Time dependent perturbation for harmonic oscillator

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the time-dependent perturbation theory applied to a one-dimensional harmonic oscillator, specifically focusing on the potential energy and perturbation Hamiltonian. The original poster is tasked with demonstrating that states with quantum numbers greater than three do not get excited from the ground state under the influence of a specific perturbation.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to analyze the transition probabilities between states using the perturbation Hamiltonian and considers the implications of the matrix elements being zero for certain states. Other participants suggest expressing the position operator in terms of raising and lowering operators to facilitate the calculations.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the mathematical expressions and exploring the implications of their calculations. Some guidance has been provided regarding the algebraic manipulation of operators, and there is a recognition of the orthogonality of the eigenstates, which is central to the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on ensuring that the algebra is correctly handled, particularly with respect to the non-commuting nature of the raising and lowering operators. The original poster is navigating through the complexities of quantum mechanics and perturbation theory while adhering to homework constraints.

Vandmelon
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I'm looking at the 1d harmonic oscillator
\begin{equation}
V(x)=\frac{1}{2}kx^2
\end{equation}
with eigenstates n and the time dependent perturbation
\begin{equation}
H'(t)=qx^3\frac{(\tau^2}{t^2+\tau^2}
\end{equation}
For t=-∞ the oscillator is in the groundstate n=0
I need to show that for n>3 the states will not get excited and I only need to look at the first order perturbation.

The Attempt at a Solution


What I'm thinking is \begin{equation}P_{a→b}=\vert c_b(t)\vert^2 \end{equation} therefore I need to find when c_b=0
and because
\begin{equation}
c_b'=-\frac{i}{\hbar}∫H_{ba}'(t')e^{i\omega_0t'}dt'
\end{equation}
I need to find
\begin{equation}
H_{ba}'=<\psi_n\vert H' \vert \psi_a >=0
\end{equation}
For n>3
It would make sense if H_ba look a bit like this
\begin{equation}
H_{ba}'=\frac{d^n}{dx^n}H'
\end{equation}
But I get some horrible results if I try to solve H_ba. Is it right what I am doing or is it way off.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You want to compute [itex]\langle n| H' |0\rangle[/itex], which is proportional to [itex]\langle n| \hat{x}^3 |0\rangle[/itex]. If you express [itex]\hat{x}[/itex] in terms of raising and lowering operators [itex]\hat{a},\hat{a}^\dagger[/itex], you should be able to see how to reach the necessary result.
 
so if I use
\begin{equation}
\hat x=\sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega}}(a_+ + a_-)
\end{equation}

then if I solved it right
\begin{equation}
\hat x^3 \psi_0=(\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega})^{\frac{3}{2}}[(a_+)^3+a_+ + a_- + (a_-)^3]\psi_0
\end{equation}
Is it correct if I use a_- on ψ_0 it will just be 0 so
\begin{equation}
\hat x^3 \psi_0=(\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega})^{\frac{3}{2}}[(a_+)^3\psi_0+a_+\psi_0]=(\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega})^{\frac{3}{2}}[\sqrt6 \psi_3+\psi_1]
\end{equation}
So it will end up like this
\begin{equation}
\langle \psi_n \vert\sqrt6 \psi_3+\psi_1 \rangle
\end{equation}
If this is correct I am not sure why the oscillator wouldn't get excited for n>3. Or is it my calculations there are wrong?

*EDIT
Oh is it because
\begin{equation}
\langle \psi_n \vert \psi_m \rangle = 0
\end{equation}
for n ≠ m
 
Last edited:
Vandmelon said:
so if I use
\begin{equation}
\hat x=\sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega}}(a_+ + a_-)
\end{equation}

then if I solved it right
\begin{equation}
\hat x^3 \psi_0=(\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega})^{\frac{3}{2}}[(a_+)^3+a_+ + a_- + (a_-)^3]\psi_0
\end{equation}

You'll want to go back through the algebra here. Remember that [itex]a_+,a_-[/itex] don't commute, so you have to keep track of the order of terms.

Is it correct if I use a_- on ψ_0 it will just be 0 so

...

Oh is it because
\begin{equation}
\langle \psi_n \vert \psi_m \rangle = 0
\end{equation}
for n ≠ m

You will have to use both of these relations. You have all of the right ideas, just fix the algebra.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K