Understanding the Basic Operator Equation for Quantum Mechanics

  • Thread starter Thread starter genericusrnme
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a quantum mechanics operator equation involving the Hamiltonian and a density operator expressed as a sum of projectors. Participants are trying to clarify the relationship between the left and right actions of the Hamiltonian on the density operator.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand the operator equation and expresses confusion about the next steps. Some participants question the correctness of the original equation and explore the implications of taking expectation values. Others suggest examining the definitions of the operators involved and their actions on states.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, with some providing insights into the equivalence of operators and discussing the implications of the Schrödinger equation. There is a recognition of differing interpretations regarding the behavior of the density operator.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a reference to Sakurai's book, indicating that the original poster's equation is derived from established literature. The discussion also highlights the distinction between time-dependent and time-independent states in the context of the problem.

genericusrnme
Messages
618
Reaction score
2
Can someone explain to me how

[itex]H(\sum_n w_n |a_n><a_n|) = \sum_n w_n(H|a_n><a_n|-|a_n><a_n|H)[/itex]

I've done this before and I remember being confused about it before then finding out it was something simple.. I should really start filing my notes away for such an eventuality :frown:
I can't seem to work out what the next step is at all.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What you wrote is not correct. If you take an expectation value of your expression in the mth state, you'd find 0 on the RHS. We can find a correct statement if we consider the operators

[tex]O_L = \sum_n w_n (H| a_n \rangle )\langle a_n| ,[/tex]

[tex]O_R = \sum_n w_n | a_n \rangle (\langle a_n|H) .[/tex]

The expectation values in an arbitrary state are equal:

[tex]\langle a_m | O_L | a_m \rangle = \sum_n w_n \langle a_m |H| a_n \rangle \langle a_n| a_m \rangle = w_m \langle a_m |H| a_m \rangle,[/tex]

[tex]\langle a_m | O_R | a_m \rangle = \sum_n w_n \langle a_m | a_n \rangle \langle a_n|H| a_m \rangle = w_m \langle a_m|H| a_m \rangle ,[/tex]

where in both cases we used [itex]\langle a_n| a_m \rangle = \delta_{nm}.[/itex]

So in this sense, [itex]O_R=O_L[/itex]: we can let the operator act from the right or left side. This is the same way that expectation values work

[tex]\langle a_n | H | a_m \rangle = \langle a_n | (H | a_m \rangle ) = (\langle a_n | H) | a_m \rangle.[/tex]


We can therefore write

[tex]H \left( \sum_n w_n | a_n \rangle \langle a_n| \right) = \frac{1}{2} \sum_n w_n \Bigl[ ( H | a_n \rangle ) \langle a_n| + | a_n \rangle (\langle a_n|H) \Bigr].[/tex]
 
Yeah, I kept coming to that conclusion too yet what I wrote is what is in Sakurai's book..

[itex]i\ \hbar \partial_t \rho = H \rho \neq -[\rho , H][/itex]

Where [itex]\rho = \sum_n w_n |a_n \rangle \langle a_n |[/itex]

I'll attatch an extract
 

Attachments

  • wat.png
    wat.png
    19 KB · Views: 540
genericusrnme said:
Yeah, I kept coming to that conclusion too yet what I wrote is what is in Sakurai's book..

[itex]i\ \hbar \partial_t \rho = H \rho \neq -[\rho , H][/itex]

Where [itex]\rho = \sum_n w_n |a_n \rangle \langle a_n |[/itex]

I'll attatch an extract

OK, the point there is that [itex]\rho[/itex] does not satisfy Schrödinger's equation so [itex]i\ \hbar \partial_t \rho \neq H \rho[/itex]. Instead you have to use

[tex]i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} |\alpha^{(i)},t_0;t \rangle \langle \alpha^{(i)},t_0;t | = \left( i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} |\alpha^{(i)},t_0;t \rangle \right) \langle \alpha^{(i)},t_0;t | + |\alpha^{(i)},t_0;t \rangle \left( i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \langle \alpha^{(i)},t_0;t | \right)[/tex]

and

[tex]i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \langle \alpha^{(i)},t_0;t | = - \left( i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} |\alpha^{(i)},t_0;t \rangle \right)^\dagger .[/tex]

The derivation I gave above is valid for time-independent states and wouldn't work here.
 
Ah!
I remembered it being something simple :L

Thanks buddy :biggrin:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K