Fermi's golden rule derivation a bit hazy

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
4 replies · 2K views
Replusz
Messages
141
Reaction score
14
TL;DR
I am stuck between line 1 and 2 in the derivation below. I have attached what I tried
1586805944414.png

1586806504002.png

1586806124910.png
My thought is following:
1586806435700.png

However this would give me w=E_m + E_n instead of E_m-E_n
I guess something relating to hermiticity or adjointing something has gnoe wrong in my version.
Can someone point me in the right direction please? :)
Thank you in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Replusz said:
However this would give me w=E_m + E_n instead of E_m-E_n

Are you sure you didn't get ##\omega = -\left(E_m + E_n \right)##? Then I would have replied that, in Dirac notation, the bra - ket is conjugate linear in the bra, i.e., if you pull a scalar outside of the bra, you have to take the complex conjugate of the scalar.

I do get the required result.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Replusz
Replusz said:
Summary:: I am stuck between line 1 and 2 in the derivation below. I have attached what I tried

View attachment 260581
View attachment 260585
View attachment 260582My thought is following:
View attachment 260584
However this would give me w=E_m + E_n instead of E_m-E_n
I guess something relating to hermiticity or adjointing something has gnoe wrong in my version.
Can someone point me in the right direction please? :)
Thank you in advance!
I agree with George. Focus on your ##e^{i H_0 t}## which you turned into ##e^{-i E_m t}##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Replusz
nrqed said:
I agree with George. Focus on your ##e^{i H_0 t}## which you turned into ##e^{-i E_m t}##.

So ##<m|e^{i H_0 t} = adjoint(e^{-i H_0 t} |m> ) = adjoint(e^{-i E_m t} |m> ) = e^{ i E_m t} <m| ##

Is this correct?
(if this is correct then everything makes sense)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Replusz said:
So ##<m|e^{i H_0 t} = adjoint(e^{-i H_0 t} |m> ) = adjoint(e^{-i E_m t} |m> ) = e^{ i E_m t} <m| ##

Is this correct?
(if this is correct then everything makes sense)
Yes, this is correct.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Replusz