Commutation of Hamiltonian and time evolution operator

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the commutation of the time evolution operator with the Hamiltonian in quantum mechanics, specifically under the condition that the Hamiltonian does not explicitly depend on time. Participants explore the mathematical foundations and implications of this relationship, touching on both bounded and unbounded cases.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asks for an explanation of how the time evolution operator commutes with the Hamiltonian when the Hamiltonian is time-independent.
  • Another participant expresses the time evolution operator as an exponential function of the Hamiltonian, specifically noting the form U = exp[-iH*(t-t0)/ħ].
  • A subsequent post discusses the definition of the exponential as a power series and prompts consideration of the commutation relation [H,U].
  • One participant points out that the exponential's power series definition holds primarily for bounded Hamiltonians, suggesting that the proof is trivial in that case but more complex for unbounded Hamiltonians.
  • Another participant acknowledges the relevance of Stone's theorem in the context of unbounded operators and mentions the self-adjoint nature of the Hamiltonian as a conclusion of this theorem.
  • A participant comments on the expectations of physics students regarding the treatment of the exponential series and the commutation relation, indicating that they may not be required to rigorously justify convergence in the bounded case.
  • One participant suggests that a proof of strong convergence would be beneficial for theoretical physics students, referencing the Euler-Maclaurin series expansion as a relevant concept.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of familiarity with the mathematical rigor required for the discussion, particularly regarding bounded versus unbounded Hamiltonians. There is no consensus on the necessity of rigorous proofs for students, nor on the implications of the commutation relation in different contexts.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the limitations of understanding the convergence of series and the conditions under which the exponential operator is defined, particularly in relation to boundedness of the Hamiltonian.

bikashkanungo
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Can anyone explain how the time evolution operator commutes with the Hamiltonian of a system ( given that the the Hamiltonian does not depend explicitly on t ) ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you know how to express the time evolution operator in terms of H? (It's an exponential). Do you know the definition of an exponential?
 
yeah i know that U = exp[-iH*(t-t0)/ħ] if H does not depend explicitly on time .
 
Right. And the exponential is defined as a power series. So what is [H,U]? (You can choose t0=0 and units such that \hbar=1 to eliminate some typing).
 
Last edited:
The exponential is defined as a power series only if H is bounded. For H bounded (which is rarely the case in QM) the proof is trivial (purely algebraic). For the unbounded case, it should go like this. From the theory of Galilei group representation, one derives that time evolution of pure states is provided by means of a strongly continuous group of unitary operators U(t) and we agree to denote by H the generator of this group and call it Hamiltonian, which is time-independent, if one's working in the Schrödinger picture. To show that the generator commutes with U(t), we start from the definition of the generator (H) and I have attached a paragraph from Blank et al.

The fact that H as the generator is self-adjoint represents the conclusion of the theorem of Stone, which is found in most books on functional analysis.
 

Attachments

  • Blank - excerpt.jpg
    Blank - excerpt.jpg
    27 KB · Views: 1,815
Last edited:
Cool. I knew that Stone's theorem is what you use in the unbounded case, but I have never studied the details. I wasn't aware of the stuff mentioned in the attachment.

To a typical physics student, a rigorous treatment of the bounded case is not trivial. They aren't expected to understand (or even care about) how to prove that the series that defines the exponential is convergent given that H is bounded, or what sort of things they can do to series and other expressions that involve limits. A physics student who's given this problem is expected to answer it with [U(t),H]=\left[e^{-iHt},H\right]=\left[\sum_{k=0}^\infty\frac{(-iHt)^k}{k!},H\right]=\sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{(-it)^k}{k!}[H^k,H]=0 without even thinking about whether these steps actually make sense.
 
Hmmm, a proof of strong convergence should be handy for a theoretical physics student, because he's normally taught (i.e. shown) in a class on real analysis that the Euler-MacLaurin series expansion of eax converges, once |a|=1 and x\leq1.

If he knows from functional analysis / math methods for quantum physics what a bounded operator is, he can make a proof of strong convergence, I believe.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
941
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
978
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K