How Does Equation (92) Follow from Equation (91) in the Breit-Wigner Derivation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BOYLANATOR
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation Formula
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
1 reply · 4K views
BOYLANATOR
Messages
193
Reaction score
18

Homework Statement



The start of the derivation is shown in the attached image. I don't follow the argument that takes us from (91) to (92).

The Attempt at a Solution



I accept that the wavefunction of (91) is not an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian. I'm not clear where equation (92) came from though. Any comments that may offer an insight would be appreciated.
 
Attachments
  • Derivation.PNG
    Derivation.PNG
    50.1 KB · Views: 1,253
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
They're just using the fact that the set of functions [itex]\left\{e^{ikt}\right\}[/itex], where k may be any real number, forms an orthogonal basis, in terms of which any integrable function may be expressed. Same idea as a Fourier transform.