Time evolution operator in terms of Hamiltonian

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the time evolution operator in quantum mechanics, specifically when the Hamiltonian is time-dependent and commutes at different times. The original poster attempts to derive the expression for the time development operator using relevant equations and seeks hints for their approach.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the rearrangement of equations related to the time evolution operator and question the definition and properties of the logarithm of an operator. There are attempts to integrate expressions and consider Taylor series expansions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing hints and suggestions for exploring the properties of the time evolution operator. Some participants are questioning how to handle the logarithm of an operator and its implications for the problem at hand.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the conditions under which the logarithm of the operator is defined, particularly regarding the existence of the inverse operator. Participants are also considering the implications of the Schrödinger equation in their discussions.

dEdt
Messages
286
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


"Show that if the Hamiltonian depends on time and [itex][H(t_1),H(t_2)]=0[/itex], the time development operator is given by
[tex]U(t)=\mathrm{exp}\left[-\frac{i}{\hbar}\int_0^t H(t')dt'\right]."[/tex]

Homework Equations


[itex]i\hbar\frac{d}{dt}U=HU[/itex]
[itex]U(dt)=I-\frac{i}{\hbar}H(t)dt[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution


The first thing I tried was to rearrange the first of the relevant equations:
[tex]\left(\frac{d}{dt}U\right)U^{-1}=-\frac{i}{\hbar}H(t).[/tex]
I can then integrate both sides; if the LHS could turn into an expression like [itex]\ln{U}[/itex] I'd be done, but that didn't work out. Any hints?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the derivative of [itex]\ln U[/itex]?
 
If U was an ordinary function I would say [itex]U^{-1}\frac{d}{dt}U[/itex], but considering that U is an operator function, I'm not sure. I don't know how [itex]\ln{U}[/itex] is even defined, much less how to apply chain rule to it.
 
Try expanding the expression you have for U(t) using a Taylor series and show that it satisfies the Schrödinger equation.
 
dEdt said:
If U was an ordinary function I would say [itex]U^{-1}\frac{d}{dt}U[/itex], but considering that U is an operator function, I'm not sure. I don't know how [itex]\ln{U}[/itex] is even defined, much less how to apply chain rule to it.

Like any function of an operator, [itex]\ln{U}[/itex] is defined in terms of it's Taylor series. More specifically in this case, it's the inverse series of the exponential function. It exists iff [itex]U^{-1}[/itex] exists.

So, working along the lines of your attempted solution, you would get something like:
[tex]U^{-1} \partial_t U = -\frac{i}{\hbar}U^{-1}HU \;.[/tex]
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
31
Views
4K