Fourier Integral of the Schrodinger Equation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of the operator ## \partial^2_x ## in the context of the Fourier integral of the Schrödinger equation. The operator, when applied to the term ## e^{-ikx} ##, yields a result of ## -k^2 ##, demonstrating its effect on the integrand. Participants clarify that the operator must be applied to the entire Fourier integral ## u_0(x) ##, specifically through the expression ## e^{it \partial^2_x } (u_0(x)) ##, leading to the result of ## e^{-ik^2t} ## within the integral. A minor correction is noted regarding the placement of the exponential term in the final expression.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Fourier integrals and their applications in quantum mechanics.
  • Familiarity with differential operators, particularly ## \partial^2_x ##.
  • Knowledge of Taylor expansion and its role in operator applications.
  • Basic grasp of the Schrödinger equation and its mathematical framework.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of differential operators in quantum mechanics.
  • Learn about the properties and implications of Fourier transforms in physics.
  • Explore the Taylor expansion of operators and its significance in quantum mechanics.
  • Investigate the role of the Schrödinger equation in wave function analysis.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students studying quantum mechanics, particularly those interested in the mathematical foundations of the Schrödinger equation and Fourier analysis.

Neothilic
Messages
21
Reaction score
5
TL;DR
So I am confused on the steps to find out how you would get to having the second order differential operator to k^2 in the exponent.
Annotation 2020-08-11 155539.png
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The operator ## \partial^2_x ## is to the left of the ## dk ## integral. The only thing that is of importance here is the ## e^{-ikx} ## term in the integrand. If the operator were by itself, (not in an exponential), I think you can see you get ##-k^2 e^{-ikx} ## when it operates on this term. The effect of the ## \partial^2_x ## operator is ## -k^2 ##. The same thing applies when the operator is in an exponential.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
Charles Link said:
The operator ## \partial^2_x ## is to the left of the ## dk ## integral. The only thing that is of importance here is the ## e^{-ikx} ## term in the integrand. If the operator were by itself, (not in an exponential), I think you can see you get ##-k^2 e^{-ikx} ## when it operates on this term. The effect of the ## \partial^2_x ## operator is ## -k^2 ##. The same thing applies when the operator is in an exponential.

I see how the effect of the ## \partial^2_x ## operator is ## -k^2 ##, but what do you mean The operator ## \partial^2_x ## is to the left of the ## dk ## integral? To show this effect of ## \partial^2_x ## operator, could I apple the operator on ## u_0(x) ##? Then I could then say that the effect of the ## \partial^2_x ## operator is ## -k^2 ##.
 
Yes, you apply it to ##u_o(x) ##, and ## u_o(x) ## is a Fourier integral in ## dk ##. The only term in the integrand with an ## x ## is ## e^{-ikx} ##.
To clarify, you apply ##e^{it \partial^2_x } ## to ## u_o(x) ##. If you do a Taylor expansion on ##e^{it \partial^2_x } ## , you will get the various powers of ## \partial^2_x ## which result in various powers of ##-k^2 ## as the result. Those then go back up in the exponential and become ## e^{-it k^2} ##.
 
Last edited:
Could I not just do ## \partial^2_x u_0(x) = - \int e^{-ikx}k^2 \tilde u_0(k) \, dk ##. Then I can say that the derivative produces a pre-factor of ## (-ik) ##. Then replace this pre-factor with the ## \partial^2_x ## in the exponent?
 
I think you have the basic idea. You need to operate on ## u_o(x) ## with ##e^{it \partial^2_x } ## though, and the result is ## e^{-it k^2} ##.
 
Charles Link said:
I think you have the basic idea. You need to operate on ## u_o(x) ## with ##e^{it \partial^2_x } ## though, and the result is ## e^{-it k^2} ##.

Oh I see. Like this:
##e^{it \partial^2_x } (u_0(x)) = e^{it \partial^2_x } (\int e^{-ikx} \tilde u_0(k) \, dk) ##
##e^{it \partial^2_x } (u_0(x)) = \int e^{it \partial^2_x }(e^{-ikx}) \tilde u_0(k) \, dk ##
##e^{it \partial^2_x } (u_0(x)) = \int e^{kt \partial_x }(e^{-ikx}) \tilde u_0(k) \, dk ##
##e^{it \partial^2_x } (u_0(x)) = \int e^{-ik^2t}e^{-ikx} \tilde u_0(k) \, dk ##
##e^{it \partial^2_x } (u_0(x)) =e^{-ik^2t} \int e^{-ikx} \tilde u_0(k) \, dk ##
Therefore, I can see the operator ## \partial^2_x ## gives the result of ## -k^2 ##.
Correct?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Charles Link
Yes. One minor correction though: In the last line, the ## e^{-ik^2t} ## needs to stay inside the integral.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K