- #1

hellfire

Science Advisor

- 1,051

- 1

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter hellfire
- Start date

- #1

hellfire

Science Advisor

- 1,051

- 1

- #2

- 13,242

- 1,026

I've never seen accelerated frames of reference in (nonrelativistic) quantum mechanics.

Daniel.

- #3

hellfire

Science Advisor

- 1,051

- 1

Make a coordinate change:

x' = x - 1/2 a t^{2}

t' = t

x' = x - 1/2 a t

t' = t

Me neither. Thats why I am not sure whether the question is meaninful at all.dextercioby said:I've never seen accelerated frames of reference in (nonrelativistic) quantum mechanics.

Last edited:

- #4

- 13,242

- 1,026

I don't know how you can fit it into ordinary classical lagrangian/ hamiltonian dynamics, actually.

I don't know many.

Daniel.

- #5

[tex]\mathcal{L} = \sum_{\imath} \frac{1}{2} m (\dot{q})^2 + V(q) [/tex]

where [tex]q' = q - 1/2 a t^2 [/tex] and figure out the Hamiltonian from the definition of generalized momentum and such.

However, this seems like an unpleasant choice, as it would make your whole Hamiltonian time-dependent, which makes the Schrodinger equation a whole new beast to solve.

- #6

seratend

- 318

- 1

Seratend.

- #7

hellfire

Science Advisor

- 1,051

- 1

I will take:

[tex] \psi = e^{\lambda} \bar{\psi}[/tex]

[tex]x = \bar{x} + \frac{1}{2} a t^2[/tex]

Then I assume this is the way to proceed:

[tex]L = \frac{1}{2} m \dot{x}^2 = \frac{1}{2} m (\dot{\bar{x}} + at)^2[/tex]

[tex]H = \bar{p} \dot{\bar{x}} - L[/tex]

with

[tex]\bar{p} = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\bar{x}}} = m (\dot{\bar{x}} + at)[/tex]

Thus:

[tex]H = \frac{1}{2} m (\dot{\bar{x}}^2 - a^2 t^2)[/tex]

and

[tex]i \hbar \frac{\partial \bar{\psi}}{\partial t} = \left( \frac{- \hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \bar{x}^2} - a^2t^2 \right) e^{\lambda} \bar{\psi}[/tex]

At the end, and according to page 4 of that paper, I should make a choice for [tex]\lambda[/tex] such that the last expression reduces to the SE in a gravitational potential for [tex]\bar{\psi}[/tex], right?

- #8

seratend

- 318

- 1

hellfire said:Thank you for your answers. So, putting things together (please correct me if I am wrong).

I will take:

[tex] \psi = e^{\lambda} \bar{\psi}[/tex]

[tex]x = \bar{x} + \frac{1}{2} a t^2[/tex]

...

At the end, and according to page 4 of that paper, I should make a choice for [tex]\lambda[/tex] such that the last expression reduces to the SE in a gravitational potential for [tex]\bar{\psi}[/tex], right?

Note exactly. Beginning of section V says that you recover the equivalence principle if you multiply the wave function by an ad hoc phase (potential -mgX'). While, with group symmetry, you recover this solution in a more formal way (cf formula 46 vs 41 p4).

Seratend.

- #9

hellfire

Science Advisor

- 1,051

- 1

There was an error in the last equation of my last post. It should be:

[tex]i \hbar \frac{\partial \bar{\psi}}{\partial t} = \left( \frac{- \hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \bar{x}^2} + at \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{x}} \right) e^{\lambda} \bar{\psi}[/tex]

It looks weird...

[tex]i \hbar \frac{\partial \bar{\psi}}{\partial t} = \left( \frac{- \hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \bar{x}^2} + at \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{x}} \right) e^{\lambda} \bar{\psi}[/tex]

It looks weird...

Last edited:

- #10

seratend

- 318

- 1

hellfire said:There was an error in the last equation of my last post. It should be:

[tex]i \hbar \frac{\partial \bar{\psi}}{\partial t} = \left( \frac{- \hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \bar{x}^2} - at \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{x}} - 2 m a^2t^2 \right) e^{\lambda} \bar{\psi}[/tex]

It looks weird...

Not so weird : ).

Hint: use the formula (a+b)^2=a^2+2ab+b^2

Seratend.

- #11

hellfire

Science Advisor

- 1,051

- 1

I am sorry, but it seams that the formula was wrong again (I get confused with p and pbar). I have corrected my previous post. The Hamiltonian:

[tex]H = \frac{1}{2} m (\dot{\bar{x}}^2 - a^2 t^2)[/tex]

is equivalent to:

[tex]H = \frac{\bar{p}^2}{2m} - at\bar{p}[/tex]

with [tex]\bar{p} = m(\dot{\bar x} + at)[/tex]

(May be someone could check that and the SE in my previous post). The question is how to proceed then...

[tex]H = \frac{1}{2} m (\dot{\bar{x}}^2 - a^2 t^2)[/tex]

is equivalent to:

[tex]H = \frac{\bar{p}^2}{2m} - at\bar{p}[/tex]

with [tex]\bar{p} = m(\dot{\bar x} + at)[/tex]

(May be someone could check that and the SE in my previous post). The question is how to proceed then...

Last edited:

- #12

seratend

- 318

- 1

Seratend

- #13

- #14

seratend

- 318

- 1

It is just an introduction to the expression of the SE in different frames (earth is a rotating frame => validity of the approximations we are doing in the lab): a constantly accelerated frame introduce the additional potential U(X')= mgX' in the unitary evolution of the state. We can see how it may change the eigenvalues of the hamiltonian.MalleusScientiarum said:

Seratend.

- #15

I can see already that they will have a time dependence.

- #16

hellfire

Science Advisor

- 1,051

- 1

[tex] \psi = e^{\lambda} \bar{\psi}[/tex]

[tex]x = \bar{x} + \frac{1}{2} a t^2[/tex]

I get the hamiltonian I mentioned above and the SE:

[tex]i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} (e^{\lambda} \bar{\psi}) = \left( \frac{- \hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \bar{x}^2} + i \hbar at \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{x}} \right) e^{\lambda} \bar{\psi}[/tex]

This can be written as:

[tex]i \hbar \frac{\partial \bar{\psi}}{\partial t} = \left( \frac{- \hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \bar{x}^2} + V \right) \bar{\psi}[/tex]

With:

[tex]\lambda = \frac{i m a}{\hbar} \left( \bar{x} t + \frac{1}{6}a t^3 \right)[/tex]

which gives [tex]V = m a \bar{x}[/tex]

Note, however, that my [tex]\lambda[/tex] differs from the one in quant-ph/0105074 by one sign. Probably I have missed some sign somewhere, but I think I can conclude that the phase factor can be chosen properly to fit with the equivalence principle.

- #17

seratend

- 318

- 1

hellfire said:[tex]x = \bar{x} + \frac{1}{2} a t^2[/tex]

Note, however, that my [tex]\lambda[/tex] differs from the one in quant-ph/0105074 by one sign. Probably I have missed some sign somewhere, but I think I can conclude that the phase factor can be chosen properly to fit with the equivalence principle.

Very good.

In fact you have choosen [itex]x = \bar{x} + \frac{1}{2} a t^2[/itex] instead of [itex] \bar{x} = x + \frac{1}{2} a t^2[/itex] (see (39)) hence the difference of sign in [itex]\lambda [/itex].

Seratend.

- #18

hellfire

Science Advisor

- 1,051

- 1

OK! Thank you for your help.

Share:

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 190

- Replies
- 17

- Views
- 777

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 172

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 467

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 344

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 363

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 238

- Replies
- 6

- Views
- 444

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 827

- Last Post

- Replies
- 21

- Views
- 412