Given the initial state, Ican find the time evolution wave function right?

cks
Messages
164
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


At t=0, the particle is in the eigenstate S_x, which corresponds to the eigenvalues -\hbar \over 2The particle is in a magnetic field and its Hamiltonian is H=\frac{eB}{mc}S_z. Find the state at t>0.


Homework Equations



Eigenstate of the Sx is

|->_x=\frac{1}{2^\frac{1}{2}}(|+>-|->)



The Attempt at a Solution



Since I am given with the initial state, then

|-(t)>_x=\frac{1}{2^\frac{1}{2}}(e^\frac{-iE_+t}{\hbar}|+>-e^\frac{-iE_-t}{\hbar}|->)

where E_t=\frac{eB}{mc}

and E_-=-\frac{eB}{mc}

Why am I wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cks said:

Homework Statement


At t=0, the particle is in the eigenstate S_x, which corresponds to the eigenvalues -\hbar \over 2The particle is in a magnetic field and its Hamiltonian is H=\frac{eB}{mc}S_z. Find the state at t>0.


Homework Equations



Eigenstate of the Sx is

|->_x=\frac{1}{2^\frac{1}{2}}(|+>-|->)



The Attempt at a Solution



Since I am given with the initial state, then

|-(t)>_x=\frac{1}{2^\frac{1}{2}}(e^\frac{-iE_+t}{\hbar}|+>-e^\frac{-iE_-t}{\hbar}|->)

where E_t=\frac{eB}{mc}

and E_-=-\frac{eB}{mc}

Why am I wrong?

Looks right to me except for a factor of hbar/2 missing in your energies.
 
yaya, aisheah, thank you very much. why I always miss something!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top