How is the Exponential Term Derived in Time-Dependent Perturbation Theory?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the derivation of the exponential term $$e^{i(\omega_m - \omega_0 ) t' }$$ in time-dependent perturbation theory. It explains that the left exponential operates on the bra while the right exponential acts on the ket, leading to the transformation of the eigenstate ##\ket{m}## into its corresponding eigenvalue due to its status as an eigenstate of ##\hat H_0##. The participants are clarifying the mathematical steps involved in this process. Understanding this derivation is crucial for grasping the overall framework of time-dependent perturbation theory. The conversation emphasizes the significance of eigenstates in simplifying complex quantum mechanical expressions.
Rayan
Messages
17
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
A free particle of spin 1 is at rest in a magnetic field B, so that
$$ H_0 = −κ B_z S_z $$
where $S_z$ is the projection of the spin operator in the z direction. A harmonic perturbation
with frequency $ ω = κ B_z $ is applied in the x direction for a short time (one period of
oscillation only), so that the weak perturbation is
$$ V (t) = −κ B_x S_x sin(ωt) \, \, \, , \, \, \, for 0 < t < T = (2π/ω) $$
Relevant Equations
Calculate, using time-dependent perturbation theory the probability of observing $S_z = ℏ$ to the lowest non-vanishing order.
So I have the solution here and trying to understand what happened at the beginning of the second row! How did we get the exponential $$e^{i(\omega_m - \omega_0 ) t' }$$ ?

Screenshot 2024-02-18 at 10.37.18.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The left exponential acted on the bra and the right exponential acted on the ket. Since ##\ket{m}## is an eigenstate of ##\hat H_0## this replaces it by its corresponding eigenvalue.
 
  • Like
Likes Rayan and docnet
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