Time evolution operator - Confusion

Kalidor
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone. I am given a somewhat common potential well V(x)=0 for ¦x¦<a and infinite elsewhere. I am told that at t = 0 my particle is in a state represented by the wavefunction

\psi(x,0)= A(\sin{(\frac{\pi x}{a})}+ \sqrt{2} \cos{(\frac{3 \pi x}{2 a})})

where A is a constant use for normalization. It turns easily out that this constant equals \sqrt{\frac{1}{3a}}. On the other hand, the eigenfunctions in this situations are very well known to be \psi_n= \sqrt{\frac{1}{a}} \sin(\frac{n \pi x}{2a}) for n even and \psi_n= \sqrt{\frac{1}{a}} \cos(\frac{n \pi x}{2a}) for n odd. So given wave function can easily be written as a linear combination of the second and third eigenstates.

Now come the problems. At some point of the exercise I am asked to calculate the expected value of some operator but at some time t. This is how the professor writes the wavefunction at the generic time t:

e^{- \frac{i}{\hbar}(E_2-E_3)t} \psi(x,0)

Now my question is: since the given state is a combination of 2 eigenstates, why in the world does he write the temporal evolution this way, with (E_2-E_3) in the exponent? Shouldn't it be something like
e^{- \frac{i}{\hbar}E_2 t} \psi_2(x,0) - e^{- \frac{i}{\hbar}E_3 t} \psi_3(x,0)?
Maybe some details are wrong but what I mean is I expect to find the sum of 2 exponentials whereas there is the exponential of a sum.
My idea is that (simplifying the notation) the ket |2> + \sqrt{2} |3> is of course different from the sum of the kets |2> and |3> but then why isn't the right expression something like
e^{- \frac{i}{\hbar}(E_2-\sqrt{2}E_3)t} \psi(x,0).

Am I somewhat clear?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Es you can easily check by pluging your solution of the Schrödinger eq. back into the equation, you are right and the prof. is wrong. The correct state is

|\psi,t \rangle>=A [\exp(-\mathrm{i} E_2 t) |2 \rangle+\sqrt{2} \exp(-\mathrm{i} E_3 t) |3 \rangle].

The norm should be 1, so you find A=1/\sqrt(1+2)=1/\sqrt{3}. Note that the 1/\sqrt{a} factor is already included in the norm of the state vectors, which are given in position representation.

I don't understand, how you come to the last forumula, which definitely is wrong.
 
Yeah, problem solved. The unexplainable factor came from a multiplication of exponentials. I must have been drunk when i first read the solution.
Thanks
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top