Free Particle Wavepacket Spreading: Is it True?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Adeimantus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wavepacket
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the behavior of wavepackets for free particles, specifically whether they spread out over time. Participants explore the implications of different wave equations, particularly the Schrödinger equation, and the conditions under which wavepackets may or may not spread. The conversation includes mathematical reasoning and various approaches to demonstrate the spreading behavior.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that wavepackets generally spread out due to differing phase velocities of component plane waves, particularly in the context of the Schrödinger equation in free space.
  • Others argue that the spreading behavior depends on the wave equation, noting that non-linear equations can yield soliton solutions that do not spread.
  • A participant suggests that showing the growth of the matrix element <ψ|x²|φ> is sufficient to demonstrate the spreading of wavepackets.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of using Galilean invariance to simplify the analysis of wavepacket behavior.
  • One participant reflects on the initial misunderstanding regarding the nature of position eigenstates and their evolution over time.
  • Another participant introduces a method involving the time-evolution operator to compute the average value of over time, leading to a conclusion about its growth.
  • Concerns are raised about a linear term in the time evolution, suggesting the possibility of temporary squeezing before spreading resumes.
  • Further mathematical exploration is presented, including a Taylor expansion approach to analyze the time dependence of <x²> and the implications for the operator <xp + px>.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the conditions under which wavepackets spread. While some aspects of the discussion align, particularly around the Schrödinger equation, there remains uncertainty about the implications of different wave equations and the behavior of specific terms in the mathematical expressions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion involves complex mathematical expressions and assumptions about the nature of wavefunctions and operators. There are unresolved questions regarding the behavior of certain terms and the conditions under which specific results hold true.

Adeimantus
Messages
112
Reaction score
1
Is it generally true that the wavepacket of a free particle spreads out as time goes to infinity? It seems like it would, since the phase velocities of the component plane waves are different, and therefore the plane waves would get increasingly out of phase with time. A gaussian wave packet spreads with time. I'm just wondering if it is true for arbitrary wavepackets, and if so, how do you show that?

thanks

edit: to be more specific, I'm trying to show that

(\Delta x)^2 = \langle x^2 \rangle - \langle x \rangle ^2

increases as t -> infinity
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, it depends on your wave equation, not so much on the wave packet. The Schrödinger equation is linear and so the wave packets spread out. There are non-linear wave equations, e.g., the Sine-Gordon equation, water waves, etc., which admit "soliton" solutions which don't spread out but which are held together by their non-linearness. Of course I'm talking about "free space" here, since potential wells obviously confine packets.

I'm assuming you're talking about the Schrödinger equation in free space here. You can use Galilean invariance of the SE to go to a frame where \left\langle x \right\rangle = 0 for all time.
 
I think it suffices to show that \left\langle \psi | x^2 | \phi \right\rangle grows arbitrarily where \psi and \phi are any two states. Now all you need to do is pick a complete basis, and eigenstates of x are well suited.
 
lbrits said:
I'm assuming you're talking about the Schrödinger equation in free space here.

Yep, I had the Schrödinger equation in mind.

You can use Galilean invariance of the SE to go to a frame where \left\langle x \right\rangle = 0 for all time.

OK, that is a good suggestion. That should simplify things.

I think it suffices to show that \langle \psi |x^2|\phi \rangle grows arbitrarily where \psi and \phi are any two states.

I don't quite understand this part. Are \psi and \phi two elements of the complete basis you referred to or just any two arbitrary wavefunctions?
 
Showing that arbitrary matrix elements of an operator behave in a certain way is equivalent to showing that the matrix elements of an operator behave that way in a certain basis.
 
Yes, I think I see what you mean now. At any instant the wavefunction can be represented as a superposition of the eigenstates of the position operator, so showing that the matrix element of x^2 between two position eigenstates |x> and |x'> increases with time in the long run is equivalent to showing that the average value w.r.t the wavefunction increases with time. The thing I wasn't seeing was this: since we are dealing with a free particle hamiltonian, a state that is initially (t=0) in a position eigenstate |x> will not remain in a position eigenstate, but will spread out. I was computing the matrix element <x | x^2 | x'> as if a position eigenstate |x> remained a position eigenstate, which gives the not very helpful answer x^2\delta(x-x&#039;).

After seeing where I was going wrong, it occurred to me to apply the time-evolution operator directly to the initial wavefunction to compute the average value of x^2:

\langle x^2 \rangle(t) = \langle \psi(t)| \hat{x}^2 | \psi(t) \rangle = \langle\psi(0)|e^{it\hat{H}/\hbar}\hat{x}^2e^{-it\hat{H}/\hbar} |\psi(0)\rangle

where H = p^2 / 2m.

Then use the commutator relation

\left[\hat{x}, e^{-i(t/2m\hbar)\hat{p}^2}\right] = \left( e^{-it\hat{H}/ \hbar}\right) \frac{t\hat{p}}{m}

twice to get

\langle x^2 \rangle(t) = \langle\psi(0)|\left(\hat{x} + \frac{t\hat{p}}{m}\right)^2|\psi(0)\rangle

\langle x^2 \rangle(t) = \langle x^2 \rangle(0) + \frac{t}{m}\langle\hat{x}\hat{p}+\hat{p}\hat{x}\rangle(0) + \frac{t^2}{m^2}\langle p^2 \rangle(0)

Then, as you suggested, we can consider the frame where <x> = <p> = 0. Since the initial spread in momentum <p^2> is positive, this shows that <x^2> grows like time squared. Does this seem correct?
 
Last edited:
Correct, although the term linear in t bothers me a bit.
 
lbrits said:
Correct, although the term linear in t bothers me a bit.

Yep, I think that means that a wavepacket could possibly spend a finite time squeezing up before it starts to spread out again. But I'll double check to make sure I got the algebra right. Thanks for your help.
 
lbrits said:
Correct, although the term linear in t bothers me a bit.

Another way of getting the same answer is to write <x^2>(t) as a Taylor expansion around t=0, and compute the derivatives in the following way:
If the operator A is not a function of time,

\frac{d}{dt}\langle\hat{A}\rangle = \frac{i}{\hbar}\langle[\hat{H},\hat{A}]\rangle

\frac{d}{dt}\langle x^2 \rangle = \frac{i}{2m\hbar}\langle[\hat{p}^2 , \hat{x}^2]\rangle

But

[\hat{p}^2 , \hat{x}^2] = \hat{p}[\hat{p}, \hat{x}^2] + [\hat{p}, \hat{x}^2]\hat{p} = -2i\hbar\left(\hat{x}\hat{p}+\hat{p}\hat{x}\right)

So that
\frac{d}{dt}\langle x^2 \rangle = \frac{1}{m}\langle \hat{x}\hat{p}+\hat{p}\hat{x}\rangle

which is also a function of time. Taking another time derivative gives

\frac{d^2}{dt^2}\langle x^2 \rangle = \frac{1}{m}\frac{d}{dt}\langle\hat{x}\hat{p}+\hat{p}\hat{x}\rangle = \frac{i}{2m^2\hbar}\langle[\hat{p}^2, \hat{x}\hat{p}] + [\hat{p}^2, \hat{p}\hat{x}]\rangle = \frac{i}{2m^2\hbar}\langle [\hat{p}^2, \hat{x}]\hat{p} + \hat{p}[\hat{p}^2, \hat{x}] \rangle = \frac{2}{m^2}\langle p^2 \rangle

which is constant. Therefore all higher order derivatives are zero. Substituting these results into the taylor expansion

\langle x^2 \rangle(t) = \langle x^2 \rangle(0) + \langle x^2 \rangle&#039;(0)t + \langle x^2 \rangle&#039;&#039;(0)\frac{t^2}{2}

gives the same answer as above. This must put a restriction on the values <xp + px> can take in order to prevent <x^2> from being negative at some time. I don't see how to guarantee that <xp + px> is positive. It is real because the operator is hermitian, but that's all I can conclude about it...weird.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K