State vectors and Eigenvalues?

kq6up
Messages
366
Reaction score
13
If I define a state ket in the traditional way, Say:

$$|\Psi \rangle =\sum _{ i }^{ }{ a_{ i }|\varphi _{ i }\rangle \quad } $$

Where $$a_i$$ is the probability amplitude.

How does:

$$\hat {H } |\Psi \rangle =E|\Psi \rangle $$ if the states of $$\Psi$$ could possibly represent states that have different energy levels, and one would not be able to factor the energy eigenvalue out of the summation. I know I am missing something big here. Could someone point it out?

Edit: Does $$ \hat {H} $$ collapse psi to one state phi, and so render only energy eigenvalue of the one phi that remains?

Thanks,
Chris Maness
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
kq6up said:
If I define a state ket in the traditional way, Say:

$$|\Psi \rangle =\sum _{ i }^{ }{ a_{ i }|\varphi _{ i }\rangle \quad } $$

Where $$a_i$$ is the probability amplitude.

How does:

$$\hat {H } |\Psi \rangle =E|\Psi \rangle $$ if the states of $$|\Psi \rangle$$ could possibly represent states that have different energy levels, and one would not be able to factor the energy eigenvalue out of the summation. I know I am missing something big here. Could someone point it out?

Thanks,
Chris Maness

When you write ##\hat {H } |\Psi \rangle =E|\Psi \rangle ##, ##|\Psi \rangle## cannot represent a state with more than one energy. Each possible ##|\Psi \rangle## that is a solution to that equation is an energy eigenstate with a definite energy.

That equation has many solutions, each corresponding to a different energy. An arbitrary state will be a superposition of energy eigenstates with different energies.

The equation ##\hat {H } |\Psi \rangle =E|\Psi \rangle ## is the time-independent Schroedinger equation or the the energy eigenstate equation. It is only an intermediate step in the solution of the full time-dependent Schroedinger equation.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Ok, so $$ \Psi $$ can't be a superposition anymore.

Does this work for a generalized statement?

$$ \hat { B } \hat { A } |\Psi \rangle =ab|\Psi \rangle $$ Where if, psi is not collapsed, it is at least degenerate, and where A & B commute.

Thanks,
Chris Maness
 
kq6up said:
Ok, so $$ \Psi $$ can't be a superposition anymore.

Does this work for a generalized statement?

$$ \hat { B } \hat { A } |\Psi \rangle =ab|\Psi \rangle $$ Where if, psi is not collapsed, it is at least degenerate, and where A & B commute.

Thanks,
Chris Maness

Statements such as these are eigenvalue problems. In these cases, by definition, ##\Psi## must be an eigenvector of the operator.

The time-dependent Schroedinger equation is NOT an eigenvalue problem:

$$H\left|\Psi\right>=i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\Psi\right>$$

And so ACTUAL wave functions do NOT have to be eigen-vectors of any operator. We just use the eigenvalue problems to help us solve the full problem.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
It's the phis that have the different energy levels!
 
kq6up said:
Ok, so $$ \Psi $$ can't be a superposition anymore.

Does this work for a generalized statement?

$$ \hat { B } \hat { A } |\Psi \rangle =ab|\Psi \rangle $$ Where if, psi is not collapsed, it is at least degenerate, and where A & B commute.

Thanks,
Chris Maness

Yes, in the example you give, if ##|\Psi \rangle## is an eigenstate of A and an eigenstate of B, then it is an eigenstate of AB or BA. This does not mean that ##|\Psi \rangle## is not a superposition. It is a superposition of eigenstates of other operators that do not commute with A or B.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_set_of_commuting_observables
http://www2.ph.ed.ac.uk/~ldeldebb/docs/QM/lect2.pdf (Section 2.7)
 
Last edited:
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top