2nd order pertubation theory of harmonic oscillator

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the second order energy shift in the context of perturbation theory applied to a harmonic oscillator. The perturbation is defined as \(\hat{H}'=\alpha \hat{p}\), where \(\hat{p}\) involves ladder operators.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to compute the second order energy shift using the provided perturbation and the relevant equation. They express confusion regarding the treatment of integrals resulting from the calculation, particularly in cases where \(m\) and \(n\) differ by one.

Discussion Status

Some participants offer guidance, indicating that the integrals do not need to be simultaneously nonzero for the same \(m\) value. The conversation explores the implications of summing over different \(m\) values, suggesting a clarification of the original poster's concerns.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the nuances of perturbation theory, particularly in relation to the behavior of integrals involving ladder operators and their implications for energy shifts. The discussion reflects on the assumptions regarding the nonzero conditions of these integrals.

Denver Dang
Messages
143
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


I'm having some trouble calculating the 2nd order energy shift in a problem.
I am given the pertubation:
\hat{H}'=\alpha \hat{p},
where $\alpha$ is a constant, and \hat{p} is given by:
p=i\sqrt{\frac{\hbar m\omega }{2}}\left( {{a}_{+}}-{{a}_{-}} \right),
where {a}_{+} and {a}_{-} are the usual ladder operators.

Homework Equations


Now, according to my book, the 2nd order energy shift is given by:
E_{n}^{2}=\sum\limits_{m\ne n}{\frac{{{\left| \left\langle \psi _{m}^{0} \right|H'\left| \psi _{n}^{0} \right\rangle \right|}^{2}}}{E_{n}^{0}-E_{m}^{0}}}

The Attempt at a Solution


Now, what I have tried to do is to calculate the term inside the power of 2. And so far I have done this:
\begin{align}<br /> &amp; E_{n}^{1}=\alpha i\sqrt{\frac{\hbar m\omega }{2}}\int{\psi _{m}^{*}\left( {{{\hat{a}}}_{+}}-{{{\hat{a}}}_{-}} \right)}\,{{\psi }_{n}}\,dx=\alpha i\sqrt{\frac{\hbar m\omega }{2}}\left( \int{\psi _{m}^{*}\,{{{\hat{a}}}_{+}}{{\psi }_{n}}\,dx-\int{\psi _{m}^{*}\,{{{\hat{a}}}_{-}}{{\psi }_{n}}\,dx}} \right) \\ <br /> &amp; =\alpha i\sqrt{\frac{\hbar m\omega }{2}}\left( \sqrt{n+1}\int{\psi _{m}^{*}\,{{\psi }_{n+1}}\,dx-\sqrt{n}\int{\psi _{m}^{*}\,{{\psi }_{n-1}}\,dx}} \right) <br /> \end{align}<br />
As you can see, I end up with the two integrals. But I don't know what to do next ? 'Cause if m &gt; n, and only by 1, then the first integral will be 1, and the other will be zero. And if n &gt; m, only by 1, then the second integral will be 1, and the first will be zero. Otherwise both will be zero.
And it seems wrong to have to make two expressions for the energy shift for n &gt; m and m &gt; n.

So am I on the right track, or doing it totally wrong ?

Thanks in advance.Regards
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are on the right track. You will not have two different expressions depending on your n and m values because you sum over the m values. So you will only have two integrals that are not zero but you will sum and square them giving you one second order energy shift.
 
Hmmm, not sure I understand.
How can the two integrals be not zero at the same time ?

As far as I know, the integrals above is either zero if n \neq m, and 1 if n = m.
And this is, as far as I can see, not possible for both of them at the same time. At least not in the way I have written it down. Or...?
 
The two integrals do not have to be nonzero at the same time (i.e., for the same m). One integral will be nonzero for one value of m and the other integral will be nonzero for a different value of m.
 
Right so just for an example pretend you had m=5. When summing over n you would keep the n=4 term and the n=6 term because these would be the only two non-zero integrals.
 
I see...
Thank you very much :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K