. JORDAN, Z. Phys. 35, 557 (1926).
[4] W. HEISENBERG, The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory (University of
Chicago Press, Chicago, 1930) (reprinted in an unabridged and unaltered version by
Dover, New York, 1949).
[5] M. BORN and P. JORDAN, Elementare Quantenmechanik (Zweiter Band der Vor-
lesungen uber Atommechanik) (Springer, Berlin, 1930).
[6] W. HEISENBERG, Z. Phys. 43, 172 (1927).
[7] J. A. WHEELER and W. H. ZUREK, Quantum Theory and Measurement (Princeton
University Press, Princeton, 1983).
[8] H. P. ROBERTSON, Phys. Rev. 34, 163 (1929).
[9] I. BIALYNICKIBIRULA, M. A. CIRONE, J. P. DAHL, M. FEDOROV and W. P.
SCHLEICH, Phys. Rev. Lett. (submitted).
[10] M. A. CIRONE, G. METIKAS and W. P. SCHLEICH, Z. Naturforsch. A 56, 48
(2001).
[11] M. A. CIRONE, K. RZAZEWSKI, W. P. SCHLEICH, F. STRAUB and J. A.
WHEELER, Phys. Rev. A 65, 022101 (2002).
[12] W. P. SCHLEICH and J. P. DAHL, Phys. Rev. A (submitted).
[13] M. A. CIRONE, J. P. DAHL, M. FEDOROV, D. GREENBERGER and W. P.
SCHLEICH, J. Phys. B 35, 191 (2002).
[14] R. H. DICKE, Phys. Rev. 93, 99 (1954).
[15] I. M. GELFAND and G. E. SHILOV, Generalized Functions (Academic Press, New
York, 1964).
[16] M. ABRAMOWITZ and I. A. STEGUN, Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Dover
Publications, New York, 1965).