Schrödinger and Heisenberg picture

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differences between the Schrödinger and Heisenberg pictures in quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on the time evolution of state kets and basis kets. Participants explore the implications of the Heisenberg picture where state kets are considered stationary while basis kets evolve over time.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the notion that the state ket remains stationary in the Heisenberg picture, suggesting that if basis kets evolve, the coefficients in the superposition must also evolve unless they are fixed.
  • Another participant provides a mathematical framework for the Schrödinger picture, illustrating how state evolution is typically expressed and how it contrasts with the Heisenberg picture where state vectors are constant.
  • A participant expresses confusion regarding a statement from Sakurai that indicates basis kets evolve while the state ket remains stationary, leading to a query about the time dependence of coefficients in the expansion of the state ket.
  • One participant argues that the coefficients of the state ket are indeed time-dependent in the Heisenberg representation, referencing a specific equation from Sakurai to support this claim.
  • Another participant elaborates on the mathematical details of the Heisenberg picture, emphasizing that the time evolution is attributed to operators rather than state kets, and discusses the implications of Born's Rule in relation to the probability outcomes being independent of the chosen picture of time evolution.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the coefficients of the state ket are time-dependent in the Heisenberg picture, indicating that multiple competing interpretations exist regarding the nature of state and basis ket evolution.

Contextual Notes

There are references to specific equations and concepts from quantum mechanics literature that may require further clarification or context for full understanding, particularly regarding the definitions and implications of time dependence in different representations.

Kontilera
Messages
176
Reaction score
24
Im sorry, I accidently edited my opening post instead of posting a new one.. The question was regarding the statement that the state ket is stationary in the Heisenberg picture when the basis kets are transforming in time. Because the state ket is a superposition of the base kets it should the be evolving to, unless the coefficients change.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Usually in S. picture you write the evolution of your state as:

$$|\Psi(t)\rangle =U(t)|\Psi(t=0)\rangle $$

where:

$$U(t)=e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\hat{H}t}$$

When you have a scalar product (which are the only physical quantities in quantum mechanics), you can always write (O is an observable):

$$\langle \Psi(t)|O|\Psi(t)\rangle=\langle \Psi (t)|U(t)U^{ \dagger }(t)OU(t)U^{\dagger}(t)|\Psi(t)\rangle$$

In H. picture the state vectors and the operators are redefined as:

$$|\Psi(t)\rangle _H = U^{ \dagger }|\Psi(t)\rangle = U^{\dagger}(t) U(t) |\Psi(t=0)\rangle \equiv |\Psi(t=0)\rangle$$

and:

$$O_H(t)=U^{ \dagger }OU(t)$$

So, as you can see, while the scalar product remain the same, now the state vectors are constant (their are fixed at their initial value) while the operators become time dependent.
 
Ah thanks for the answer.
I think my confusion comes from the fact that Sakurai writes that the basis kets evolves in the Heisenberg picture:

[tex]\mid a' \rangle_H = \mid a'(t) \rangle_H,[/tex]
while the state ket stays stationary. If the state ket should be stationary then the coefficients for a basis (which evolves with time) also has to evolve with time.

Since:
[tex]\mid \phi \rangle_H = \sum_{i=1}^n c_i \mid a' \rangle_H.[/tex]
If the coefficient doesn't evolve with time.. doesn't this mean that:

[tex]\mid \phi \rangle_H = \mid \phi(t) \rangle_H ?[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Your reasoning is correct but where have you found that the coefficients of the expansion of the state ket are time indipendent? Maybe I'm missing something but, reading the Sakurai itself, at page 88 eq. (2.2.44b) it says that the coefficients are the same in both representation so in H. representation they are time dependent too...or at least so it seems to me :-p
 
In the Heisenberg picture the full time dependence is put to the operators which describe observables while the state, i.e., the Statistical Operator (or in the case of pure states a Hilbert-space vector as its representant) is time independent.

Mathematically that means that in the Heisenberg picture the time evolution of a (not explicitly time dependent) observable operator is given by
[tex]\hat{O}(t)=\hat{U}(t,t_0) \hat{O}(t_0) \hat{U}^{\dagger}(t,t_0), \qquad (1)[/tex]
where [itex]\hat{U}(t,t_0)[/itex] is the unitary time evolution oparator in the Heisenberg picture. For a non explicityly timedependent Hamiltonian you have
[tex]\hat{U}(t,t_0)=\exp[+\mathrm{i} (t-t_0) \hat{H}].[/tex]
A basis can be defined by an arbitrary complete set of observables, i.e., let [itex]\hat{O}_k(t)[/itex], [itex]k \in \{1,\ldots,N \}[/itex] be a set of pairwise commuting self-adjoint operators whose joint eigenspaces are non-degenerate, i.e., for each possible set of eigenvalues [itex](o_1,o_2,\ldots,o_N)[/itex] there is (up to a constant factor) one and only one eigenvector [itex]|o_1,\ldots,o_N;t \rangle[/itex]. The time evolution of these eigenvectors is, according to Eq. (1)
[tex]|o_1,\ldots,o_N;t \rangle=\hat{U}(t,t_0) |o_1,\ldots o_N; t \rangle.[/tex]
Note that the set of eigenvalues doesn't change with time since the unitary time evolution (1) for observable operators doesn't change the spectra of these operators. The state kets, however, evolve according to this very unitary time-evolution operator, as you can prove within one line immediately.

Now, according to Born's Rule, the physical meaning of the formalism is that, if a quantum system is prepared at time, [itex]t[/itex] in the pure state represented by the state ket [itex]|\psi,t \rangle=|\psi,t_0 \rangle=:|\psi \rangle=\text{const}[/itex], the probability to find the outcome [itex](o_1,o_2,\ldots,o_N[/itex] for a simultaneous (and by assumption compatible!) measurements of the observables [itex]O_1,\ldots,O_N[/itex] is given with help of the wave function,
[tex]\psi(q_1,\ldots,q_N;t)=\langle o_1,\ldots,o_N;t |\psi \rangle[/tex]
via
[tex]P_{\psi}(q_1,\ldots,q_N;t)=|\psi(q_1,\ldots,q_N;t)|^2.[/tex]
This physical outcome is independent of the choice of the picture of time evolution by construction, i.e., you obtain the very same probability (distribution) also within the Schrödinger picture since it is connected to the Heisenberg picture by a unitary transformation. The same holds true for any general picture (which formalism has been developed by Dirac; particularly in connection with the socalled interaction picture, which is important in time-dependent perturbation theory).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 143 ·
5
Replies
143
Views
12K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K