How Does the Time Evolution of Expectation Shape Scientific Understanding?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the time evolution of quantum mechanical expectation values, specifically how they are governed by a differential equation involving Hermitian operators. The Ehrenfest theorem is referenced to illustrate the relationship between the time derivative of an operator and its commutation with the Hamiltonian. A user presents a problem related to the expectation value of x², seeking clarification on an unexpected extra term in their calculations. After some back-and-forth, they realize their mistake was in the handling of derivatives. The conversation highlights the complexities of quantum mechanics and the importance of careful mathematical manipulation.
OGrowli
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you asking about how quantum mechanical expectation values evolve with time? If so, then it evolves according to the differential equation

\frac{d}{dt}<{\psi}|O|{\psi}> = \frac{i}{\hbar}<{\psi}|[H,O]|{\psi}> + <{\psi}|\frac{{\partial}O}{{\partial}t}|{\psi}>

With O being a Hermitian operator.
 
Last edited:
planck42 said:
Are you asking about how quantum mechanical expectation values evolve with time? If so, then it evolves according to the differential equation

\frac{d}{dt}<{\psi}|O|{\psi}> = \frac{i}{\hbar}<{\psi}|[H,O]|{\psi}> + <{\psi}|\frac{{\partial}O}{{\partial}t}|{\psi}>

With O being a Hermitian operator.

i don't know what happened to my original post, but I am having an issue with the following problem:

Show that:

\frac{d}{dt}<x^2> =\frac{1}{m}(< xp_x> +<p_xx>)

for a three dimensional wave packet.

relevant equations:

Ehrenfest Theorem:(1)
i\hbar\frac{d}{dt}&lt;O&gt;=&lt;[O,H]&gt;+i\hbar&lt;\frac{\partial }{\partial t}O&gt;

where O is an operator
(2)
\frac{d}{dt}\int_{V}d^3r\psi ^*O\psi

I tried using both ways illustrated above and I arrived at the same answer:

\frac{-i\hbar}{2m}\int_{V}d^3r\psi ^*[\bigtriangledown ^2(x^2\psi)-x^2\bigtriangledown ^2\psi]

=\frac{-i\hbar}{2m}\int_{V}d^3r\psi ^*[\frac{\partial }{\partial x}<br /> (x^2\psi&#039;+2x\psi)-x^2\frac{\partial^2 }{\partial x^2}\psi]

=\frac{-i\hbar}{2m}\int_{V}d^3r\psi ^*[<br /> 2\psi+2x\frac{\partial }{\partial x}\psi+2x\frac{\partial }{\partial x}\psi+(x^2-x^2)\frac{\partial^2 }{\partial x^2}\psi]

=\frac{1}{m}\int_{V}d^3r[\psi ^*(-i\hbar)\psi+\psi^*x(-i\hbar\frac{\partial }{\partial x})\psi+\psi^*(-i\hbar\frac{\partial }{\partial x})x\psi]

=\frac{1}{m}(&lt;xp_x&gt;+&lt;p_xx&gt;)-\frac{i\hbar}{m}

Am I doing anything wrong? Where does the extra term come from, and does it mean anything?
 
nvm, I got it:

<br /> =\frac{-i\hbar}{2m}\int_{V}d^3r\psi ^*[\frac{\partial }{\partial x}<br /> (x^2\psi&#039;+2x\psi)-x^2\frac{\partial^2 }{\partial x^2}\psi]<br />

=\frac{-i\hbar}{2m}\int_{V}d^3r\psi ^*[x^2\frac{\partial^2 }{\partial x^2}\psi+2x\frac{\partial }{\partial x}\psi+2\frac{\partial }{\partial x}(x\psi)-x^2\frac{\partial^2 }{\partial x^2}\psi]

=\frac{1}{m}\int_{V}d^3r[\psi^*x(-i\hbar\frac{\partial }{\partial x})\psi+\psi^*(-i\hbar\frac{\partial }{\partial x})x\psi]

=\frac{1}{m}(&lt;xp_x&gt;+&lt;p_xx&gt;)

I went wrong thinking I could just rearrange the derivatives.
 
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