Normalizeable solutions when separating the SED

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter aaaa202
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the normalization of solutions when separating the Schrödinger Equation (SED). It establishes that the separation constant E must be real to ensure the wave function remains normalizable over time. A complex separation constant leads to a wave function of the form ψ(x,t) = A(x)exp(at), which cannot be normalized for all t. However, it is noted that if the wave function is normalized at a specific time t0, it remains normalized for future times, highlighting a critical property of the SED related to unitary time evolution operators.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Schrödinger Equation (SED)
  • Knowledge of wave function normalization
  • Familiarity with unitary operators in quantum mechanics
  • Concept of time evolution in quantum systems
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of real versus complex separation constants in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the theorem of Stone and its relevance to time evolution
  • Investigate the properties of norm-preserving operators in quantum systems
  • Learn about Hamiltonians and their role in quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Quantum mechanics students, physicists, and researchers focusing on wave function behavior and time evolution in quantum systems.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
Hey guys,
I recently did an exercise whose purpose was to show what we must require from the separation constant E (when separating the SED) for the solutions to be normalized. The point was that it must be real since a complex one yields a wave function of the form:
ψ(x,t) = A(x)exp(at)
And this can't be normalized for all t. But the problem is for me: It can be normalized for all finite t, and I have shown in an earlier exercise that when the wave function is normalized at one time t0 then it stays normalized in the future (I believe this is a very important property of the SED). So isn't there some kind of inconsistensy here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The necessity of imaginary exponential comes from the theorem of Stone which in turn is needed to get to the generator of time translations, the Hamiltonian. The time evolution must be represented by a norm preserving operator, thus this is necessarily unitary.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
12K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K