Is the hamiltonian in the coordinate representation always diagonal?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether the Hamiltonian in the coordinate representation of a quantum mechanical system is always diagonal. Participants explore this question through theoretical considerations and examples from quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the Hamiltonian need not be diagonal in the coordinate representation, citing examples such as the Hamiltonian of a free particle and the one-dimensional harmonic oscillator.
  • One participant explains that when a potential is local, the Hamiltonian can be expressed in a diagonal form, leading to the Schrödinger equation being a differential equation in the coordinate representation.
  • Another participant elaborates on the mathematical representation of the Hamiltonian, discussing how it can be expressed in terms of the delta function and derivatives, depending on the nature of the potential.
  • Questions are raised about the mathematical proof of the diagonal form of the Hamiltonian, with participants seeking clarification on notation and derivation steps.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the Hamiltonian is always diagonal in the coordinate representation, with multiple competing views presented regarding the conditions under which it may or may not be diagonal.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss specific cases of local and non-local potentials, highlighting that the diagonal nature of the Hamiltonian is contingent on these definitions. The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and notation that some participants find confusing.

zedya
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
In the coordinate representation of a quantum mechanical system, is it always true that the Hamiltonian of the system is diagonal? If so, can someone explain to me why this is true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, the Hamiltonian of a qm system need not be diagonal in the coordinate rep. The Hamiltonian of a free particle is diagonal in p, not in x. The 1-dim. harmonic oscillator is neither diagonal in x nor in p.
 
zedya said:
In the coordinate representation of a quantum mechanical system, is it always true that the Hamiltonian of the system is diagonal? If so, can someone explain to me why this is true?

What led you to believe that it was?
 
I think someone said something of that sort a while back... and I made a note of it. It's been confusing me for several days. Because I was pretty sure that it made no sense. I wanted to check basically. Thanks for your replies.
 
zedya said:
In the coordinate representation of a quantum mechanical system, is it always true that the Hamiltonian of the system is diagonal? If so, can someone explain to me why this is true?

Let me explain to you what people mean when they say that.
In the X-representation, a potential is said to be local if it can be described by the following diagonal matrix;

[tex]\langle x | \hat{V} | y \rangle = \delta (x-y) V(x)[/tex]

So, when the potential is local, the Hamiltonian is diagonal in the sense that it can be written as

[tex]\langle x| \hat{H}| y \rangle = H(x,-i\partial_{x}) \delta(x-y)[/tex]

where

[tex]H(x,-i\partial_{x}) = -\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x^{2}} + V(x)[/tex]

This diagonal form of H is the one and only reason why Schrödinger equation is a differential equation in the X-representation;

[tex]i\partial_{t} \Psi (x) = \int dy \langle x|\hat{H}|y\rangle \Psi(y)[/tex]

When V is not local, the Hamiltonian will not have a diagonal form and Schrödinger equation becomes an integral equation.

This also happens in the P-representation where the Hamiltonian has the following non-diagonal form;

[tex]\langle P|\hat{H}|\bar{P}\rangle = P^{2} \delta(P - \bar{P}) + V(P - \bar{P})[/tex]

where

[tex]V(p) = \int dx V(x) e^{iPx}[/tex]

and

[tex]i\partial_{t}\Psi(x) = P^{2} \Psi(x) + \int d \bar{P} V(P - \bar{P}) \Psi(\bar{P})[/tex]

regards

sam
 
Last edited:
samalkhaiat said:
So, when the potential is local, the Hamiltonian is diagonal in the sense that it can be written as

[tex]\langle x| \hat{H}| y \rangle = H(x,-i\partial_{x}) \delta(x-y)[/tex]

where

[tex]H(x,-i\partial_{x}) = -\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x^{2}} + V(x)[/tex]

So, one more question (thanks a lot for this reply by the way, beautiful explanation)... how would you prove the above? I always get confused with notation stuff... how would you prove that

[tex]\langle x| \hat{H}| y \rangle = H(x,-i\partial_{x}) \delta(x-y)[/tex]

is true mathematically?

Thanks again.
 
zedya said:
So, one more question (thanks a lot for this reply by the way, beautiful explanation)... how would you prove the above? I always get confused with notation stuff... how would you prove that

[tex]\langle x| \hat{H}| y \rangle = H(x,-i\partial_{x}) \delta(x-y)[/tex]

is true mathematically?

Thanks again.



In the X-representation, and for an arbitrary ket [itex]|\Psi\rangle[/itex], we have;

[tex]\langle x|\hat{X}|\Psi \rangle = x \langle x| \Psi \rangle \equiv x\Psi(x)[/tex]

[tex]\langle x|\hat{P}|\Psi\rangle = -i \partial_{x}\langle x|\Psi\rangle \equiv\ –i \partial_{x}\Psi(x)[/tex]

Now letting [itex]|\Psi\rangle[/itex] be the position eigenket [itex]|y\rangle[/itex], we get

[tex]\langle x |\hat{X}| y \rangle =x \langle x |y \rangle = x \delta (x-y)[/tex]

[tex]\langle x |\hat{P}| y \rangle = -i \partial_{x}\delta(x-y)[/tex]

Next, write

[tex] \langle x |\hat{P}^{2} | \Psi \rangle = \int \ dy \ \langle x |\hat{P} | y \rangle \langle y | \hat{P} | \Psi \rangle[/tex]

and use the above relations to obtain

[tex] \langle x |\hat{P}^{2} | \Psi \rangle = (-i)^{2} \partial_{x} \int \ dy \delta(x-y) \partial_{y} \langle y | \psi \rangle = - \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x^{2}} \langle x | \Psi \rangle[/tex]

Again, let [itex]|\Psi \rangle = |y \rangle[/itex] to get

[tex]\langle x | \hat{P}^{2} | y \rangle = -i \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x^{2}} \delta (x-y)[/tex]

Now if you put the above in the Hamiltonian matrix ( 2m = 1),

[tex]\langle x| \hat{H} |y \rangle = \langle x | \hat{P}^{2}| y\rangle + \langle x | \hat{V}| y \rangle[/tex]

you will get what you wanted.

Regards

sam
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
906
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K