Propagator for quantum linear potential

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
3 replies · 5K views
Peeter
Messages
303
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement



Attempting a problem related to a quantum particle in free fall due to constant force (old exam question)

[tex]\begin{align*}H = \frac{1}{{2m}} P^2 + m g X\end{align*}[/tex]

The last part of the question asks to verify that the position space propagator has the following form

[tex]\begin{align*}\phi(x,t) &= \int_{-\infty}^\infty \phi(x', 0) G(x,x';t) dx' \\ G(x,x';t) &=\sqrt{\frac{m}{2 \pi \hbar i t}} \exp\left(\frac{im}{2 h t}\left( x - x' + gt^2/2\right)^2\right)\exp\left(-\frac{img}{h}\left( x t + gt^3/6\right)\right)\end{align*}[/tex]

(working in the momentum representation to get that far).


Homework Equations



One is able to show

[tex]\begin{align*}i \hbar \frac{\partial {}}{\partial {t}}\tilde{\phi}(p,t)= (mg) i \hbar \frac{\partial {}}{\partial {p}}\tilde{\phi}(p,t)+ \frac{p^2}{2m}\frac{\partial {}}{\partial {p}}\tilde{\phi}(p,t)\end{align*}[/tex]

I find as a solution, using separation of variables

[tex]\begin{align*}\tilde{\phi}(p,t) = C \exp \left( \frac{1}{{m g i \hbar}} \left( E p - \frac{p^3}{6m}\right) - \frac{i E t}{\hbar} \right)\end{align*}[/tex]

and verify that this has the form
[tex]\begin{align*}\tilde{\phi}(p,t) &= f( p + mg t ) \exp \left( - i \frac{ p^3} {6 m^2 \hbar g}\right) \\ f( p ) &=\tilde{\phi}(p,0) \exp \left( - i \frac{ p^3} {6 m^2 \hbar g}\right) \end{align*}[/tex]


The Attempt at a Solution



Relating the position and momentum representation with Fourier transforms

[tex]\begin{align*}\tilde{\phi}(p,t) &= \tilde{\phi}(p + m g t,0) \exp \left( - i \frac{ p^3 + (p + m g t)^3} {6 m^2 \hbar g}\right) \\ \phi(x,t) &= \frac{1}{{2 \pi \hbar}} \int dp\tilde{\phi}(p,t) e^{i p x/\hbar} \\ \tilde{\phi}(p + m g t,0) &=\frac{1}{{2 \pi \hbar}} \int dx'\phi(x', 0) e^{-i x'(p + mg t)/\hbar }\end{align*}[/tex]

Putting these all together and making some changes of variables I can reduce this to the propagator form:
[tex]\begin{align*}G(x,x'; t) = \frac{1}{{2 \pi}} e^{-i x' mg t/\hbar} \int dk \exp\left( i k (x-x') -\frac{i \hbar^2 }{6 m^2 g}\left( (k+ mgt/\hbar)^3 + k^3 \right)\right)\end{align*}[/tex]

But appear out of luck for any easy way to integrate this, so I suspect that I've messed this up in some fundamental way, and am looking to be pointed onto the right path.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With the help of the Airy function
[tex]\begin{align*}Ai(x) = \frac{1}{{2\pi}} \int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{i(u^3/3 + ux)} du\end{align*}[/tex]

and it's Fourier transform
[tex]\begin{align*}F(Ai(x)) = \frac{1}{{2\pi}} e^{i k^3/3}\end{align*}[/tex]

I was able to compute

[tex]\begin{align*}G(x,x'; t) = \frac{1}{{2 \pi}} \frac{6 m^2 g}{\hbar^2} e^{-i x' mg t/\hbar} \int_{-\infty}^\infty du \exp\left( i \left( u^3/3 + (x-x') u \right)\right) du\end{align*}[/tex]

(although I think I may have lost some factors of 3 along the way). This has some similarities to the expected form, but is not a match. We also haven't covered Airy functions in class, so I think there must be some simpler approach.

I'm wondering now if I've improperly assumed that [itex]\tilde{\phi}(p,t)[/itex] is related to [itex]\phi(x,t)[/itex] via Fourier transformation. Perhaps that only makes sense for the free particle case where [itex]\left\langle{{x}} \vert {{p}}\right\rangle \propto e^{i p x/\hbar}[/itex]?
 
I haven't gone over your calculations, so I can't tell you where your error is, but I can suggest an easier way to do things... In order to verify a solution, all you really need to do is show that the solution satisfies the Time-dependent Schrödinger's Equation... so why not just show that

[tex]i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t} \phi(x,t) = H\phi(x,t)[/tex]

by calculating the appropriate derivatives?
 
I was loose in my description of the problem, which asked to show that this is the value for G, and not just verify that it works. I suppose the verification you suggest would do that indirectly, but I think they really did want a derivation.