 |  |
Astron. Astrophys. 337, 299-310 (1998)
2. Quantum probability and complex wavefunctions
Nottale's major statement is that the CPSS trajectories become
nondifferentiable (and hence fractal) after their very short inverse
Lyapounov exponent of about 5 Myr, thus forcing one to jump to a
probabilistic description à-la-Born/Schroedinger
(Nottale, 1993). This link between nondifferentiable particle
trajectories (explicitely involving, or not, fractal space-time) and
the Schroedinger equation, first pioneered by Feynman (Feynman &
Hibbs, 1965), and shortly after followed by (amongst others) Nelson
(1966), Abbot & Wise (1981), Ord (1983), Nottale (1989), Sornette
(1990), is indeed a crucial progress in the conceptual frame of the
Schroedinger equation, for it opens the possibility of applying the
basic quantum rules, and amongst them the orbit and/or energy
quantization formulas, to dynamical systems, the dimensions, energy
and action of which lie far from those of the microscopical world.
Schroedinger's equation is no longer restricted to atoms. It may
concern much larger dynamical systems, such as astronomical systems in
the present case.
Note that, recently, this link between the Schroedinger equation
and fractal trajectories has been strengthened, although the two were
not equated (Hermann, 1997).
2.1. Continuity equation
The question we wish to address in the present paper is the
following: once we have the CPSS Schroedinger equation, what does it
mean? How does the key-concept of quantum probability enter
macroscopic quantization? Nottale's Scale-Relativity theory proposes
that matter concentrates where the infinite set of geodesics of the
fractal space-time get denser. Quantitatively, he relates this
statement to the so-called Madelung-Bohm-DeBroglie equation of
continuity (Madelung, 1926; Bohm, 1952a,b, 1953; DeBroglie, 1956;
Nelson, 1966; Nottale, 1993, 1996a,b, 1997) which is but the imaginary
part of the Schroedinger equation:
![[EQUATION]](img29.gif)
once its wavefunction solution is assumed complex-valued:
![[EQUATION]](img30.gif)
The quantity is Nottale's geodesics density,
while µ is the (reduced, in the case of a central-field
problem) particle mass. Making use of the continuity equation Eq. (1)
in order to confirm the identification of with
a probability density, as Nottale does, is indeed very attractive and
has been proposed by numerous authors (see Holland, 1993 for an
extensive review). The pioneering works originate from Bohm et al.'s
classical (causal) statistical interpretation of QM that has the dual
sense of the probability distribution of the initial conditions
characterizing an ensemble of particle trajectories in the
configuration space, as well as of a real `quantum-potential' field
present in a single experiment (Bohm, 1952a,b, 1953; Bohm &
Vigier, 1954; DeBroglie, 1956, Holland, 1993). However this
statistical interpretation was criticized by Keller (1953) and Pauli
(1953) amongst others, who showed that Eq. (1) is indeed a necessary
condition for to be a quantum probability
density of the classical statistical type, but not a sufficient
one.
2.2. Divergence of for stationary states
There is another serious difficulty related to the identification
of with a probability density, and it is the
following. In the case of a stationary and separable quantum state,
the quantity where is
defined by Eq. (2) and is not
integrable. It diverges to infinity at the boundaries of the system
(Reinisch, 1994; 1997). This divergence emphasizes the ambiguity of
the probabilistic Born postulate of QM which has given rise to many of
the conceptual difficulties associated with the subject (Rae, 1992).
Indeed, while on the one hand this postulate yields as a general
statement that is the density of probability to
find the particle at a given position (Born, 1926), on the other hand,
the Born probability density is rather than
in the case of stationary and separable quantum
systems that ultimately reduce to 1-dimensional Schroedinger
eigenproblems, precisely for the sake of normalization of the
probability density (Reinisch, 1994; 1997).
Tackling this problem actually amounts to recovering Einstein's
definition of a real understanding of quantum physics, namely
that the probabilistic description of the whole quantum process should
naturally (i.e. self-consistently ) emerge from the `complete'
dynamical description of the system itself (Pais, 1982). In our
opinion, there is no doubt that, whereas this point of view opened
sophisticated debates in quantum microphysics by the endless
controversy between the Copenhagen interpretation of QM and its causal
alternative (Einstein & Born, 1969), it is the clue to any
convincing macro-Schroedinger model of chaos. Hence the credo of our
present approach: if it is macro-Schroedinger, then it
should be possible to tell it in classical terms.
2.3. Schroedinger equation's irregular eigenmode
The goal of the present paper is to tentatively resolve the
conflict between the Schroedinger equation and CM on the scale of the
Solar System. The argument is that the Schroedinger spectrum is also
the spectrum of the nonlinear Madelung system that is obtained from
the Schroedinger equation by choosing an ansatz solution of the type
Eq. (2) and then separating the real and imaginary parts (Madelung,
1926). The corresponding system of two coupled Ordinary Differential
Equations (ODE's) yields a single nonlinear second-order ODE, known as
the Ermakov-Milne-Pinney (EMP) equation (Ermakov, 1880; Milne, 1930;
Pinney, 1950), in the stationary and separable case (Reinisch, 1994;
1997). This EMP equation is related to the linear second-order
Schroedinger eigenproblem by a nonlinear superposition formula making
use of the fundamental set of solutions of Schroedinger's equation
(Milne, 1930; Common & Musette, 1997). Indeed, to each normalized
(regular) eigenfunction of the discrete
Schroedinger spectrum that is labeled by the (main) quantum number
N, there exists a second linearly independent solution
to the same eigenvalue ,
which is, however, non-normalizable, or `irregular' (Richter &
Wuensche, 1996). We show that this irregular solution
(which is divergent to infinity at the
boundaries of the system) allows us to give a
clear local classical statistical sense in terms of the time interval
that is spent by the system between two spheres of radius r and
, although the quantity
obviously diverges at the boundaries of the system since
. Note that such a simple classical statistical
meaning of has been suggested by White (1931;
1934) in the early thirties.
2.4. Schroedinger equation's Hamilton-Jacobi dynamics
Therefore the present theory makes an extensive use of this
irregular Schroedinger solution that is
completely discarded in the `standard' (i.e. Schroedinger-Born)
interpretation of QM. However there is a strong tendency in the very
recent literature to re-introduce these irregular Schroedinger
solutions in the investigation of the properties of the discrete
(Richter & Wuensche, 1996; Leonhardt & Raymer, 1996) as well
as of the continuum (Leonhardt & Schneider, 1997) energy
spectrum.
The technical interest of taking into account the fundamental set
of solutions to the Schroedinger equation is that one can build the
general wavefunction solution of the type Eq. (2) as
. This yields the phase shift
that is related to the actual momentum field
by use of the classical Hamilton-Jacobi
equation. Therefore, to each value in the
configuration space that parametrizes the `trajectory' of the system
in the plane, there exists the polar angle
that unambiguously defines the actual momentum
field . And the classical (i.e. causal) dynamics
that is derived from this momentum field allows us to give
its local classical statistical meaning which,
thus, extrapolates Born's postulate to the case where
is not integrable.
2.5. Schroedinger equation's new parameter
The constant Wronskian A of the fundamental set of solutions
appears to be the fundamental new
parameter of the present theory. It is independent of the
energy eigenvalue and its choice, as a mere
constant of integration, is free. Its actual physical dimension is a
matter flux. It has been shown (Reinisch, 1994; 1997) that standard
microphysics amounts to taking . On the other
hand, the present paper shows that the value
(in appropriate reduced units) corresponds to the macro-Schroedinger
CM.
One might wonder whether the present theory is not a mere remake of
the several Madelung-Bohm-DeBroglie hydrodynamical pictures of QM (see
Holland, 1993, for an extensive account of these theories). The answer
is clearly negative, for there is a crucial difference between
all these stationary hydrodynamical theories and the present
one. In the case of the Kepler problem, for instance, Madelung et al.
assume (Holland, 1993). Then
and there is no irregular mode in the
corresponding Madelung description. Therefore this latter trivially
degenerates into the standard Schroedinger eigenproblem related to the
single remaining regular eigenfunction . As a
consequence, the classical dynamical information that is provided by
the gradient of the phase is lost and,
in order to replace it, one is then forced to artificially
introduce Born's postulate like a sort of deus ex machina
(Reinisch, 1994). On the other hand, when the Wronskian A is
non-zero, it can be shown that the Born postulate can indeed be
recovered by the purely classical interpretation of the steady-state
matter-flow dynamics that is related to the momentum field
(Reinisch, 1997). Therefore the Born postulate
is actually contained in the non-degenerated ( )
Madelung system.
Let us stress as a final remark that the Madelung-DeBroglie-Bohm
"causal" description which is used in the present paper is rigorously
equivalent to the complex Hamilton-Jacobi equation that is provided by
Nottale's Scale Relativity theory, although their conceptual
foundations are quite different. Indeed, while the former makes use of
real quantities (amplitude and action S)
in the complex description (Eq. (2)) of the wave function
, the latter simply assumes
and S complex. The interest of such a
formal complex action is its gradient. It yields a complex momentum
field which, in turn, defines the complex covariant derivative
operator associated with the scale covariance postulate (Nottale,
1997; Pissondes, 1997).
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1998
Online publication: August 6, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |