Hamiltonian For The Simple Harmonic Oscillator

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the Hamiltonian for a simple harmonic oscillator, emphasizing the concept of "energy surface" and its dimensionality. For a one-dimensional oscillator, the phase space is two-dimensional, while the energy surface is one-dimensional, represented as a line. The equation for the Hamiltonian is clarified, showing that the energy surface forms a paraboloid in the x-p plane, with constant energy levels depicted as circles. The participants confirm that the dimensionality of the energy surface is one less than that of the phase space, aligning with the general understanding of hyperspheres. This exchange enhances the understanding of the relationship between phase space and energy surfaces in classical mechanics.
morangta
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
I am reading an article on the "energy surface" of a Hamiltonian. For a simple harmonic oscillator, I am assuming this "energy surface" has one (1) degree of freedom. For this case, the article states that the "dimensionality of phase space" = 2N = 2 and "dimensionality of the energy surface" = 2N-1 = 1.

Adjusting x gives H = ω (p + x). That's H = ω(p*p + x*x).

When I plot the energy surface for H, I get a 3-dimensional paraboloid plotted against the x-p plane. Or, lines of constant H are 2-dimensional circles in the p-x plane. What energy surface would be 2N-1 = one (1)-dimensional here? Am not trying to quibble about terminology here. Just want to know if I am missing something.

Thanks for reading.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi.
I assume N refers to the number of spatial dimensions, so in the case of a one-dimensional oscillator your phase space is indeed two-dimensional while the energy "surface" is a line (i.e. one-dimensional).
In general, you understand how phase space volume would be 2N-dimensional; now the harmonic oscillator equation always determines a hypersphere (E = x^2 + y^2 +...), so the dimensionality of the hyper-surface is naturally one dimension less than the volume: 2N–1...
 
  • Like
Likes hisacro
I get it now. Thanks so much for your fast reply.
Ted
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top