Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Quantization: History and Problems

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2202.07838 v1 pith:NQVJR7EM submitted 2022-02-16 physics.hist-ph math-phmath.MPquant-ph

Quantization: History and Problems

classification physics.hist-ph math-phmath.MPquant-ph
keywords quantizationdiracclassicalknownquantumwillgroenewoldhistory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

In this work, I explore the concept of quantization as a mapping from classical phase space functions to quantum operators. I discuss the early history of this notion of quantization with emphasis on the works of Schr\"odinger and Dirac, and how quantization fit into their overall understanding of quantum theory in the 1920's. Dirac, in particular, proposed a quantization map which should satisfy certain properties, including the property that quantum commutators should be related to classical Poisson brackets in a particular way. However, in 1946, Groenewold proved that Dirac's mapping was inconsistent, making the problem of defining a rigorous quantization map more elusive than originally expected. This result, known as the Groenewold-Van Hove theorem, is not often discussed in physics texts, but here I will give an account of the theorem and what it means for potential "corrections" to Dirac's scheme. Other proposals for quantization have arisen over the years, the first major one being that of Weyl in 1927, which was later developed by many, including Groenewold, and which has since become known as Weyl Quantization in the mathematical literature. Another, known as Geometric Quantization, formulates quantization in differential-geometric terms by appealing to the character of classical phase spaces as symplectic manifolds; this approach began with the work of Souriau, Kostant, and Kirillov in the 1960's. I will describe these proposals for quantization and comment on their relation to Dirac's original program. Along the way, the problem of operator ordering and of quantizing in curvilinear coordinates will be described, since these are natural questions that immediately present themselves when thinking about quantization.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Classical and quantum mechanics across representations: an operational reading of the Wigner Weyl correspondence

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    The robust classical–quantum boundary across Wigner–Weyl representations is noncommutative star-multiplication, not negativity or the choice of phase-space versus Hilbert-space language.