Need info on rules for applying derivatives in QM equations

buffordboy23
Messages
545
Reaction score
2
This is not a homework problem, but advice on the presented examples would be helpful anyways.

Does anyone know of a good QM textbook or website that discusses the rules for applying derivatives in QM? In reviewing many of the derivations, I find many weird applications with no reasoning from the author. Here are two examples:

In trying to derive

\left\langle v \right\rangle = \frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt}

we see that

\frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt} = \int x\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\Psi\right|^{2}dx

yet we can't pull the partial derivative over onto x--this is because the wave function may evolve over time and therefore change the expectation value (?).

In another example, in trying to derive

\left\langle p \right\rangle = m \frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt}

we eventually see that

m \frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt} = \frac{i\hbar}{2}\int\left[ \Psi^{*}x\frac{\partial^{2}\Psi}{\partial x^{2}} - \frac{\partial^{2}\Psi^{*}}{\partial x^{2}}x\Psi\right] dx = \frac{i\hbar}{2}\int\left[ \Psi^{*}\frac{\partial^{2}(x\Psi)}{\partial x^{2}} - \frac{\partial^{2}\Psi^{*}}{\partial x^{2}}(x\Psi)\right] dx - i\hbar \int \Psi^{*}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\Psi dx

where the x is thrown into the partial derivative. I can't explain this one and the author offers no indication for his reasoning. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
buffordboy23 said:
This is not a homework problem, but advice on the presented examples would be helpful anyways.

Does anyone know of a good QM textbook or website that discusses the rules for applying derivatives in QM? In reviewing many of the derivations, I find many weird applications with no reasoning from the author. Here are two examples:

In trying to derive

\left\langle v \right\rangle = \frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt}

we see that

\frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt} = \int x\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\Psi\right|^{2}dx

yet we can't pull the partial derivative over onto x--this is because the wave function may evolve over time and therefore change the expectation value (?).
I am not sure I understand your comment. The above equality is correct because x does not depend on time so you can pass it throught the derivative with respect to time.
In another example, in trying to derive

\left\langle p \right\rangle = m \frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt}

we eventually see that

m \frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt} = \frac{i\hbar}{2}\int\left[ \Psi^{*}x\frac{\partial^{2}\Psi}{\partial x^{2}} - \frac{\partial^{2}\Psi^{*}}{\partial x^{2}}x\Psi\right] dx = \frac{i\hbar}{2}\int\left[ \Psi^{*}\frac{\partial^{2}(x\Psi)}{\partial x^{2}} - \frac{\partial^{2}\Psi^{*}}{\partial x^{2}}(x\Psi)\right] dx - i\hbar \int \Psi^{*}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\Psi dx

where the x is thrown into the partial derivative. I can't explain this one and the author offers no indication for his reasoning. Thanks.

See my comment above
 
nrqed said:
I am not sure I understand your comment. The above equality is correct because x does not depend on time so you can pass it throught the derivative with respect to time.


I know it is right, but suppose I said

\frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt} = \int \frac{\partial x}{\partial t}\left|\Psi\right|^{2}dx

Since \partial x/\partial t = 0, then

\frac{d \left\langle x \right\rangle}{dt} = 0

which is wrong because it neglects the evolution of the wave-function with time. Basically, I don't want to fall into such traps.

nrqed said:
See my comment above

So for the second example, it sounds like you are saying that x does not depend on the position in space? Therefore, x is a constant and is treated as such when thrown into the partial derivative:

\frac{\partial^{2}(x\Psi)}{\partial x^{2}}=x\frac{\partial^{2}\Psi}{\partial x^{2}}

This doesn't make sense to me because of the extra integral. Do you have any recommendations on what I can do to obtain better clarity in applying these strange techniques? I would likely never thought of it unless I saw it somewhere else first. How has your experience been in deriving equations in QM? It seems like a lot of trial and error in my efforts so far--there are many directions in which to manipulate some equation but the direction is not always clear, so I choose one direction and keep chugging away until a page later I see that the road is blocked, and I must try a new direction...time is wasted and I want to be more efficient. =(
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top