Interaction picture equation from Heisenberg equation

copernicus1
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
The standard Heisenberg picture equation of motion is $$i\hbar\frac d{dt}A_H=[A_H,H],$$ assuming no explicit ##t##-dependence on the Heisenberg-picture operator ##A_H##. I've been trying to go directly from this equation to the corresponding interaction-picture equation, $$i\hbar\frac d{dt}A_I=[A_I,H_0],$$ (see Sakurai 5.5.12) which I thought at first would be simple, but I keep coming up with $$i\hbar\frac d{dt}A_I=[A_I,H_0]+[A_I,V_I],$$ where ##V_I## is the interaction part of the hamiltonian in the interaction picture. The basic problem is that in the original equation ##H## contains both ##H_0## and ##V## and I don't know how to get rid of the ##V## part. Has anyone been through this calculation?

Thanks!

P.S. I know I could just start with ##A_I(t)=e^{iH_0t/\hbar}A_Se^{-iH_0t/\hbar}##, where ##A_S## is in the Schrodinger picture, and I can derive the equation this way, but I feel like it should work the other way too.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you please show your derivation?
 
I start with $$i\hbar\frac{}d{dt}A_H(t)=[A_H(t),H_H(t)]$$ (subscript means Heisenberg picture) and plug in ##A_H(t)=e^{iH_St/\hbar}A_Se^{-iH_St/\hbar}## and ##H_H(t)=e^{iH_St/\hbar}H_Se^{-iH_St/\hbar}##. (I then replace ##H_S=H_{0,S}+V_S## everywhere and transform both sides of the original Heisenberg equation using $$i\hbar\frac{}d{dt}e^{-iV_St/\hbar}A_H(t)e^{iV_St/\hbar}=e^{-iV_St/\hbar}[A_H(t),H_H(t)]e^{iV_St/\hbar}.$$ Simplify and I'm left with $$i\hbar\frac{d}{dt}A_I(t)=A_I(t)e^{iH_{0,S}t/\hbar}H_Se^{-iH_{0,S}t/\hbar}-e^{iH_{0,S}t/\hbar}H_Se^{-iH_{0,S}t/\hbar}A_I(t),$$ but ##H_S\neq H_{0,S}##. If it did I would be done. Instead it's ##H_S=H_{0,S}+V_S##. This is where I get stuck.
 
copernicus1 said:
I then replace ##H_S=H_{0,S}+V_S## everywhere
I guess this is where it doesn't work. Since ##[H_0, V] \neq 0##, ##e^{i (H_0 + V) t/ \hbar} \neq e^{i H_0 t/ \hbar} e^{i V t/ \hbar}##.
 
Ah, interesting! Thanks for pointing that out.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top