Free Schroedinger equation: time separation

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter chartery
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the free Schrödinger equation, specifically the general solution represented as e^{±i(kx-ωt)}. The user questions the validity of e^{+iωt} as a solution to the time-separated ordinary differential equation (ODE) dψ/dt = -iωψ, noting that it satisfies dψ/dt = +iωψ instead. The response clarifies that e^{+iωt} corresponds to the complex conjugate of the positive-energy solution e^{-iωt}, indicating that both solutions represent positive energies in quantum mechanics, relevant for understanding particle and anti-particle wave functions in quantum field theory.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Schrödinger equation and its solutions
  • Familiarity with complex functions and their properties
  • Basic knowledge of quantum mechanics concepts, including energy and wave functions
  • Awareness of quantum field theory principles
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the free Schrödinger equation and its implications
  • Explore the role of complex conjugates in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the relationship between wave functions and particle physics
  • Investigate the applications of the Schrödinger equation in quantum field theory
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, as well as anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of wave functions and their physical interpretations.

chartery
Messages
42
Reaction score
5
Hi

Apologies for formatting, I can't get PF's new Tex to work for me.

The (?most) general solution of the free Schroedinger eq. is e^{±i(kx-ωt)} , which implies e^{+iωt} should solve the time separated ODE:
dψ/dt = -iωψ, but instead it satisfies dψ/dt = +iωψ which is not obviously (to me) the same equation. Could someone explain where my logic errs please?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
chartery said:
Hi

Apologies for formatting, I can't get PF's new Tex to work for me.

The (?most) general solution of the free Schroedinger eq. is e^{±i(kx-ωt)} , which implies e^{+iωt} should solve the time separated ODE:
dψ/dt = -iωψ, but instead it satisfies dψ/dt = +iωψ which is not obviously (to me) the same equation. Could someone explain where my logic errs please?
Because the energy ##E=\hbar \omega## is supposed to be positive, physically speaking (up to an additive constant).
Insert ##\psi (x,t)=e^{\pm i\omega t}\psi(x)## in Schrödinger's equation and see what happens.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: javisot and PeroK
@pines-demon, thanks for reply. If I plug in e+iωt , I get separation constant as -ħω. Does that mean it is a "negative energy" solution?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pines-demon
chartery said:
If I plug in e+iωt , I get separation constant as -ħω. Does that mean it is a "negative energy" solution?
Note that the wave functions in the Schrödinger equation are complex functions.

##e^{-\mathrm{i}\omega t}## corresponds to the positive-energy solution.

##e^{+\mathrm{i}\omega t}=\left(e^{-\mathrm{i}\omega t}\right)^*## then corresponds to complex conjugate of the positive-energy solution.

For a free particle, both "##\pm##" solutions correspond to positive energies, its just that you use both the "normal" wave function ##\psi## and the complex-conjugated wave function ##\psi^*##.

This plays a role in quantum field theory, where ##\psi##'s correspond to wave functions of particles and ##\psi^*##'s - to wave functions of their anti-particles. Both the particle and its anti-particle are physical and have positive energies; the difference is that one of the wave functions is a complex-conjugated version.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: chartery

Similar threads

  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
41
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
5K