In the mathematically rigorous formulation of quantum mechanics, the state of a quantum mechanical system is a vector \psi belonging to a (
separable) complex
Hilbert space \mathcal H. This vector is postulated to be normalized under the Hilbert space inner product, that is, it obeys \langle \psi,\psi \rangle = 1, and it is well-defined up to a complex number of modulus 1 (the global phase), that is, \psi and e^{i\alpha}\psi represent the same physical system. In other words, the possible states are points in the
projective space of a Hilbert space, usually called the
complex projective space. The exact nature of this Hilbert space is dependent on the system – for example, for describing position and momentum the Hilbert space is the space of complex
square-integrable functions L^2(\mathbb C), while the Hilbert space for the
spin of a single proton is simply the space of two-dimensional complex vectors \mathbb C^2 with the usual inner product. In the continuous case, these formulas give instead the
probability density. After the
measurement, if result \lambda was obtained, the quantum state is postulated to
collapse to \vec\lambda, in the non-degenerate case, or to P_\lambda\psi\big/\! \sqrt{\langle \psi,P_\lambda\psi\rangle}, in the general case. The
probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics thus stems from the act of measurement. This is one of the most debated aspects of quantum theory, with different
interpretations of quantum mechanics giving radically different answers to questions regarding quantum-state collapse, as discussed
below.
Time evolution of a quantum state The time evolution of a quantum state is described by the Schrödinger equation: i\hbar {\frac {\partial}{\partial t}} \psi (t) =H \psi (t). Here H denotes the
Hamiltonian, the observable corresponding to the
total energy of the system, and \hbar is the reduced
Planck constant. The constant i\hbar is introduced so that the Hamiltonian is reduced to the
classical Hamiltonian in cases where the quantum system can be approximated by a classical system; the ability to make such an approximation in certain limits is called the
correspondence principle. The solution of this differential equation is given by \psi(t) = e^{-iHt/\hbar }\psi(0). The operator U(t) = e^{-iHt/\hbar } is known as the time-evolution operator, and has the crucial property that it is
unitary. This time evolution is
deterministic in the sense that – given an initial quantum state \psi(0) – it makes a definite prediction of what the quantum state \psi(t) will be at any later time. corresponding to the wave functions of an electron in a hydrogen atom possessing definite energy levels (increasing from the top of the image to the bottom:
n = 1, 2, 3, ...) and angular momenta (increasing across from left to right:
s,
p,
d, ...). Denser areas correspond to higher probability density in a position measurement.Such wave functions are directly comparable to
Chladni's figures of
acoustic modes of vibration in classical physics and are modes of oscillation as well, possessing a sharp energy and thus, a definite frequency. The
angular momentum and energy are
quantized and take only discrete values like those shown – as is the case for
resonant frequencies in acoustics. Some wave functions produce probability distributions that are independent of time, such as
eigenstates of the Hamiltonian. Many systems that are treated dynamically in classical mechanics are described by such "static" wave functions. For example, a single electron in an unexcited atom is pictured classically as a particle moving in a circular trajectory around the
atomic nucleus, whereas in quantum mechanics, it is described by a static wave function surrounding the nucleus. For example, the electron wave function for an unexcited hydrogen atom is a spherically symmetric function known as an
s orbital (
Fig. 1). Analytic solutions of the Schrödinger equation are known for
very few relatively simple model Hamiltonians including the
quantum harmonic oscillator, the
particle in a box, the
dihydrogen cation, and the
hydrogen atom. Even the
helium atom – which contains just two electrons – has defied all attempts at a fully analytic treatment, admitting no solution in
closed form. However, there are techniques for finding approximate solutions. One method, called
perturbation theory, uses the analytic result for a simple quantum mechanical model to create a result for a related but more complicated model by (for example) the addition of a weak
potential energy. Both position and momentum are observables, meaning that they are represented by
Hermitian operators. The position operator \hat{X} and momentum operator \hat{P} do not commute, but rather satisfy the
canonical commutation relation: [\hat{X}, \hat{P}] = i\hbar. Given a quantum state, the Born rule lets us compute expectation values for both X and P, and moreover for powers of them. Defining the uncertainty for an observable by a
standard deviation, we have \sigma_X={\textstyle \sqrt{\left\langle X^2 \right\rangle - \left\langle X \right\rangle^2}}, and likewise for the momentum: \sigma_P=\sqrt{\left\langle P^2 \right\rangle - \left\langle P \right\rangle^2}. The uncertainty principle states that \sigma_X \sigma_P \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}. Either standard deviation can in principle be made arbitrarily small, but not both simultaneously. This inequality generalizes to arbitrary pairs of self-adjoint operators A and B. The
commutator of these two operators is [A,B]=AB-BA, and this provides the lower bound on the product of standard deviations: \sigma_A \sigma_B \geq \tfrac12 \left|\bigl\langle[A,B]\bigr\rangle \right|. Another consequence of the canonical commutation relation is that the position and momentum operators are
Fourier transforms of each other, so that a description of an object according to its momentum is the Fourier transform of its description according to its position. The fact that dependence in momentum is the Fourier transform of the dependence in position means that the momentum operator is equivalent (up to an i/\hbar factor) to taking the derivative according to the position, since in Fourier analysis
differentiation corresponds to multiplication in the dual space. This is why in quantum equations in position space, the momentum p_i is replaced by -i \hbar \frac {\partial}{\partial x}, and in particular in the
non-relativistic Schrödinger equation in position space the momentum-squared term is replaced with a Laplacian times -\hbar^2. If the state for a composite system is entangled, it is impossible to describe either component system or system by a state vector. One can instead define
reduced density matrices that describe the statistics that can be obtained by making measurements on either component system alone. This necessarily causes a loss of information, though: knowing the reduced density matrices of the individual systems is not enough to reconstruct the state of the composite system. As described above, entanglement is a key feature of models of measurement processes in which an apparatus becomes entangled with the system being measured. Systems interacting with the environment in which they reside generally become entangled with that environment, a phenomenon known as
quantum decoherence. This can explain why, in practice, quantum effects are difficult to observe in systems larger than microscopic.
Equivalence between formulations There are many mathematically equivalent formulations of quantum mechanics. One of the oldest and most common is the "
transformation theory" proposed by
Paul Dirac, which unifies and generalizes the two earliest formulations of quantum mechanics –
matrix mechanics (invented by
Werner Heisenberg) and wave mechanics (invented by
Erwin Schrödinger). An alternative formulation of quantum mechanics is
Feynman's
path integral formulation, in which a quantum-mechanical amplitude is considered as a sum over all possible classical and non-classical paths between the initial and final states. This is the quantum-mechanical counterpart of the
action principle in classical mechanics.
Symmetries and conservation laws The Hamiltonian H is known as the
generator of time evolution, since it defines a unitary time-evolution operator U(t) = e^{-iHt/\hbar} for each value of t. From this relation between U(t) and H, it follows that any observable A that commutes with H will be conserved: its expectation value will not change over time. This statement generalizes, as mathematically, any Hermitian operator A can generate a family of unitary operators parameterized by a variable t. Under the evolution generated by A, any observable B that commutes with A will be conserved. Moreover, if B is conserved by evolution under A, then A is conserved under the evolution generated by B. This implies a quantum version of the result proven by
Emmy Noether in classical (
Lagrangian) mechanics: for every
differentiable symmetry of a Hamiltonian, there exists a corresponding
conservation law. == Examples ==