QM, Heisenberg's motion equations, harmonic oscillator

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on solving the Heisenberg motion equations for a one-dimensional harmonic oscillator characterized by mass m, Hooke's constant k, and angular frequency ##\omega = \sqrt{\frac{k}{m}}##. The user attempts to derive the equations for the position operator ##\hat x## and momentum operator ##\hat p## using the Heisenberg equation of motion ##\frac{dA(t)}{dt}=\frac{i}{\hbar}[\hat H, \hat A(t)]##. The user encounters discrepancies between the quantum mechanical results and classical mechanics, specifically in the derived differential equations for ##\hat x## and ##\hat p##. The discussion highlights the importance of correctly applying the commutation relations and unitary transformations in quantum mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics, specifically Heisenberg's equations of motion
  • Familiarity with classical mechanics concepts, particularly harmonic oscillators
  • Knowledge of operator algebra in quantum mechanics
  • Basic grasp of unitary transformations and self-adjoint operators
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Heisenberg's equations of motion in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the commutation relations for position and momentum operators
  • Explore the classical limit of quantum systems and how they relate to harmonic oscillators
  • Investigate the implications of unitary transformations in quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in physics, particularly those studying quantum mechanics and classical mechanics, as well as anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of harmonic oscillators.

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,932
Reaction score
283

Homework Statement


Hi guys, I don't really know how to solve the first part of a problem which goes like this:
Consider a 1 dimensional harmonic oscillator of mass m, Hooke's constant k and angular frequency ##\omega = \sqrt{\frac{k}{m} }##.
Remembering the classical solutions, solve the Heisenberg's motion equations for the operators ##\hat x## and ##\hat p##. Why does the quantum evolution match the classical one?

Homework Equations


Heisenberg's motion equation: ##\frac{dA(t)}{dt}=\frac{i}{h}[\hat H, \hat A (t)]=\frac{i}{h}[\hat H, \hat A](t)##. (eq.1)
Where ##\hat A(t)=U_t^*AU_t##.
Where ##U_t=\exp \{ -i\hat H t/\hbar \}##. Since ##\hat H## is self-adjoint, it follows that ##U_t## is unitary. Thus ##U_t^*=U_t^{-1}##. Also ##U_t^*=U_{-t}##.

The Attempt at a Solution


From Classical mechanics, ##H=\frac{p^2}{2m}+\frac{m\omega^2 q^2}{2}##.
This leads to ##\dot p =-m\omega ^2 q## and ##\dot q=\frac{p}{m}##. I know I must solve them but before proceeding, let's see if I can find some similar equations to solve using Heisenberg's motion equations.
In QM, ##\hat H=\frac{\hat p ^2}{2m}+\frac{m\omega ^2}{2} \hat x##.
Using eq.1, skipping arithmetical steps I reached that ##\frac{d}{dt} \hat A (t) = \frac{i}{\hbar} \{ \frac{1}{2m} [\hat p ^2 , \hat A](t) +\frac{m \omega ^2}{2} [\hat x ^2 , A](t) \}## where ##\hat p=-i\hbar \frac{d}{dx}## and ##\hat x =x##.
Now, replacing ##\hat A## by ##\hat x##, I get that ##\frac{d\hat x}{dt}=\frac{i}{\hbar} \{ \frac{1}{2m}[\hat p^2,\hat x](t) \}=\frac{i}{2m\hbar}(-\hat x \hat p^2)(t)=-\frac{i}{2m\hbar}U_t^* (\hat x \hat p ^2)U_t##.
Here I am unsure of my step. I think that it's worth ##-\frac{i}{2m\hbar}U_t ^* U_t \hat x \hat p^2=-\frac{i}{2m\hbar} \hat x \hat p ^2##.
So I get the differential equation ##\frac{d\hat x}{dt}=-\frac{i}{2m\hbar}\hat x \hat p ^2## which differs from the one of classical mechanics for ##\dot q##. I don't know what I did wrong.

Similarly for ##\frac{d \hat p}{dt}##, I found that it's worth ##\frac{m \omega ^2 }{2}(\hat x \hat p -1)## which again does not match the DE of CM.
I guess my approach is wrong?
I would like any pointer. Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
fluidistic said:
I get that \frac{d\hat x}{dt}=\frac{i}{\hbar} \{ \frac{1}{2m}[\hat p^2,\hat x](t) \}=\frac{i}{2m\hbar}(-\hat x \hat p^2)(t)
I don't think this step is correct. try checking this again.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
3K