Why must we work in the phase space?

We are going to prove that the phase-space description is fundamental both in the classical and quantum physics. It is shown that many problems in statistical mechanics, quantum mechanics, quasi-classical theory and in the theory of integrable systems may be well-formulated only in the phase-space language.Comment: 130 page

Coherent States Measurement Entropy

Coherent states (CS) quantum entropy can be split into two components. The dynamical entropy is linked with the dynamical properties of a quantum system. The measurement entropy, which tends to zero in the semiclassical limit, describes the unpredictability induced by the process of a quantum approximate measurement. We study the CS--measurement entropy for spin coherent states defined on the sphere discussing different methods dealing with the time limit $n \to \infty$. In particular we propose an effective technique of computing the entropy by iterated function systems. The dependence of CS--measurement entropy on the character of the partition of the phase space is analysed.Comment: revtex, 22 pages, 14 figures available upon request (e-mail: [email protected]). Submitted to J.Phys.

Perspectives: Quantum Mechanics on Phase Space

The basic ideas in the theory of quantum mechanics on phase space are illustrated through an introduction of generalities, which seem to underlie most if not all such formulations and follow with examples taken primarily from kinematical particle model descriptions exhibiting either Galileian or Lorentzian symmetry. The structures of fundamental importance are the relevant (Lie) groups of symmetries and their homogeneous (and associated) spaces that, in the situations of interest, also possess Hamiltonian structures. Comments are made on the relation between the theory outlined and a recent paper by Carmeli, Cassinelli, Toigo, and Vacchini.Comment: "Quantum Structures 2004" - Meeting of the International Quantum Structures Association; Denver, Colorado; 17-22 July, 200

On Locality in Quantum General Relativity and Quantum Gravity

The physical concept of locality is first analyzed in the special relativistic quantum regime, and compared with that of microcausality and the local commutativity of quantum fields. Its extrapolation to quantum general relativity on quantum bundles over curved spacetime is then described. It is shown that the resulting formulation of quantum-geometric locality based on the concept of local quantum frame incorporating a fundamental length embodies the key geometric and topological aspects of this concept. Taken in conjunction with the strong equivalence principle and the path-integral formulation of quantum propagation, quantum-geometric locality leads in a natural manner to the formulation of quantum-geometric propagation in curved spacetime. Its extrapolation to geometric quantum gravity formulated over quantum spacetime is described and analyzed.Comment: Mac-Word file translated to postscript for submission. The author may be reached at: [email protected] To appear in Found. Phys. vol. 27, 199

Wigner function for twisted photons

A comprehensive theory of the Weyl-Wigner formalism for the canonical pair angle-angular momentum is presented, with special emphasis in the implications of rotational periodicity and angular-momentum discreteness.Comment: 6 pages, 4 figure

On central atoms of Archimedean atomic lattice effect algebras

summary:If element $z$ of a lattice effect algebra $(E,\oplus, {\mathbf 0}, {\mathbf 1})$ is central, then the interval $[{\mathbf 0},z]$ is a lattice effect algebra with the new top element $z$ and with inherited partial binary operation $\oplus$. It is a known fact that if the set $C(E)$ of central elements of $E$ is an atomic Boolean algebra and the supremum of all atoms of $C(E)$ in $E$ equals to the top element of $E$, then $E$ is isomorphic to a direct product of irreducible effect algebras ([16]). In [10] Paseka and Riečanová published as open problem whether $C(E)$ is a bifull sublattice of an Archimedean atomic lattice effect algebra $E$. We show that there exists a lattice effect algebra $(E,\oplus, {\mathbf 0}, {\mathbf 1})$ with atomic $C(E)$ which is not a bifull sublattice of $E$. Moreover, we show that also $B(E)$, the center of compatibility, may not be a bifull sublattice of $E$