274

P. A. M. DIRAC

STATEMENT OF A PROBLEM IN QUANTUM MECHANICS

P. A. M. DIRAC*.

I should like to call the attention of mathematicians to a problem of

pure mathematics whose solution would probably be of great value for
the general development of quantum theory.
The big advance of quantum mechanics in recent years was made
possible by the introduction of a new transformation theory to replace
the contact transformation theory of classical mechanics. The new
theory can be regarded as a generalization of the classical contact
transformation theory and leads to a scheme of dynamics which has been
found to be excellently well suited for the description of atomic phenomena
up to a certain point. The limitations of the new theory appear when
one tries to get a formulation conforming to restricted relativity. Such
a formulation seems to be possible only if one introduces enormous
complexity into the equations and sacrifices the directness of physical
interpretation which was so satisfactory a feature of the non-relativistic
theory; and a general review of the present state of quantum mechanics
leads one to the conclusion that the existing quantum transformation
theory is "played out", and that to get a satisfactory relativistic quantum
mechanics one will have to introduce some new improved transformation
theory.
The following mathematical considerations bring out more definitely
the unsuitability of the existing quantum transformation theory for
relativistic treatment and give some indication of the direction in which
improvement should be sought. In classical dynamics, for a system with
n degrees of freedom, the values pr, qr (r = 1, ..., n) of the dynamical
variables at one time instant are connected with their values Pr, Qr at
some later time instant by a contact transformation. The analytical
expression of the conditions for this is
i,(prdqr-PrdQr) = dS,

(1)

where dS is a perfect differential of some function S of the qr and Qr.

Suppose now that we put
Qr = qn+r> Pr=-Pn+V

(2)

Then equation (1) may be written

padqa = dS,
1

* Received 26 May, 1933; read 15 June, 1933.

(3)

STATEMENT OF A PROBLEM IN QUANTUM MECHANICS.

275

where dS is a perfect differential of some function S of the qa(a=l, ..., 2n).

In this form the equation is symmetrical between all the 2n pairs of
conjugate variables and does not involve any partition of these 2?i pairs
into two sets of n pairs, as equation (1) does. Equation (3) is more
properly regarded as a connection between 2n pairs of conjugate variables,
all pairs being on the same footing, instead of a transformation from one
set of variables to another.
This symmetry property of equation (3) is the underlying reason for
the adaptability of classical contact transformation theory to relativity
requirements. In a general relativistic problem we have to deal with the
coupling between a certain region of space-time and the rest of the world.
This coupling takes place through certain degrees of freedom, each of
which is described by a coordinate qa and a conjugate variable pn denoting
a transfer of momentum into the space-time region. In the general case,
all the degrees of freedom are on the same footing and their variables are
connected by equation (3). In the special case when the space-time
region is bounded by two time instants, the degrees of freedom divide
naturally into two sets referring to the two time instants respectively, and
equation (3) goes over into equation (1) and becomes interpretable as
a contact transformation.
Let us now go over to the quantum theory. The fundamental
transformation connecting the state of affairs at two time instants is now
a unitary transformation in the Hilbert space of the wave functions,
which reads, if the wave functions at the two times a,ref(q) and g(Q),
/(<?)= jj

A(q,Q)g(Q)dQ1...dQn,
(4)

= 11

A(q,Q)f(q)dqi...dqn,

where the bar denotes the conjugate complex and the domains of integration consist of the whole permissible domains of the variables. The
transformation function A(q, Q) may be any function of the variables
qr, Qr satisfying the unitary condition, which is the condition necessary
for the above two transformation equations to be consistent. This
condition may be written

JdQ ...dQ A(q,

x

tl

Q)A(q,Q')=l

or 0,

(5)

according as the domain of integration A for the Q's includes the point
Qr Qr' or not. The domain of integration for the <?'s is the whole
permissible domain of these variables.
T2

276

P. A. M. DIRAC

The momenta pr, Pr in this theory are the operators

ih ~ and
dqr

ih ^77,
dQr'

where h is a universal constant. They can be represented* by the following functions of the q'a and Q'a,
pMQ)

-ihA3,

PMQ)=ihMKS.

(6)

Note that there is no minus sign in the second of these equations.

Equations (5) and (6) are the essential equations of the present transformation theory and correspond to the classical equation (1), A being
the analogue of eiSlh. Equations (4) are not so important, since they correspond to those classical equations which express the p'a and q'a as functions
of the P's and Q'a, or the P's and Q'a as functions of the p'a and q'a, and
not to general conditions for a contact transformation. Equations (4) will
therefore not appear further in the discussion.
Let us now make the change of notation (2). Equations (6) become
(o,j8=l,...,2n),

(7)

in which form they are symmetrical between all the In pairs of conjugate
variables. The unitary condition (5), on the other hand, cannot be
written in a form exhibiting this symmetry property, so that the transformation as a whole does not possess this symmetry property. We thus
conclude that the symmetry feature of the classical contact transformation
theory which makes that theory adaptable to relativity requirements gets lost
in the passage to the quantum transformation theory in its present form.
We are now faced with the problem of getting an improved quantum
transformation theory in which the above-mentioned symmetry feature
is not lost, i.e. a theory which, when one makes the change of notation (2),
becomes symmetrical between all the pairs of variables. One cannot
be sure that such a theory exists, but its existence is rendered probable
by the fact that, first, such a theory is strongly needed by theoretical
physics, and, secondly, the present theory almost satisfies the required
conditions, since the relations between coordinates and momenta which it
See Dirac, Physik. Zeits. der Sowjetunion, 3 (1933), 66, eqns. (3) and (5;. The proof of
these equations consists simply in noting that their right-hand sides, when multiplied into
any funotion g(Q) and integrated over all values of the Q'a, give the same results as pr operating on the transform of g(Q) by the first of equations (4), and as the transform by this
equation (4) of the result of P, operating on g(Q), respectively.

STATEMENT OF A PROBLEM IN QUANTUM MECHANICS.

277

gives, namely equations (6) or (7), are all right and only the unitary
condition (o) is unsatisfactory. Presumably, if one could make some more
thorough investigation of the connection between the classical contact
transformation theory and the present quantum transformation theory,
one would be able to see just where the classical symmetry property that
we are interested in gets lost and how it is to be restored*.

ON THE DIFFERENCE TT{X)-H(X) (I).

S. SKEWESf.
1. Let 77- (x) be the number of primes less than x, and let li(a;) denote
as usual the "logarithmic integral"

[' dx
Jo logx +"
The "prime number theorem" states that
lim 7r(x)/\i(x) = 1.

Numerical evidence suggests that 7r(a;)/li(a;) tends to unity from below,

so that
TT(X)U(X)<0.

Littlewood has proved, however, that the number

actually changes sign infinitely often as x increases to infinity.

Ingham has pointed out that Littlewood's method provides, even
in principle, no definite number x0, such as a repeated exponential like
99*, before which P{x) has changed sign. My object is to obtain, assuming
* A paper by P. Jordan, Zeitschrift fiir Fhys., 80 (1933), 285, gives an interesting
attempt to improve the present quantum formalism by the introduction of non-associative
algebra. This work, though, does not seem to lead to any transformation theory having
analogies with the classical contact transformation theory and is therefore not the solution of
our problem.
f Received and read 15 June, 1933.
X More precisely,

li(x) = lim (I ' + [

)..
11
,-<> Vjo
Ji + ,/log
See A. E. Ingham, "The distribution of prime numbers", Cambridge Math. Tracts,
No. 30, 1932.