I Relation between operators and their variables' signs

  • Thread starter Thread starter hokhani
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the operator ##\hat{A}(x,t) = \frac{d}{dx} + f(x,t)## and its behavior under sign changes of its variables, specifically ##\hat{A}(-x,-t)##. Participants debate whether the correct expression is ##\hat{A}(-x,-t) = \frac{d}{dx} + f(-x,-t)## or ##\hat{A}(-x,-t) = -\frac{d}{dx} + f(-x,-t)##, concluding that neither is correct unless the function has specific symmetries. The conversation also touches on the nature of operators as mappings from functions to functions, rather than functions of coordinates themselves. Additionally, the implications of time-dependent Hamiltonians in quantum mechanics are explored, emphasizing the complexity of operator equations in relation to spatial and temporal variables. The discussion ultimately clarifies the distinction between operators and functions in mathematical contexts.
hokhani
Messages
566
Reaction score
19
TL;DR
Do differential operators change corresponding to their variables' signs?
Consider the operator ##\hat{A} (x,t) =\frac{d}{dx} +f(x,t)## where ##\hat{A}## is an operator and ##f(x,t)## a function. I don't know which of the following expression is correct for ##\hat{A} (-x,-t)##?
first one: $$\hat{A} (-x,-t) =\frac{d}{dx} +f(-x,-t)$$ and the second: $$\hat{A} (-x,-t) =-\frac{d}{dx} +f(-x,-t)$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
My take:
$$\hat{A}(-x,-t) = \left.\frac{d}{dx}\right|_{-x} + f(-x,-t)$$

Unless the function acted upon by ##\hat{A}(x,t)## possesses any symmetries, I'd say neither of your suggestions are correct.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker and hokhani
hokhani said:
TL;DR Summary: Do differential operators change corresponding to their variables' signs?

Consider the operator ##\hat{A} (x,t) =\frac{d}{dx} +f(x,t)## where ##\hat{A}## is an operator and ##f(x,t)## a function. I don't know which of the following expression is correct for ##\hat{A} (-x,-t)##?
first one: $$\hat{A} (-x,-t) =\frac{d}{dx} +f(-x,-t)$$ and the second: $$\hat{A} (-x,-t) =-\frac{d}{dx} +f(-x,-t)$$
An operator is a mapping from functions to functions. It's not itself a function of ##x## and ##t##.
 
PeroK said:
An operator is a mapping from functions to functions. It's not itself a function of ##x## and ##t##.
Of course in general an operator can be a function of the coordinates; e.g., the 3D Laplacian in spherical coordinates:$$\nabla^{2}=\dfrac{1}{r^{2}}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r^{2}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial r}\right)+\dfrac{1}{r^{2}\sin\theta}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\left(\sin\theta\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\right)+\dfrac{1}{r^{2}\sin^{2}\theta}\dfrac{\partial^{2}}{\partial\phi^{2}}$$
 
renormalize said:
Of course in general an operator can be a function of the coordinates; e.g., the 3D Laplacian in spherical coordinates:$$\nabla^{2}=\dfrac{1}{r^{2}}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(r^{2}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial r}\right)+\dfrac{1}{r^{2}\sin\theta}\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\left(\sin\theta\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\right)+\dfrac{1}{r^{2}\sin^{2}\theta}\dfrac{\partial^{2}}{\partial\phi^{2}}$$
That's not a function of coordinates. It uses a coordinate function such as ##r^2## as part of its action on a function. The input to the Laplacian is a function and the output is another function.
 
  • Like
Likes hokhani and PeterDonis
PeroK said:
That's not a function of coordinates. It uses a coordinate function such as ##r^2## as part of its action on a function. The input to the Laplacian is a function and the output is another function.
OK, mea culpa! Yes, I was using "function" in the colloquial sense of "having a dependence on" the coordinates. Since a function by definition takes numbers into numbers, something taking functions into functions is indeed a different beast. Labeling it a "mapping", I modify my previous statement to simply note that this function-to-function "map" may well depend upon the coordinates.
 
If ##g(x,t) = f(-x,-t)##, then we could relate ##\hat Ag## to ##\hat Af##.
 
PeroK said:
That's not a function of coordinates. It uses a coordinate function such as ##r^2## as part of its action on a function. The input to the Laplacian is a function and the output is another function.
In mathematical language, as you said, an operator is not a function of ##(x,t)##. However, the operator depends on x and t. If we cannot write this dependence as ##H(x,t)##, how to show this dependence in an operator equation?
 
hokhani said:
In mathematical language, as you said, an operator is not a function of ##(x,t)##. However, the operator depends on x and t. If we cannot write this dependence as ##H(x,t)##, how to show this dependence in an operator equation?
Can you be more specific about the context of the question?
 
  • #10
PeroK said:
Can you be more specific about the context of the question?
Of course; in the Schrodinger equation we have something like: ##H(x,t)\psi(x,t)=i\hbar \frac{\partial }{\partial t} \psi(x,t)## which at each space-time point, ##(x,t)##, only the Hamiltonian ##H(x,t)## acts on ##\psi(x,t)##. I try to understand why ##\psi(x,-t)## is not the answer of ##H(x,-t)##?
 
  • #11
hokhani said:
Of course; in the Schrodinger equation we have something like: ##H(x,t)\psi(x,t)=i\hbar \frac{\partial }{\partial t} \psi(x,t)## which at each space-time point, ##(x,t)##, only the Hamiltonian ##H(x,t)## acts on ##\psi(x,t)##. I try to understand why ##\psi(x,-t)## is not the answer of ##H(x,-t)##?
The Hamiltonian may depend on time, which means you do not have a simple operator equation. The Hamiltonian itself does not depend on position. The Hamiltonian is an operator. It's not a function.

Let's take the example of a time-independent Hamiltonian. This can be written in the form of an operator:
$$\hat H = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\hat D^2 + \hat V$$We have used ##\hat D## to denote the differential operator and ##\hat V## to represent the operator generated by multiplication by some (potential) function ##V##.

The action of this operator on a function, ##\psi## is:
$$\hat H\psi = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\hat D^2\psi + \hat V\psi$$Finally, we can use ##x## and ##t## as the position and time variables for our functions and express this equation for every point ##x## and time ##t##:
$$(\hat H\psi)(x, t) = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial x^2}(x, t) + V(x)\psi(x, t)$$If the potential is also a function of ##t##, then we have a time-varying equation:
$$(\hat H\psi)(x, t) = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial x^2}(x, t) + V(x,t)\psi(x, t)$$In this case, you could write the Hamiltonian itself as a function of time:
$$\hat H(t) = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\hat D^2 + \hat V(t)$$
 
  • #12
PeroK said:
The Hamiltonian may depend on time, which means you do not have a simple operator equation. The Hamiltonian itself does not depend on position. The Hamiltonian is an operator. It's not a function.

Let's take the example of a time-independent Hamiltonian. This can be written in the form of an operator:
$$\hat H = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\hat D^2 + \hat V$$We have used ##\hat D## to denote the differential operator and ##\hat V## to represent the operator generated by multiplication by some (potential) function ##V##.

The action of this operator on a function, ##\psi## is:
$$\hat H\psi = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\hat D^2\psi + \hat V\psi$$Finally, we can use ##x## and ##t## as the position and time variables for our functions and express this equation for every point ##x## and time ##t##:
$$(\hat H\psi)(x, t) = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial x^2}(x, t) + V(x)\psi(x, t)$$If the potential is also a function of ##t##, then we have a time-varying equation:
$$(\hat H\psi)(x, t) = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\psi}{\partial x^2}(x, t) + V(x,t)\psi(x, t)$$In this case, you could write the Hamiltonian itself as a function of time:
$$\hat H(t) = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\hat D^2 + \hat V(t)$$
Great answer, many thanks.
 
  • #13
Sorry for returning again to this question, I would like to be certain. So, I raise another question:
For the general form of the Hamiltonian in one dimension, ##H=P^2/2m +V(x)##, which of the following is correct for ##H\psi(-x)##?
$$ (1): \\
H\psi(-x)=(P^2/2m +V(x)) \psi(-x)$$ or $$ (2): \\
H\psi(-x)=(P^2/2m +V(-x)) \psi(-x)?$$
 
  • #14
The way to resolve such problems is to let:
$$\phi(x) \equiv \psi(-x)$$That's technically what ##\psi(-x)## means. That the wavefunction is a composition of the function ##\psi## with the function ##x\to -x##. That is case (1).

However, you might also have the case of a general spatial inversion ##x \ to -x##. That is case (2) where you have a general change of coordinates.
 
  • Like
Likes hokhani and javisot

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
478
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K