Necessary axioms to derive solution to QHO problem

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter snoopies622
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axioms Derive
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving the quantum harmonic oscillator using matrix methods, specifically analyzing the Hamiltonian \(\hat{H} = \frac{1}{2m} \hat{P}^2 + \frac{1}{2} m \omega^2 \hat{X}^2\) and the commutator relation \([\hat{X}, \hat{P}] = i \hbar \hat{I}\). It is established that an additional assumption is required: the Hamiltonian must possess at least one eigenvector in the Hilbert space, indicating it is essentially self-adjoint on the operator algebra representation space. Furthermore, all three matrices involved—\(\hat{X}\), \(\hat{P}\), and \(\hat{H}\)—must be Hermitian, which serves as an additional constraint in the analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly the quantum harmonic oscillator.
  • Familiarity with matrix methods in quantum mechanics.
  • Knowledge of operator algebra and Hilbert spaces.
  • Comprehension of Hermitian operators and their significance in quantum theory.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Hermitian operators in quantum mechanics.
  • Explore the concept of eigenvectors and eigenvalues in the context of quantum systems.
  • Learn about the implications of self-adjoint operators in quantum mechanics.
  • Investigate the derivation of the Schrödinger equation and its applications in quantum harmonic oscillators.
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and researchers focusing on operator theory and matrix methods in quantum systems will benefit from this discussion.

snoopies622
Messages
852
Reaction score
29
I'm wondering how one solves for the quantum harmonic oscillator using matrix methods exclusively. Given the Hamiltonian
[tex]\hat{H} = \frac {1}{2m} \hat {P}^2 + \frac {1}{2} m \omega ^2 \hat {X}^2[/tex]
and commutator relation
[tex][ \hat {X} , \hat {P} ] = i \hbar \hat {I}[/tex]
is that enough for premises? To me it looks like two equations and three unknowns. Are any other assumptions — either classical or quantum — allowed? It is tempting to introduce
[tex]\hat {H} \psi = E \psi[/tex]
but that is called the Schrödinger equation after all, so it seems like cheating.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you need the extra assumption that the Hamiltonian has at least 1 eigenvector in the Hilbert space in which you represent the operator algebra. This amounts to saying the Hamiltonian is essentially self-adjoint on a representation space of the X,P,H operator algebra.
 
Very interesting, thank you dextercioby.

edit: Oh wait, all three matrices have to be Hermitian, don't they? That's a restriction, too.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
433
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K