I Derivation of two-electron density operator

Mart1234
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Derivation of two electron density operator using single electron density operator
Hello, I am going over the derivation for two-electron density. I am having a hard time understanding how the second term in 2.11a seen below is derived. I know this term must eliminate the i=j products but can't seem to understand how. Thanks for the help.
1677185633960.png
 

Attachments

  • 1677185491730.png
    1677185491730.png
    18.1 KB · Views: 153
Physics news on Phys.org
Where is this coming from? The 2nd equality of (2.11a) seems to indicate that you consider a special state of uncorrelated/free particles, but we need more context to make sense of it.
 
I've never seen the two-electron density written like that. Here are my thoughts but I can't say for sure.

Mart1234 said:
I know this term must eliminate the i=j products but can't seem to understand how.
Considering the terms where ##i=j## $$\sum_{i}\delta(\mathbf r-\mathbf r_i)\delta(\mathbf r' - \mathbf r_i)$$We should be able to use the identities ##\delta(x - y) = \delta(y - x)## and ##\int dy \delta(x-y)\delta(y-x') = \delta(x-x')## So we rewrite the above as $$\sum_{i}\delta(\mathbf r-\mathbf r_i)\delta(\mathbf r_i - \mathbf r')$$ and when we are computing the electron density function we will be integrating over ##\mathbf r_i## so the latter identity suggests $$\sum_i\int d\mathbf r_1\dots d\mathbf r_N \delta(\mathbf r - \mathbf r_i)\delta(\mathbf r_i - \mathbf r')|\Psi(\mathbf r_1,\dots, \mathbf r_N)|^2 = N\int d\mathbf r_2\dots d\mathbf r_N \delta(\mathbf r - \mathbf r')|\Psi(\mathbf r,\dots, \mathbf r_N)|^2$$For the last line. I am assuming $$\int dx\int dy \delta(x-y)\delta(y-x')f(y) = \int dx \delta(x-x')f(x)$$
 
Last edited:
Morbert said:
I've never seen the two-electron density written like that. Here are my thoughts but I can't say for sure.Considering the terms where ##i=j## $$\sum_{i}\delta(\mathbf r-\mathbf r_i)\delta(\mathbf r' - \mathbf r_i)$$We should be able to use the identities ##\delta(x - y) = \delta(y - x)## and ##\int dy \delta(x-y)\delta(y-x') = \delta(x-x')## So we rewrite the above as $$\sum_{i}\delta(\mathbf r-\mathbf r_i)\delta(\mathbf r_i - \mathbf r')$$ and when we are computing the electron density function we will be integrating over ##\mathbf r_i## so the latter identity suggests $$\sum_i\int d\mathbf r_1\dots d\mathbf r_N \delta(\mathbf r - \mathbf r_i)\delta(\mathbf r_i - \mathbf r')|\Psi(\mathbf r_1,\dots, \mathbf r_N)|^2 = N\int d\mathbf r_2\dots d\mathbf r_N \delta(\mathbf r - \mathbf r')|\Psi(\mathbf r,\dots, \mathbf r_N)|^2$$For the last line. I am assuming $$\int dx\int dy \delta(x-y)\delta(y-x')f(y) = \int dx \delta(x-x')f(x)$$

Morbert said:
I've never seen the two-electron density written like that. Here are my thoughts but I can't say for sure.Considering the terms where ##i=j## $$\sum_{i}\delta(\mathbf r-\mathbf r_i)\delta(\mathbf r' - \mathbf r_i)$$We should be able to use the identities ##\delta(x - y) = \delta(y - x)## and ##\int dy \delta(x-y)\delta(y-x') = \delta(x-x')## So we rewrite the above as $$\sum_{i}\delta(\mathbf r-\mathbf r_i)\delta(\mathbf r_i - \mathbf r')$$ and when we are computing the electron density function we will be integrating over ##\mathbf r_i## so the latter identity suggests $$\sum_i\int d\mathbf r_1\dots d\mathbf r_N \delta(\mathbf r - \mathbf r_i)\delta(\mathbf r_i - \mathbf r')|\Psi(\mathbf r_1,\dots, \mathbf r_N)|^2 = N\int d\mathbf r_2\dots d\mathbf r_N \delta(\mathbf r - \mathbf r')|\Psi(\mathbf r,\dots, \mathbf r_N)|^2$$For the last line. I am assuming $$\int dx\int dy \delta(x-y)\delta(y-x')f(y) = \int dx \delta(x-x')f(x)$$
Got it. I appreciate the help.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
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...
I am not sure if this falls under classical physics or quantum physics or somewhere else (so feel free to put it in the right section), but is there any micro state of the universe one can think of which if evolved under the current laws of nature, inevitably results in outcomes such as a table levitating? That example is just a random one I decided to choose but I'm really asking about any event that would seem like a "miracle" to the ordinary person (i.e. any event that doesn't seem to...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top