Question about a harmonic oscillator integral

Heath Watts
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I'm trying to learn quantum physics (chemistry) on my own so that my work with Gaussian and Q-Chem for electronic structural modeling is less of a black box for me. I've reached the harmonic oscillator point in McQuarrie's Quantum Chemistry book and I'm having trouble justifying a step in his math. It's the integral of force with respect to x.

Integrate[m*(d2x/dt2), dx]
This says integrate the second derivative of time with respect to t for the integration variable x.

Changing the variable of integration to time gives:

Integrate[m*(d2x/dt2)*(dt/dt), dx]
or
Integrate[m*(d2x/dt2)*(dx/dt), dt]

Then something occurs here:
Integrate[m*(d(dx/dt)/dt)*(dx/dt), dt]

Integrate[(m/2)*d((dx/dt)*(dx/dt))/dt, dt]

Integrate[(m/2)*d((dx/dt)^2)/dt, dt]

What calculus rule have I forgotten that says that
(d2x/dt2)*(dx/dt)=(1/2)*d((dx/dt)^2)/dt

I can't seem to find it in any of my old textbooks or online. I hope that my notation is clear. I appreciate your help. If you can direct me to a website that explains this rule, I'd appreciate it.
Thanks,
Heath
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you work backwards it's easy to see: it's just the chain rule!

\frac{d}{dt} \left(\frac{1}{2} \left( \frac{dx}{dt}\right)^2 \right) = 2 \times \left( \frac{1}{2} \frac{dx}{dt} \right) \times \frac{d}{dt} \frac{dx}{dt} = \frac{dx}{dt} \frac{d^2x}{dt^2}

Substituting \frac{dx}{dt} = f(t) maybe helps:
\frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{1}{2} \left( f(t) \right)^2 \right) = 2 \times \left(\frac{1}{2} f(t) \right) \times \frac{df}{dt} = f(t) \frac{df}{dt}

Or even easier in 'words':
The derivative of f^2 is 2f \, f'. Of course, we don't want the two, so we use 1/2 in front of the f^2 term (which doesn't change the differentiation process since it's a constant).It's a pretty common differentiation 'trick' .
 
Last edited:
Thanks very much Nick. The chain rule! How embarrassing. :blushing:
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top