J.J. Sakurai: Error of 2nd Order in d x' Eq (1.6.24)

  • Thread starter Thread starter omoplata
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sakurai
omoplata
Messages
327
Reaction score
2
From page 46 of "Modern Quantum Mechanics, revised edition", by J.J. Sakurai.

In equation (1.6.24),
\left[\mathbf{x}, \mathcal{T}(d\mathbf{x'}) \right] = d \mathbf{x'} \mid \mathbf{x'} + d \mathbf{x'} \rangle \approx d \mathbf{x'} \mid \mathbf{x'} \rangle
It is written: "where the error made in writing the last line of (1.6.24) is of second order in d \mathbf{x'}". How does that happen? From a Taylor expansion of \mid \mathbf{x'} + d \mathbf{x'} \rangle ? If so, how do you Taylor expand a ket?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You may just use the definition of the transformation operator \mathcal{T}.
\mathcal{T}(d\mathbf{x'})\mid \mathbf{x'} \rangle = \mid \mathbf{x'} +d\mathbf{x'} \rangle
\left[\mathbf{x}, \mathcal{T}(d\mathbf{x'}) \right]\mid \mathbf{x'} \rangle = d \mathbf{x'} \mid \mathbf{x'} + d \mathbf{x'} \rangle = d \mathbf{x'}\mathcal{T}(d\mathbf{x'})\mid\mathbf{x'} \rangle = d \mathbf{x'} \left(1 - i\mathbf{K} \cdot d\mathbf{x'}\right) \mid\mathbf{x'} \rangle

You may notice that 1 - i\mathbf{K} \cdot d\mathbf{x'} does look like the first two terms of a Taylor expansion.
 
Last edited:
Oh, yeah. That never occurred to me. Thanks!

I also found out just now that I had written my equation wrong. I just corrected it. Sorry about that and thanks for looking at Sakurai to get through that.
 
You can’t use (1-\mathbf{K}\cdot dx') because you need to prove this later. I believe ket can be expanded as |x'+dx'\rangle=|x'\rangle+\frac{|x'\rangle}{dx'}dx'+\dots and then ignore O(dx')^2. What do you think?
 
Last edited:
The problem is how you can expand the ket?
I guess a good way would be to use this:
<f|x+dx>= f(x+dx) \approx f(x)+ f'(x) dx = <f|x>+ \frac{<f| x+dx>-<f|x>}{dx} dx= <f| (|x>+\frac{| x+dx>-<f|x>}{dx} dx)
or
|x+dx> \approx |x>+\frac{| x+dx>-|x>}{dx} dx

so multiplying with dx:
dx |x+dx> \approx dx |x>+\frac{| x+dx>-|x>}{dx} (dx)^{2}

Am I somewhere wrong?
 
Exactly ... the second term \frac{|x+dx\rangle-|x\rangle}{dx} is nothing but d|x\rangle/dx since dx is infinitesimal. It is totally legal to apply dervative to ket. Remember SHE \hat{H} |\psi\rangle=i\hbar d|\psi\rangle/dt. So you don't need to project the ket into function.
 
Last edited:
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Thread 'Lesser Green's function'
The lesser Green's function is defined as: $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\langle C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\rangle=i\bra{n}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\ket{n}$$ where ##\ket{n}## is the many particle ground state. $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{n}e^{iHt'}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(0)e^{-iHt'}e^{iHt}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ First consider the case t <t' Define, $$\ket{\alpha}=e^{-iH(t'-t)}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ $$\ket{\beta}=C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt'}\ket{n}$$ $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{\beta}\ket{\alpha}$$ ##\ket{\alpha}##...
Back
Top