Understanding Second Quantization and Its Application in Quantum Mechanics

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the application of second quantization in quantum mechanics, specifically how to express integrals involving wave functions as creation and annihilation operators. The user attempts to rewrite an integral involving the Hamiltonian by substituting wave functions with operator expressions. They question the validity of their assumptions in this transformation and seek clarification on whether their approach is correct. Additionally, the user expresses frustration with LaTeX formatting issues that prevent their equations from displaying properly. The conversation highlights the complexities of applying second quantization techniques in quantum mechanics.
QuantumClue
Messages
159
Reaction score
0
I begin with \int (\bar{\psi}(x) (\mathcal{H} \psi(x)) d^3x

This is just

\int (\bar{\psi}(x) ({\frac{p^2}{2M} + \frac{1}{2}M \omega^2 (x)} \psi(x)) d^3x

If one identified that \bar{\psi}(x) and \psi(x) are creation and annihilation operators, I assume that I can simply restate my integral by replacing the appropriate expressions with the following:


\int (a^{\dagger}a ({\frac{p^2}{2M} + \frac{1}{2}M \omega^2 (x)} aa^{\dagger}) d^3x

So that

\int (\hbar \omega^{-1} \mathcal{H} - \frac{\hbar \omega}{2} ({\frac{p^2}{2M} + \frac{1}{2}M \omega^2 (x)} \hbar \omega^{-1} \mathcal{H} + \frac{\hbar \omega}{2}) d^3x

I am just asking if I have assumed to much. Am I allowed to do this, and if not, why not?

Thanks

edit

What am I doing wrong this time, the equations won't show? I love latex, but I hate it sometimes!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I found the invalid move. Sorry about that folks! Latex will show soon I hope :)
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K