Definition of a Gaussian wave packet for a Initial State

Gabriel Maia
Messages
70
Reaction score
1
Hi :)

I'm reading a didactic paper and the author defined the initial state ket as

|\Phi_{in}> = {\int}dq\phi_{in}(q)|q>

where q is a coordinate and

\phi_{in}(q) = <q|\Phi_{in}> = exp\left[\frac{-q^{2}}{4\Delta^{2}}\right]

I don't know if I'm missing something but isn't this definition a little flawed? I mean if you calculate the inner product of <q| with the first equation, <q|q>=1, sure, but that does not eliminate the integral, right?

I'm thinking the correct definition would be

|\Phi_{in}> = \phi_{in}(q)|q>

with

\phi_{in}(q) = <q|\Phi_{in}> = exp\left[\frac{-q^{2}}{4\Delta^{2}}\right]Thank you
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Just think of the unitary operator acting on |Φ_{in}&gt;
\hat{1}|Φ_{in}&gt;
but then, you also know (complete basis) that:
\hat{1}= \sum_{q} |q&gt;&lt;q| \rightarrow \int dq |q&gt;&lt;q|
the arrow is for a continuous q variable...
By that you get everything straightforwardly...

In the same way, you can get:

&lt;Φ_{in}|Φ_{in}&gt;= \int dq&#039; dq φ^{*}(q&#039;)φ(q) &lt;q&#039;|q&gt;
&lt;Φ_{in}|Φ_{in}&gt;= \int dq&#039; dq φ^{*}(q&#039;)φ(q) δ(q&#039;-q)
integrating out q' due to the delta function you get:
&lt;Φ_{in}|Φ_{in}&gt;= \int dq φ^{*}(q)φ(q) =1
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
I see... so

<q|\Phi_{in}> = <q|\hat{I}|\Phi_{in}>

right? But then

<q|\Phi_{in}> = <q|\hat{I}|\Phi_{in}> = {\int}dq\phi_{in}(q)

and the integral of \phi_{in}(q) is not the same as = \phi_{in}(q)

what is happening here?

Thank you.
 
you are confusing the brackets... If you have a continuous variable, then you can't generally say that <q|q>=1. This happens only for discrete ones, because the discrete version of dirac's delta function is the delta of kroenicker...
In fact you have to generalize it for continuous variables, and as I used above:
&lt;q&#039;|q&gt;= δ(q&#039;-q)
in the same way for discrete variables you had:
&lt;m|n&gt;=δ_{mn}

also avoid using the same q everywhere... since you are already taking the bra <q| in <q|Φin> when you wrote the identity operator you should have used a new symbol like |q'><q'| or generally |something else><something else|
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
wait for it... wait for it...

I cannot use the very same variable in \hat{I}={\int}dq|q&gt;&lt;q| and in the <q| I took the inner product with, right? The identity operator must be something like

\hat{I}={\int}dq&#039;|q&#039;&gt;&lt;q&#039;|

This will give me (when I take the inner product with <q|) a Dirac delta and save the day.

I mean... this is the rigourous precedure, right?

Thank you.
 
Thank you very much :) Saved my day!
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...
Back
Top