I Will the kinetic energy operator change with a variable shift?

Konte
Messages
90
Reaction score
1
Hello everybody,

A special problem constrain me to make a variable change in my Hamiltonian operator, so with the kinetic energy operator, I have a doubt.
The variable change is: ## \theta \longrightarrow (\theta + k) ## (where ##k## is a constant).
And the kinetic energy operator change as :
$$ \hat{T}_{old}=\frac{-\hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta^2} \,\, \longrightarrow \,\, \hat{T}_{new}=\frac{-\hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial}{\partial (\theta+k)^2} $$

When ##\hat{T}_{old}## and ##\hat{T}_{new}## operate respectively onto a function, say ##\psi(\theta)##, will I have two different results?Thank you very much.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If ##\theta## is an angular variable, such as the ##\theta## in cylindrical coordinates, then that is not the correct expression of kinetic energy. If ##\theta## is a normal cartesian position coordinate, then those operators produce the same result when operating on a function, as you can deduce from the equation ##\frac{d}{d\theta} = \frac{d(\theta+k)}{d\theta}\frac{d}{d(\theta + k)}=\frac{d}{d(\theta + k)}##
 
  • Like
Likes Konte
This hamiltonian is for a plane rotator (polar coordinate whith fixed-##r##). I should have mentioned inertia ##I## instead of mass ##m##.
So it is about an angular variable ##\theta##. Is something change with respect to your answer in the Cartesian coordinate case?

Thanks.
 
Yes, if you use ##I## instead of ##m##, the expression is correct. The derivative ##\frac{d}{d\theta}## is equal to ##\frac{d}{d(\theta + k)}## for any variable ##\theta## and constant ##k##.
 
  • Like
Likes Konte
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
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...
I am not sure if this falls under classical physics or quantum physics or somewhere else (so feel free to put it in the right section), but is there any micro state of the universe one can think of which if evolved under the current laws of nature, inevitably results in outcomes such as a table levitating? That example is just a random one I decided to choose but I'm really asking about any event that would seem like a "miracle" to the ordinary person (i.e. any event that doesn't seem to...
Back
Top