1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Difference between stationary/non-stationary quantum states

  1. Feb 21, 2016 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
    I apologize, this is not really a homework problem. I have an exam coming up, and I need to be able to explain the difference between a stationary/non-stationary quantum state in a qualitative way, and in what cases these states have time dependent probabilities. I am hoping someone can correct my understanding if it is wrong. Thank you!

    2. Relevant equations


    3. The attempt at a solution
    A stationary state is any quantum state which consists of only one eigenstate of the Hamiltonian H. For example, if a spin 1/2 system in the z basis with a magnetic field in the z-direction, a stationary state we may work with is |ψ(0)> = a|+>. In the same system, a non-stationary state would be |ψ(0)> = a|+> + b|->. The important distinction is that stationary states are composed of one energy eigenstate of the H, and non-stationary states are a superposition of n energy eigenstates of H (for a spin 1/2 system, this would only be up to n=2).

    Probabilities of any state are time independent if:
    • The state we are measuring the probability in is stationary OR
    • We are measuring the probability in a basis that commutes with the basis of the Hamiltonian.
    Probabilities of any state are time dependent if:
    • The state is non-stationary and we are measuring the probability in a basis that does not commute with the basis of the Hamiltonian.
    Also sorry if this is a dumb question, but is it possible to have a state that is not made up of energy eigenvalues/eigenstates of the Hamiltonian? I don't think you can.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 21, 2016 #2

    DrClaude

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    No. The eigenstates of the Hamiltonian form a complete basis, as do the eigenstates of any observable. Therefore, it is always possible to write any state as a linear combination of those eigenstates.
     
  4. Feb 21, 2016 #3

    blue_leaf77

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    When one talks about stationary states, it's actually more about the time dependency of the observables. If a system is known to be in a stationary state, then the expectation value of any observable quantity measured on this system will be time independent. If on the other hand the state is non-stationary state, any observables which do not commute with the Hamiltonian will have time-dependent expectation value.
    Not always, consider this superposition state in a hydrogen atom ##|\psi\rangle = \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}|u_{211}\rangle+\frac{1}{2}|u_{200}\rangle##. This state is a stationary state.

    As for the time-dependency of the probabilities, it makes more sense to talk about the (non)stationary states as a basis, not as the state of the system. It's just a matter of which basis you want to use to expand the state of a given system.
     
  5. Feb 21, 2016 #4
    The bold text makes sense to me, however I'm confused now about the hydrogen atom state. Is the state you wrote a spin 1/2 state? I think we are only dealing with spin 1/2 states, and we have yet to have any homework/practice problems where a superposition state was stationary and any observable quantity measured was time independent.
     
  6. Feb 21, 2016 #5

    blue_leaf77

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    No, they are the eigenfunctions of hydrogen atom Hamiltonian ##u_{nlm}##.
    Why do you have to specialize the discussion on the spin 1/2 states only. The concept of stationary states applies to all kinds of Hamiltonian.
    Stationary states are equivalent to the eigenstates of the system's Hamiltonian. Keeping this in mind, a superposition state can be a stationary state if the superposing states all have the same energy. For example of hydrogen atom, the energy is a function of the principal quantum number, ##n##, only. Therefore, eigenstates ##|u_{nlm}\rangle## with different ##l## and ##m## but the same ##n## can superpose to form a stationary state.
     
  7. Feb 21, 2016 #6
    Hmm, I should have prefaced my question - the class I am in is an intro course, and our professor told us we'd only be working with either spin 1/2 or spin 1 systems. I know that the concept applies to all kinds of Hamiltonian operators. For this exam it was specified that all systems would be spin 1/2, so I was just looking to make sure I understood that type of system.
     
  8. Feb 22, 2016 #7

    blue_leaf77

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Every system which involves spin-1/2 particles are called spin-1/2 system. A hydrogen atom is also a spin-1/2 system because the electron (and proton) is a spin-1/2 particle, however in the nonrelativistic limit, the spin makes no effect at all to the energy levels. This means, for a given spatial wavefunction ##u_{nlm}(r,\theta,\phi)##, both spin up and down have the same energy. If the particle (of whatever spin value) is in a region of uniform magnetic field like what you used as an example above, the energy is not degenerate - it depends on the orientation of the spin. In this case, no superposition state can be a stationary state.

    In general, you have to pay attention to what kind of Hamiltonian the particle is subject to. Although your prof told you that he will only consider spin-1/2 or 1 particle, that doesn't mean the system will always be that of a uniform magnetic field.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted