Quantum version of Larmor precession

10 replies · 3K views · last reply
Bobs
Messages
14
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement

Typed physics problem: Hamiltonian H = -γB·S = -μ·B, with B equal to B ê_z for 0 ≤ t < T and B ê_y for T ≤ t ≤ 2T, and initial state |ψ(0)> = χ+(x), asking for the state at t ≥ T and the probability at t = 2T.


Homework Equations


I didn't get what this actually means.

The Attempt at a Solution


Handwritten quantum mechanics derivation of a spin-half system's time evolution under a magnetic field, with Hamiltonian H = -γB·S, eigenstates written as column vectors, and the state at time t and probability P of finding the spin in a given eigenstate at t = 2T.

Handwritten derivation of a quantum spin probability: inner product <x-|psi(t=2t)> equals exp(iγT)(-i/2) plus exp(-iγT)(i/2), followed by |psi> and P(x-) = 2 + sin(γT) expressions.

I'm not sure whether it is correct. Could you take a look?
Regards!
 
Attachments
  • Typed physics problem: Hamiltonian H = -γB·S = -μ·B, with B equal to B ê_z for 0 ≤ t < T and B ê_y for T ≤ t ≤ 2T, and initial state |ψ(0)> = χ+(x), asking for the state at t ≥ T and the probability at t = 2T.
    gawdbdm.png
    5 KB · Views: 1,071
  • Handwritten quantum mechanics derivation of a spin-half system's time evolution under a magnetic field, with Hamiltonian H = -γB·S, eigenstates written as column vectors, and the state at time t and probability P of finding the spin in a given eigenstate at t = 2T.
    DtD4BYE.png
    54 KB · Views: 1,029
  • Handwritten derivation of a quantum spin probability: inner product <x-|psi(t=2t)> equals exp(iγT)(-i/2) plus exp(-iγT)(i/2), followed by |psi> and P(x-) = 2 + sin(γT) expressions.
    DpSH9Y6.png
    68 KB · Views: 1,032
Hello. I haven't gone through all of the details of your calculations. But, I don't see where you have taken into account the evolution of the system between ##t = 0## and ##t = T##. It appears to me that you are assuming that the system is in state ##\chi_+^{(x)}## at time ##t = T##.

Handwritten equation for time evolution from t = 0 to t = T: psi(t>0, T) = e^(-iHt/hbar) |psi(0)> = exp(-i omega t / 2) chi_+^(x), labelled equation (1).
 
Attachments
  • Handwritten equation for time evolution from t = 0 to t = T: psi(t>0, T) = e^(-iHt/hbar) |psi(0)> = exp(-i omega t / 2) chi_+^(x), labelled equation (1).
    upload_2018-6-21_14-3-53.png
    4.7 KB · Views: 663
Do you see any mistakes at the final answer? And yes, I'm assuming that the system in state ##\chi_+^{(x)}## at time ##t=T##. Staying tuned for your sincerely reply!
 
Maybe we are interpreting the statement of the problem differently. The way I read it, at time ##t = 0## the system is in state ##|\psi(0) \rangle = \chi_+^{(x)}##. It evolves for time ##T## with ##\mathbf B## in the z direction. Then, in the time interval ##T \leq t \leq 2T## it evolves with ##\mathbf B## in the y direction. So, you will need to find ##|\psi(T) \rangle## before you can determine the state for ##t > T##.

Your final result for the probability appears to be a complex number. But probabilities are real numbers. Also, shouldn't the answer depend on the magnetic field strength B?
 
It looks like this post has appeared twice.
Bobs said:
Do you see any mistakes at the final answer? And yes, I'm assuming that the system in state at time ##t=T##. Staying tuned for your sincerely reply!
The systaem will not be in state ##\chi_+^{(x)}## at t = T. As TSny points out in the above post, the evolution between t = 0 and t = T is dictated by the magnetic field only in the z direction. You should calculate |ψ(T)> from that, and then let that evolve from t = T to t = 2T with the magnetic field only in the y direction.
 
I found the probability as ##\dfrac{B^2}{2}## is that correct?
 
Bobs said:
I found the probability as ##\dfrac{B^2}{2}## is that correct?
That answer can't possibly be correct. Probabilities are unitless.
 
Finally, I've found the probability as ##0## from ##P = \dfrac{1}{4}exp \biggr( \dfrac{-2t\mu BB}{\hbar}\biggr ) \biggr | (1-1) \biggr |^2 = 0## Does that seem correct now? Thanks in advance.
 
Is that correct? Or what would be the correct probability we're looking for? I'm receiving too many different answers.
 
No. The argument of the exponential should be unitless.