**Preliminary note**: This post may cause brain damage. š If you haven’t worked yourself through a good introduction to physics – including the math – you will probably not understand what this is about. So… Well… Sorry. š¦ But if you *have*… Then this should be *very* interesting. Let’s go. š

If you know one or two things about quantum math – SchrĆ¶dinger’s equation and all that – then you’ll agree the math is anything but straightforward. Personally, I find the most annoying thing about wavefunction math are those transformation matrices: every time we look at the same thing from a different direction, we need to transform the wavefunction using one or more rotation matrices – and that gets quite complicated !

Now, if you have read any of my posts on this or my other blog, then you know I firmly believe the wavefunction represents somethingĀ *real*Ā or… Well… Perhaps it’s just the next best thing to reality: we cannot know *das Ding an sich*, but the wavefunction gives us everything we would want to know about it (linear or angular momentum, energy, and whatever else we have an *operator* for). So what am I thinking of? Let me first quote Feynman’s summary interpretation ofĀ SchrĆ¶dinger’s equationĀ (*Lectures*, III-16-1):

āWe can think of SchrĆ¶dingerās equation as describing the diffusion of the probability amplitude from one point to the next. [ā¦] But the imaginary coefficient in front of the derivative makes the behavior completely different from the ordinary diffusion such as you would have for a gas spreading out along a thin tube. Ordinary diffusion gives rise to real exponential solutions, whereas the solutions of SchrĆ¶dingerās equation are complex waves.ā

Feynman further formalizes this in his *Lecture on Superconductivity *(Feynman, III-21-2), in which he refers to SchrĆ¶dingerās equation as the āequation for continuity of probabilitiesā. His analysis there is centered on the *local *conservation of energy, which makes *me* think SchrĆ¶dingerās equation might be an energy diffusion equation. I’ve written about thisĀ *ad nauseamĀ *in the past, and so I’ll just refer you to one of my papers here for the details, and limit this post to the basics, which are as follows.

The wave equation (so that’s SchrĆ¶dinger’s equation in its non-relativistic form, which is an approximation that is good enough)Ā isĀ written as:The resemblance with the standard diffusion equation (shown below) is, effectively, very obvious:As Feynman notes, it’s just that imaginary coefficient that makes the behavior quite different.Ā *HowĀ *exactly? Well… You know we get all of those complicated electron orbitals (i.e. the various wave *functionsĀ *that satisfy the equation) out of SchrĆ¶dinger’s differential equation. We can think of these solutions as (complex)Ā *standing waves*. They basically represent someĀ *equilibriumĀ *situation, and the main characteristic of each is theirĀ *energy level*. I won’t dwell on this because – as mentioned above – I assume you master the math. Now, you know that – if we would want to interpret these wavefunctions as something real (which is surely whatĀ *IĀ *want to do!) – the real and imaginary component of a wavefunction will be perpendicular to each other. Let me copy the animation for theĀ *elementaryĀ *wavefunction Ļ(Īø) =Ā *aĀ·e*^{āiāĪø}Ā =Ā *aĀ·e*^{āiā(E/Ä§)Ā·t}Ā *= a*Ā·cos[(E/Ä§)āt]Ā *ā**Ā i*Ā·aĀ·sin[(E/Ä§)āt] once more:

So… Well… That 90Ā° angle makes me think of the similarity with the mathematical description of an electromagnetic wave. Let me quickly show you why. For a particle moving in free space ā with no external force fields acting on it ā there is no potential (U = 0) and, therefore, the VĻ term – which is just the equivalent of the theĀ *sinkĀ *or *sourceĀ *term S in the diffusion equation – disappears. Therefore, SchrĆ¶dingerās equation reduces to:

āĻ(**x**, t)/āt =Ā *i*Ā·(1/2)Ā·(Ä§/m_{eff})Ā·ā^{2}Ļ(**x**, t)

Now, the key difference with the diffusion equation – let me write it for you once again: āĻ(**x**, t)/āt = DĀ·ā^{2}Ļ(**x**, t) – is thatĀ SchrĆ¶dingerās equation gives usĀ *twoĀ *equations for the price of one. Indeed, because Ļ is a complex-valued function, with aĀ *realĀ *and anĀ *imaginaryĀ *part, we get the following equations:

*Re*(āĻ/āt) = ā(1/2)Ā·(Ä§/m_{eff})Ā·*Im*(ā^{2}Ļ)*Im*(āĻ/āt) = (1/2)Ā·(Ä§/m_{eff})Ā·*Re*(ā^{2}Ļ)

** Huh?Ā **Yes. These equations are easily derived from noting that two complex numbers a +Ā

*i*āb and c +Ā

*i*ād are equal if, and

*only*if, their real and imaginary parts are the same. Now, the āĻ/āt =Ā

*i*ā(Ä§/m

_{eff})āā

^{2}Ļ equation amounts to writing something like this: a +Ā

*i*āb =Ā

*i*ā(c +Ā

*i*ād). Now, remembering thatĀ

*i*

^{2}Ā = ā1, you can easily figure out thatĀ

*i*ā(c +Ā

*i*ād) =Ā

*i*āc +Ā

*i*

^{2}ād = ā d +Ā

*i*āc. [Now that we’re getting a bit technical, let me note that theĀ m

_{eff}is the

*effective*mass of the particle, which depends on the medium. For example, an electron traveling in a solid (a transistor, for example) will have a different effective mass than in an atom. In free space, we can drop the subscript and just write m

_{eff}= m.] š OK.Ā

*Onwards !Ā*š

The equations above make me think of the equations for an electromagnetic wave in free space (no stationary charges or currents):

- ā
**B**/āt = āāĆ**E** - ā
**E**/āt =Ā*c*^{2}āĆ**B**

Now, these equations – and, I must therefore assume, the other equations above as well – effectively describe a *propagation *mechanism in spacetime, as illustrated below:

You know how it works for the electromagnetic field: it’s the interplay between circulation and flux. Indeed, circulation around some axis of rotation creates a flux in a direction perpendicular to it, and that flux causes this, and then that, and it all goes round and round and round. š Something like that. š I will let you look up how it goes,Ā *exactly*. The principle is clear enough.Ā Somehow, in this beautiful interplay between linear and circular motion, energy is borrowed from one place and then returns to the other, cycle after cycle.

Now, we know the wavefunction consist of a sine and a cosine: the cosine is the real component, and the sine is the imaginary component. Could they be equally real? Could each represent *half *of the total energy of our particle? I firmly believe they do. The obvious question then is the following: why wouldn’t we represent them asĀ *vectors*, just like **E** and **B**? I mean… Representing them as vectorsĀ (I meanĀ *realĀ *vectors here – something with a magnitude and a direction in aĀ *realĀ *space – as opposed to *state *vectors from the Hilbert space) wouldĀ *showĀ *they are real, and there would be no need for cumbersome transformations when going from one representationalĀ *baseĀ *to another. In fact, that’s why vector notation was invented (sort of): we don’t need to worry about the coordinate frame. It’s much easier to write physical laws in vector notation because… Well… They’re theĀ *realĀ *thing, aren’t they? š

What about dimensions? Well… I am not sure. However, because we are – arguably – talking about some pointlike charge moving around in those oscillating fields, I would suspect the dimension of the real and imaginary component of the wavefunction will be the same as that of the electric and magnetic field vectors **E** and **B**. We may want to recall these:

**E**Ā is measured inĀ*newton per coulombĀ*(N/C).**B**Ā is measured in newton per coulomb divided by m/s, so that’s (N/C)/(m/s).

The weird dimension of **B**Ā is because of the weird force law for the magnetic force. It involves a vector cross product, as shown by Lorentz’ formula:

**F** = qE + q(** v**Ć

**B**)

Of course, it is onlyĀ *oneĀ *force (one and the same physical reality), as evidenced by the fact that we can write **B** as the following vector cross-product: **B**Ā = (1/*c*)ā**e****_{x}**Ć

**E**, withĀ

**e****Ā the unit vector pointing in the**

_{x}*x*-direction (i.e. the direction of propagation of the wave). [Check it, because you may not have seen this expression before. Just take a piece of paper and think about the geometry of the situation.] Hence, we may associate the (1/

*c*)ā

**e****Ć**

_{x}*operator*, which amounts to a rotation by 90 degrees, with the s/m dimension. Now, multiplication by

*i*also amounts to a rotation by 90Ā° degrees. Hence, if we can agree on a suitable convention for the

*directionĀ*of rotation here,Ā we may boldly write:

**B**Ā = (1/*c*)ā**e****_{x}**Ć

**E**= (1/

*c*)ā

*i*ā

**E**

This is, in fact, what triggered my geometric interpretation of SchrĆ¶dingerās equation about a year ago now. I have had little time to work on it, but think I am on the right track. Of course, you should note that, for anĀ electromagnetic wave, the magnitudes of **E** and **B** reach their maximum, minimum and zero point *simultaneously*Ā (as shown below). So theirĀ *phaseĀ *is the same.

In contrast, the phase of the real and imaginary component of the wavefunction is not the same, as shown below.

In fact, because of the Stern-Gerlach experiment, I am actually more thinking of a motion like this:

But that shouldn’t distract you. š The question here is the following: could we possibly think of a new formulation of SchrĆ¶dinger’s equation – usingĀ *vectors *(again,Ā *realĀ *vectors – not these weirdĀ *state *vectors)Ā rather than complex algebra?

I think we can, but then I wonder why theĀ *inventorsĀ *of the wavefunction – Heisenberg, Born, Dirac, and SchrĆ¶dinger himself, of course – never thought of that. š

Hmm… I need to do some research here. š

**Post scriptum**: You will, of course, wonder how and why the matter-wave would be different from the electromagnetic wave if my suggestion that the dimension of the wavefunction component is the same is correct. The answer is: the difference lies in the phase difference and then, most probably, the different orientation of the angular momentum. Do we have any other possibilities? š

P.S. 2: I also published this post on my new blog:Ā https://readingeinstein.blog/. However, I thought the followers of this blog should get it first. š