How do I evaluate <x> with the k-space representation?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on evaluating the expectation values <x> and <p> using the k-space representation of a wave function. Participants clarify that the operator x acts in k space as i∂/∂k, contrasting its behavior in position space. The conversation emphasizes that the integral should be computed directly in k space, rather than converting to position space. Misunderstandings about the number of integrals needed for calculations are addressed, leading to a clearer understanding of the problem. Ultimately, the participants express satisfaction with the clarification, indicating they have reached the correct solution.
Cracker Jack
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Given the following k-space representation of the wave function:
Ψ(k,t) = Ψ(k)e-iħk2t/2m

use the wave number representation to show the following:

<x>t=<x>0 + <p>0t/m

<p>t=<p>0

Homework Equations


<x>=∫Ψ*(x,t)xΨ(x,t)dx
<p>=∫Ψ*(x,t)(-iħ ∂/∂x)Ψ(x,t)dx

The Attempt at a Solution


I have tried to make the k-space representation into the normal Ψ(x,t) representation then taking Ψ*(x,t) and taking that integral where Ψ(x,t)=1/√(2pi)∫Ψ(k)e-iħk2t/2m*ei(kx-ħk2t/2m)dkHowever, I get caught up when calculating <x> at the following integral: <x>=1/2pi*∫∫(Ψ*(k)Ψ(k) x dk)dx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cracker Jack said:
Ψ(x,t)=1/√(2pi)∫Ψ(k)e-iħk2t/2m*ei(kx-ħk2t/2m)dk
You don't need to do that calculation because you are asked to compute the integral in the k space, and you have also been given the state in k space.
Cracker Jack said:
<x>=1/2pi*∫∫(Ψ*(k)Ψ(k) x dk)dx
Your equation is not correct. Even if you want to do the integral in x space by first expressing ##\psi(x,t)## in its Fourier integral, there should be three integral signs appearing there. But again you don't need to do this. Simply calculate
$$
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \psi^*(k,t)x\psi(x,t) \hspace{2mm}dk
$$
Your first task is to find out how the operator ##x## acts in k space.
Hint: the expression of ##x## in k space is similar to that of ##p## in position space.
 
blue_leaf77 said:
You don't need to do that calculation because you are asked to compute the integral in the k space, and you have also been given the state in k space.

Your equation is not correct. Even if you want to do the integral in x space by first expressing ##\psi(x,t)## in its Fourier integral, there should be three integral signs appearing there. But again you don't need to do this. Simply calculate
$$
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \psi^*(k,t)x\psi(x,t) \hspace{2mm}dk
$$
Your first task is to find out how the operator ##x## acts in k space.
Hint: the expression of ##x## in k space is similar to that of ##p## in position space.
Thank you, I think this helps. I was thinking x could only act on Ψ if it was Ψ(x,t). Looking through lecture notes, I think that x operates in k space as i∂/∂k. Is that correct?
 
Cracker Jack said:
I think that x operates in k space as i∂/∂k. Is that correct?
Yes correct.
Cracker Jack said:
I was thinking x could only act on Ψ if it was Ψ(x,t).
States are vector in vector space and the operators are the linear maps in the vector space. Since vector space can have more than one bases, the operators can also have different form depending on which bases being used. When position bases is being used ##x## becomes simply a number, in k space ##x## acts such that it has the form you wrote there.
 
blue_leaf77 said:
Yes correct.

States are vector in vector space and the operators are the linear maps in the vector space. Since vector space can have more than one bases, the operators can also have different form depending on which bases being used. When position bases is being used ##x## becomes simply a number, in k space ##x## acts such that it has the form you wrote there.
Thank you this helped a lot, and now I think I've gotten the right answer.
 
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