- #1

- 312

- 0

Just started reading this online text (arxiv 0608140) and already ran into trouble in the second equation (see quoted below).

The energy product of the wave function is negative. (Am I saying this correctly?)

Dyson says "NR wave-mechanics tells you to take the equation [tex]E=\frac {1}{2m}p^2[/tex] of classical mechanics, and write

[tex]E \rightarrow i \hbar \frac {\partial} {\partial t}[/tex] [tex]p_x \rightarrow -i \hbar \frac {\partial} {\partial x}[/tex] eqn. 1

to get the wave-equation

[tex]i \hbar \frac {\partial} {\partial t} \psi = -\frac {\hbar^2}{2m}(\nabla^2)\psi[/tex] eqn. 2

satisfied by the wave-equation [tex]\psi[/tex]"

I make the substitution of p(x) into the classical mechanics eqn. and so I have to square [tex]-i \hbar \frac {\partial} {\partial x}[/tex], which seems to me now to result in a positive quantity, contrary to the negative value given on the right in the wave equation. How should I evaluate the square so that it comes out positive?

ok I got it. Factor the -1, squares to 1, and i squares to -1, easy.

Well at least I got some practice using latex!

Now what is that j vector in eqn 3? Does that little arrow over the j mean it is a unit vector? I think not, it is just an ordinary vector.

[tex]\frac {\partial \rho} {\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \vec{j}=0[/tex] eqn. 3

here rho is probability, [tex]\rho=\psi^* \psi[/tex] of finding the particle at xyzt.

Dyson says probability is conserved because of eqn. 3, where

[tex]\vec{j}=\frac {\hbar}{2mi}(\psi^*\nabla\psi-\psi \nabla\psi^*)[/tex] eqn.4

Equation 3 tells me that [tex]\frac {\partial \rho}{\partial t}[/tex] and [tex]\nabla \cdot \vec{j}[/tex] are equal absolute value and opposite sign, or both zero. [tex]\frac {\partial \rho}{\partial t}[/tex] is the partial change in probability over time, which, as zero, is just the math statement that probability is conserved. So the meaning has to be encoded in the equality with [tex]-\nabla \cdot \vec{j}[/tex], the inner product of the del operator with j.

Substituting eqn 4 into eqn 3 gives:[tex]\frac {\partial \rho} {\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \frac {\hbar}{2mi}(\psi^*\nabla\psi-\psi \nabla\psi^*)=0[/tex]

or

[tex]\frac {\partial \rho} {\partial t} =- \nabla \cdot \frac {\hbar}{2mi}(\psi^*\nabla\psi-\psi \nabla\psi^*)[/tex]

Now I am not getting much meaning from the right side of the eqn. IIRC [tex]\nabla^2[/tex] is zero, so the right side equals zero, as it should. But where is the meaning of all the rest of the formula? I am sure it isn't there just to be folded back into zero.

Maybe it is in the meaning of the complex conjugation, whose rules I will have to go look up. Or maybe it is in the fraction, which I now interpret as the number of Planck constants in one cycle (2 pi) of the rather mysterious term, 2mi. At least I know, now, that mi is not the abbreviation for miles. But

R

The energy product of the wave function is negative. (Am I saying this correctly?)

Dyson says "NR wave-mechanics tells you to take the equation [tex]E=\frac {1}{2m}p^2[/tex] of classical mechanics, and write

[tex]E \rightarrow i \hbar \frac {\partial} {\partial t}[/tex] [tex]p_x \rightarrow -i \hbar \frac {\partial} {\partial x}[/tex] eqn. 1

to get the wave-equation

[tex]i \hbar \frac {\partial} {\partial t} \psi = -\frac {\hbar^2}{2m}(\nabla^2)\psi[/tex] eqn. 2

satisfied by the wave-equation [tex]\psi[/tex]"

I make the substitution of p(x) into the classical mechanics eqn. and so I have to square [tex]-i \hbar \frac {\partial} {\partial x}[/tex], which seems to me now to result in a positive quantity, contrary to the negative value given on the right in the wave equation. How should I evaluate the square so that it comes out positive?

ok I got it. Factor the -1, squares to 1, and i squares to -1, easy.

Well at least I got some practice using latex!

Now what is that j vector in eqn 3? Does that little arrow over the j mean it is a unit vector? I think not, it is just an ordinary vector.

[tex]\frac {\partial \rho} {\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \vec{j}=0[/tex] eqn. 3

here rho is probability, [tex]\rho=\psi^* \psi[/tex] of finding the particle at xyzt.

Dyson says probability is conserved because of eqn. 3, where

[tex]\vec{j}=\frac {\hbar}{2mi}(\psi^*\nabla\psi-\psi \nabla\psi^*)[/tex] eqn.4

**How does this formula show that probability is conserved?**Equation 3 tells me that [tex]\frac {\partial \rho}{\partial t}[/tex] and [tex]\nabla \cdot \vec{j}[/tex] are equal absolute value and opposite sign, or both zero. [tex]\frac {\partial \rho}{\partial t}[/tex] is the partial change in probability over time, which, as zero, is just the math statement that probability is conserved. So the meaning has to be encoded in the equality with [tex]-\nabla \cdot \vec{j}[/tex], the inner product of the del operator with j.

Substituting eqn 4 into eqn 3 gives:[tex]\frac {\partial \rho} {\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \frac {\hbar}{2mi}(\psi^*\nabla\psi-\psi \nabla\psi^*)=0[/tex]

or

[tex]\frac {\partial \rho} {\partial t} =- \nabla \cdot \frac {\hbar}{2mi}(\psi^*\nabla\psi-\psi \nabla\psi^*)[/tex]

Now I am not getting much meaning from the right side of the eqn. IIRC [tex]\nabla^2[/tex] is zero, so the right side equals zero, as it should. But where is the meaning of all the rest of the formula? I am sure it isn't there just to be folded back into zero.

Maybe it is in the meaning of the complex conjugation, whose rules I will have to go look up. Or maybe it is in the fraction, which I now interpret as the number of Planck constants in one cycle (2 pi) of the rather mysterious term, 2mi. At least I know, now, that mi is not the abbreviation for miles. But

**what is the significance ofthe product of twice the mass and the imaginary number i?**R

Last edited: