I Prove that TDSE is invariant under Galilean Transformation.

Viraj Daniel Dsouza
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I want the proof for a general wavefunction Ψ(x,t).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Schrödinger equation isn't invariant under Galilean transformations. It's invariant under a central extension of the universal cover of the Galilean group. Specifically, this means that you cannot just apply a Galilean transformation to the wave-function, but you need to add a (mass and time dependent) phase factor in order to transform a solution into another solution. In contrast to the Lorentz group, the phase factor cannot be made to vanish in case of the Galilean group.
 
Viraj Daniel Dsouza said:
I want the proof for a general wavefunction Ψ(x,t).

A proof of what?
 
PeterDonis said:
A proof of what?

I want to prove that the time dependent Schrödinger equation is invariant under Galilean transformation.
 
Viraj Daniel Dsouza said:
I want to prove that the time dependent Schrödinger equation is invariant under Galilean transformation.

See chapter 3 Ballentine - QM - A Modern Development - he does the converse - proves the Schrodinger equation from the Galilean principle of relativity. Specifically he assumes the probabilities of an observation are invariant.

BTW I think Rubi is right although I haven't gone deep into it.

Added Later:
Had a quick scan through Ballentine and Rubi is correct. Here is a paper I found on it - note the phase change mentioned by Rubi.
http://www.ijqf.org/wps/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/IJQF-2486.pdf

It says it is invariant - but with that phase change things are a bit murkier. Interesting question - before going into it I would have said yes it is - however its a bit more subtle.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Viraj Daniel Dsouza
Could this be somehow deduced from the fact that the canonical commutation relation ##[\hat{x},\hat{p}]=i\hbar## doesn't change in the transformation

##\hat{x} \rightarrow \hat{x}+vt##,
##\hat{p} \rightarrow \hat{p} + mv##

with ##m## and ##v## real numbers and ##t## the time?

On the other hand, the commutator at any time ##t## will also remain the same if the ##vt## is replaced by ##\beta t^2## or something else that is nonlinear in ##t##.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top