Can Fourier Transformation be Used for Amplitude of a Free Particle?

karlsson
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I hope this is the correct place for my question. I posted it here, because it`s from Peskin & Schroeder:
"Consider the amplitude for a free particle to propagate from \mathbf{x}_{0} to \mathbf{x} :

U(t)=\left\langle \mathbf{x}\right|e^{-iHt}\left|\mathbf{x_{0}}\right\rangle

In nonrelativistic quantum mechanics we have E=p^2/2m, so

U(t)&=&\left\langle \mathbf{x}\right|e^{-i(\mathbf{p}^{2}/2m)t}\left|\mathbf{x}_{0}\right\rangle

<br /> =\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}}\left\langle \mathbf{x}\right|e^{-i(\mathbf{p}^{2}/2m)t}\left|\mathbf{p}\right\rangle \left\langle \mathbf{p}\right.\left|\mathbf{x_{0}}\right\rangle

<br /> =\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{3}}\int d^{3}p\, e^{-i(\mathbf{p}^{2}/2m)t}\cdot e^{i\mathbf{p}\cdot(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x}_{0})}<br />

<br /> =\left(\frac{m}{2\pi it}\right)^{3/2}\, e^{im(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x}_{0})/2t}}<br />
."

I don't understand the last equation.
Why I can't use the fourier-transformation:

<br /> =\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{3}}\int d^{3}p\, e^{-i\mathbf{p}\cdot(\mathbf{x}_{0}-\mathbf{x})}\widetilde{f}(\mathbf{p})<br />

<br /> =f(\mathbf{p})<br />

<br /> =e^{-i(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x}_{0})^{2}/2m)t}<br />
 
Physics news on Phys.org
but is what you have don actually ;)

marco
 
Sry, I don't understand. My solution is a different one as from Peskin & Schroeder. But why?
 
karlsson said:
<br /> =\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}}\left\langle \mathbf{x}\right|e^{-i(\mathbf{p}^{2}/2m)t}\left|\mathbf{p}\right\rangle \left\langle \mathbf{p}\right.\left|\mathbf{x_{0}}\right\rangle

<br /> =\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{3}}\int d^{3}p\, e^{-i(\mathbf{p}^{2}/2m)t}\cdot e^{i\mathbf{p}\cdot(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x}_{0})}<br />

<br /> =\left(\frac{m}{2\pi it}\right)^{3/2}\, e^{im(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x}_{0})/2t}}<br />
."

I don't understand the last equation.

The last step is made by completing the square and evaluating the gaussian integral (although with complex coefficient). I suspect the expression should be ~exp[im(x-x_0)^2/2t] though...

Why I can't use the fourier-transformation:

The last step is precisely the evaluation of a Fourier transform. In what you write next:

<br /> =\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{3}}\int d^{3}p\, e^{-i\mathbf{p}\cdot(\mathbf{x}_{0}-\mathbf{x})}\widetilde{f}(\mathbf{p})<br />

<br /> =f(\mathbf{p})<br />

<br /> =e^{-i(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x}_{0})^{2}/2m)t}<br />

It looks like you have simply taken \widetilde{f}=f and replaced the \mathbf{p} argument with \mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x}_0.. If so then this is wrong. The Fourier transform should be evaluated as in the last step of your first equation (i.e. completing the square as I wrote)
 
jensa said:
I suspect the expression should be ~exp[im(x-x_0)^2/2t] though...

You are right.

jensa said:
The last step is made by completing the square and evaluating the gaussian integral ...

Thanks a lot.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top