The Schrodinger Equation: How to Solve for Time Evolution and Eigenstates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the Schrödinger equation for a quantum mechanical system with a time-dependent Hamiltonian. Participants explore the formulation of the time evolution of quantum states as linear combinations of eigenstates and the implications of orthonormality in deriving equations for the coefficients of these states.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a problem involving the time evolution of a quantum state given a Hamiltonian of the form H(t) = f(t)H^0, where H^0 is Hermitian with a complete set of eigenstates.
  • Another participant suggests substituting the expressions for the state and Hamiltonian into the Schrödinger equation and using orthonormality to simplify the resulting equations.
  • Concerns are raised about handling the sums and the implications of orthogonality when evaluating the Schrödinger equation.
  • There is a discussion about the probability of measuring a different eigenvalue as time approaches infinity, with a formula provided for calculating this probability.
  • Participants clarify the distinction between the observable A and the state of the system, with one participant providing a specific form for the operator A and its eigenvalues.
  • Details about the time-independent part of the Hamiltonian and its eigenvectors and eigenvalues are shared, along with the implications for the time evolution of the state.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the approach to solving the Schrödinger equation and the use of orthonormality, but there are varying interpretations and uncertainties regarding the handling of specific terms and the implications for the probability of measuring different eigenvalues.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the treatment of sums and the application of orthonormality versus completeness in their calculations. The discussion also highlights dependencies on the specific forms of the Hamiltonian and observable operators.

wileecoyote
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I'm working my way through some QM problems for self-study and this one has stumped me. Given the Hamiltonian as [itex]H(t) = f(t)H^0[/itex] where [itex]f(t)[/itex] is a real function and [itex]H^0[/itex] is Hermitian with a complete set of eigenstates [itex]H^0|E_n^0> = E_n^0|E_n^0>[/itex]. Time evolution is given by the Schrödinger equation [itex]i \hbar \frac{d}{dt}|\phi (t)> = H(t)|\phi (t)>[/itex]. I am supposed to write a solution to the Schrödinger equation as a linear combination of the eigenstates of [itex]H^0[/itex]. Now clearly
[itex]|\phi (t)> = \sum\limits_{n=1}^N c_n (t)|E_n^0>[/itex]. But where do I go from there. The second part is to convert the Schrödinger equation into a first order diff eq and solve for the [itex]c_n (t)[/itex]. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Seems pretty straight forward to me. Plug in the expressions for |phi(t)> and H(t) into the Schroedinger Equation, act on it with a bra of one of the eigenstates <En0|, use the orthonormality of those states, and solve the ODE.
 
I'm not really sure how to deal with the sums, when I plug in and evaluate [itex]H^0[/itex]I get
[itex]i \hbar \frac{d}{dt} \sum\limits_{n=1}^N c_n (t)|E_n^0> = f(t) \sum\limits_{n=1}^N c_n (t) E_n^0 |E_n^0>[/itex] and then if I act with a [itex]<E_n^0|[/itex] it will simply cancel out the [itex]|E_n^0>[/itex] (completeness relation), but then how do I solve it from there? Also if I am given a well-defined Hamiltonian in terms of time and a state [itex]A[/itex] with eigenvalue [itex]a[/itex] at t=0. How do I find the probability that as t->infinity a measurement of [itex]A[/itex] will give a different eigenvalue?
 
You should apply the bra on the left side and use the orthonormality relation - not the completeness relation. There will be only one single non-vanishing term left in the summation. That term will give you an ODE.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Right so because of orthogonality each term where [itex]n \neq m[/itex] will cancel leaving the left side as [itex]i \hbar \frac{d}{dt} c_n (t)[/itex] but wouldn't the same have to happen to the right side making the equation [itex]i \hbar \frac{d}{dt} c_n (t) = f(t)E_n^0 c_n (t)[/itex]. Is that right? Also what about my second question from post 3?
 
wileecoyote said:
Right so because of orthogonality each term where [itex]n \neq m[/itex] will cancel leaving the left side as [itex]i \hbar \frac{d}{dt} c_n (t)[/itex] but wouldn't the same have to happen to the right side making the equation [itex]i \hbar \frac{d}{dt} c_n (t) = f(t)E_n^0 c_n (t)[/itex]. Is that right?
Yes, that is the idea.
wileecoyote said:
Also what about my second question from post 3?
[tex]P = \lim_{t \to +\infty}\left(1-|\langle A(t)| A(0)\rangle|^2\right),[/tex]
where [itex]|A(t)\rangle[/itex] can be computed from Schrödinger's equation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Ravi Mohan said:
Yes, that is the idea.

[tex]P = \lim_{t \to +\infty}\left(1-|\langle A(t)| A(0)\rangle|^2\right),[/tex]
where [itex]|A(t)\rangle[/itex] can be computed from Schrödinger's equation.

Thanks, but how would I compute [itex]A(t)[/itex]. I'll give a little more detail. For this particular example, I am given that
[itex]A = \left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & -1 \end{array} \right)[/itex] with eigenvalue 1 at [itex]t= 0[/itex]. Since I've now got an expression for [itex]c_n(t)[/itex] I can calculate [itex]|\phi (t)>[/itex], but what about this [itex]A(t)[/itex].
 
wileecoyote said:
Also if I am given a well-defined Hamiltonian in terms of time and a state [itex]A[/itex] with eigenvalue [itex]a[/itex] at t=0.
I thought that [itex]A[/itex] was a quantum state.

wileecoyote said:
For this particular example, I am given that
[itex]A = \left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & -1 \end{array} \right)[/itex] with eigenvalue 1 at [itex]t= 0[/itex]. Since I've now got an expression for [itex]c_n(t)[/itex] I can calculate [itex]|\phi (t)>[/itex], but what about this [itex]A(t)[/itex].
Do you mean that system is in one of the eigen states of operator [itex]A[/itex]?
Also can you write down the Hamiltonian?
 
Ravi Mohan said:
Do you mean that system is in one of the eigen states of operator [itex]A[/itex]?
yes at t=0


Ravi Mohan said:
Also can you write down the Hamiltonian?
[itex]H(t) = ae^{-t/b} \left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 0 & 1 \\<br /> 1 & 0 \end{array} \right)\[/itex]
 
  • #10
Ok.
So the time independent part of Hamiltonian is
[itex]H^0 = \left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 0 & 1 \\<br /> 1 & 0 \end{array} \right),[/itex]
with eigen-vectors and eigen-values as [itex]|e_1\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> 1 \\<br /> 1 \end{array} \right)[/itex], [itex]|e_2\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> 1 \\<br /> -1 \end{array} \right)[/itex] and [itex]1,-1[/itex] respectively.

Now after calculating [itex]C_n(t)[/itex], you have [itex]|\phi(t)\rangle = \sum\limits_{i=1}^{2}C_i(t) |e_i \rangle[/itex].

The operator corresponding to observable [itex]A[/itex] is
[itex]A = \left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & -1 \end{array} \right),[/itex]
with eigen-vectors as [itex]|a_1\rangle = \left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> 1 \\<br /> 0 \end{array} \right)[/itex], [itex]|a_2\rangle = \left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> 0 \\<br /> 1 \end{array} \right)[/itex].

When the time approaches infinity the probability that the measurement will not result in eigen-value = 1 is given by evaluating
[tex]P = \lim_{t \to +\infty}\left(1-|\langle a_1| \phi(t)\rangle|^2\right).[/tex]
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
383
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K