Propagator for a free particle / schrodinger equation

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the propagator for a free particle as described by the Schrödinger equation. Participants are examining the derivation and normalization factors involved in transitioning between momentum and energy representations.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the origin of the factor \(\frac{m}{(2mE)^{1/2}}\) in the context of the propagator. There are attempts to derive the propagator from first principles and to understand the relationship between energy and momentum states.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the necessity of certain factors for proper normalization and density of states. Others are questioning the assumptions made in the derivations and whether the standard forms of the propagator are being correctly applied.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted confusion regarding the normalization of states and the transition between momentum and energy representations. Participants are also referencing specific equations from literature to support their points, indicating a reliance on established texts for clarification.

boboYO
Messages
106
Reaction score
0
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/4295/eqn.png here is the text preceding the exercise:

http://yfrog.com/5mch5p in the exercise, where does the factor [tex]\frac{m}{(2mE)^{1/2}}[/tex] come from? Comparing that equation with 5.19 (bottom right of link), why can't we just replace |p> with |E,+> and |E,->?

if I start from scratch:

[tex]| \psi \rangle = \sum_{\alpha=\pm} \int_0^{\infty}\! |E,\alpha\rangle\langle E,\alpha|\psi \rangle \,\,dE[/tex]do [tex]\left( i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} - H \right)[/tex] to both sides:

[tex]\left( i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} - H \right) |\psi \rangle = 0 = \sum_{\alpha=\pm} \int_0^{\infty}\!\left[i \hbar \langle E,\alpha|\dot{\psi}\rangle -E\langle E\langleE,\alpha|\psi\rangle \right] |E, \alpha \rangle \,\, dE[/tex]

[tex]\implies i \hbar \langle E,\alpha|\dot{\psi}\rangle -E\langle E\langleE,\alpha|\psi\rangle = 0[/tex]

[tex]\implies \langle E,\alpha| \psi \rangle = \langle E,\alpha|\psi_0\rangle e^{-iEt/\hbar}[/tex][tex]\therefore | \psi \rangle = \sum_{\alpha=\pm} \int_0^{\infty}\! |E,\alpha\rangle \langle E,\alpha|\psi_0\rangle e^{-iEt/\hbar} \,\,dE[/tex]and so the propagator is [tex]U(t) = \sum_{\alpha=\pm} \int_0^{\infty}\! |E,\alpha\rangle \langle E,\alpha| e^{-iEt/\hbar} \,\,dE[/tex]

??
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Split (5.1.9) into two integrals, one for positive p and one for negative p, and when you change variables from p to E, remember that you have to express dp in terms of dE.
 
Thanks. I mistakenly assumed dp=dE because |p>=|E>but I still can't find the mistake in my derivation? Is the first line correct?
 
Just a guess, but maybe it's a just difference in normalization.
 
It can not be a just difference in normalization, since [tex]\frac{m}{(2mE)^{1/2}}[/tex] is the factor of the integrand. I am facing the same problem, any help is appreciated.
 
That factor is necessary as a measure to properly count the density of states. The point is that the number of states in the interval [tex](E,E+dE)[/tex] must be the same as the number of states in the interval [tex](p,p+dp)[/tex] when [tex]E = p^2/(2m)[/tex].

For a free particle, the momentum states are parameterized as a linear function of wavenumbers, so it's obvious that

[tex]\sum_p \rightarrow \int dp[/tex]

without any factors. If we compute

[tex]\int_{\sqrt{2mE}}^{\sqrt{4mE}} = (\sqrt{2}-1) \sqrt{2mE} \neq \int_E^{2E} dE.[/tex]

However

[tex]\int_E^{2E} dE \frac{m}{\sqrt{2mE}} = (\sqrt{2}-1) \sqrt{2mE}.[/tex]

We therefore conclude that

[tex]\sum_E \rightarrow \int dE ~\frac{m}{\sqrt{2mE}}.[/tex]
 
I do not understand why the number of states in the two interval must be same, through it leads to the desired result. But the point is, what is wrong with the derivation above? Isn't that the normal form of propagator?
 
kerrigan said:
I do not understand why the number of states in the two interval must be same, through it leads to the desired result. But the point is, what is wrong with the derivation above? Isn't that the normal form of propagator?

It is, but you still have to change the momentum integration to an energy integration, which introduces the same factor. Start with

[tex]U(t) = \int_{-\infty}^\infty dp | p \rangle \langle p | e^{-iEt/\hbar}[/tex]

We can introduce complete sets of energy eigenstates:

[tex]U(t) = \int_{0}^\infty dp \int_0^\infty dE' \int_0^\infty dE'' |E',+\rangle\langle E'',+ | \langle E'',+ | p \rangle \langle p | E',+ \rangle e^{-iEt/\hbar}<br /> + (+\rightarrow -).[/tex]

Now we know that

[tex]\langle p | E',+\rangle = \langle E=p^2/2m, + | E',+\rangle = \delta(E-E'),[/tex]

but to use that we'll need to rewrite the integral over momentum in terms of an integral over energy:

[tex]\int_0^\infty dp = \int_0^\infty \frac{m}{\sqrt{2mE}} dE.[/tex]
 
Thank you for your reply. I am puzzled with what you "start with". We are dealing with the free particle, so [tex]H=\frac{m}{(2mE)^{1/2}}[/tex]. If a state is an eigenstate of [tex]H[/tex], it should be an eigenstate of [tex]P^2[/tex], and thus an eigenstate of [tex]P[/tex]. (Why? We know that any eigenstate of [tex]P[/tex] is also eigenstate of [tex]P ^2[/tex], but vice versa?) As the result, an eigenstate of energy can be labeled as |p>.

The normal form of propagator is [tex] U(t) = \int_{0}^\infty dE | E \rangle \langle E | e^{-iEt/\hbar}[/tex].
Then replace |E> with |p>, it seems that the propagator should be
[tex] U(t) = \int_{0}^\infty dE | p \rangle \langle p | e^{-iEt/\hbar}[/tex]. What's wrong?

I'm reading shankar. If you have a book at hand, you may see p.146 and p.152. Thanks.
 
  • #10
kerrigan said:
Thank you for your reply. I am puzzled with what you "start with". We are dealing with the free particle, so [tex]H=\frac{m}{(2mE)^{1/2}}[/tex].

That's not the free particle Hamiltonian. Among other things, that expression has the wrong units!.

If a state is an eigenstate of [tex]H[/tex], it should be an eigenstate of [tex]P^2[/tex], and thus an eigenstate of [tex]P[/tex]. (Why? We know that any eigenstate of [tex]P[/tex] is also eigenstate of [tex]P ^2[/tex], but vice versa?)

The vice versa comes from the theorem that if two observables commute, they have simultaneous eigenstates.

As the result, an eigenstate of energy can be labeled as |p>.

The normal form of propagator is [tex] U(t) = \int_{0}^\infty dE | E \rangle \langle E | e^{-iEt/\hbar}[/tex].
Then replace |E> with |p>, it seems that the propagator should be
[tex] U(t) = \int_{0}^\infty dE | p \rangle \langle p | e^{-iEt/\hbar}[/tex]. What's wrong?

I'm reading shankar. If you have a book at hand, you may see p.146 and p.152. Thanks.

This thread was about a particular definition of the propagator that is equation 5.1.9 in the link in the OP. It is more common to define the propagator as a sum over energy eigenstates. However, if you rewrite your last expression above as an integral over momentum, you'll find an extra factor of [tex]p/m[/tex]. So the two definitions of propagator are not perfectly in agreement, but I believe that the qualitative physics will be the same.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
671
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K