Wavefunction in rotating frame

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the transformation of wavefunctions between a lab frame and a rotating frame in quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on the implications of a time-dependent potential and the Hamiltonian in these frames. Participants explore the mathematical relationships and conditions under which the wavefunctions are related.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a Hamiltonian for a system in a rotating frame and proposes a transformation for the wavefunction from the rotating frame to the lab frame.
  • Another participant argues that the potential is not isotropic, suggesting that the commutation relation between the angular momentum operator and the Hamiltonian does not hold, which affects the validity of the proposed transformation.
  • A later reply seeks confirmation on the correctness of the unitary transformation for rotating frames, suggesting that both frames agree on the wavefunction values at specific spatial points.
  • Another participant reiterates the non-commuting nature of the operators involved, emphasizing the implications for the transformation.
  • One participant reflects on their learning process regarding the transformation to a rotating frame, indicating a personal journey through understanding the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the commutation relations of the operators involved, indicating a lack of consensus on the validity of the proposed transformation between frames. Some participants agree on the general concept of wavefunction values being consistent across frames at specific points, while others challenge the underlying assumptions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations related to the isotropy of the potential and the implications for operator commutation, which remain unresolved within the conversation.

Coffee_
Messages
259
Reaction score
2
Hello, I have the following problem:

A system in the lab frame is described by a time dependent rotating potential ##V(\vec{r},t)##.

So ##H_{lab}=\frac{\boldsymbol{p}^{2}}{2m} + V(\vec{r},t)##.

My book says that the Hamiltonian in the rotating frame is given by

##H_{rot}=\frac{\boldsymbol{p'}^{2}}{2m} + V(\vec{r}) - w\boldsymbol{L'_z}##

Where ##\boldsymbol{p'}## and ##L'_z## are operators in the rotating frame. So to clarify, in this frame the potential is stationary.

(Let's take this as an ansatz! Assume this is the correct rotating Hamiltonian for all reasoning to follow.)

So in the rotating frame a ##\Psi'## will solve the Schrödinger equation with the adjusted Hamiltonian.

How to conver from ##\Psi'## to the wavefunction in the lab frame?Edit:

I see some papers proposing the following: (in hbar=1 units)

##\Psi'(\vec{r'},t)=e^{i\boldsymbol{L'_z}wt}\Psi_{lab}(\vec{r'},t)##

(1)

Let me show why I don't see how this is correct:

Writing out the time evolution for ##\Psi'## in the rotating frame Schrödinger equation gives:

##\Psi'(\vec{r'},t)=e^{-i\boldsymbol{H''}t + i\boldsymbol{L'_z}wt} \Psi'(\vec{r},0) ##

Where ##\boldsymbol{H''}=\frac{\boldsymbol{p'}^{2}}{2m} + V(\vec{r'})##

Now if ##\boldsymbol{L'z}## and ##\boldsymbol{H''}## commute which I'm pretty sure they do then:

##\Psi'(\vec{r'},t)=e^{i\boldsymbol{L'_z}wt} e^{-i\boldsymbol{H''}t} \Psi'(\vec{r},0) ##

Since ##\Psi'(\vec{r},0) = \Psi_{lab}(\vec{r},0)## we have this final equation :

##\Psi'(\vec{r'},t)=e^{i\boldsymbol{L'_z}wt} e^{-i\boldsymbol{H''}t} \Psi(\vec{r},0) ##

Eq(2)

Now now! Compare eq(1) and eq(2), it does look like:

##\Psi_{lab}(\vec{r},t)=e^{-i\boldsymbol{H''}t} \Psi(\vec{r},0) ##

Which is a result I can not believe. If you take a look at ##\boldsymbol{H''}## it has a time INDEPENDENT potential in there. This would mean that to find the evolution in the Lab frame all we have to do is ignore the time dependence of the potential and just let it evolve as if the potential was stationary in the lab frame all along.

What is wrong?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your potential V(r') is not isotropic, hence the commutator with the operator L=L' can't vanish as L is the generator of rotations. So L' and H'' certainly don't commute.
 
Great. This was exactly what I thought a few hours after posting it (the non-commuting part) but thanks for confirming. So the unitary transformation I wrote down is correct for rotating frames in general? This means both the lab frame and the rotating frame agree upon the values of the WF in a certain point in real space. By this I mean, for example if the person in the lab frame points a laser pointer at a certain location and yells the value of te WF for me is ''...'' and the person in the rotating frame looks at this same spot that is lit up, he agrees with this value?

Sounds correct but I'd like to be sure.
 
DrDu said:
Your potential V(r') is not isotropic, hence the commutator with the operator L=L' can't vanish as L is the generator of rotations. So L' and H'' certainly don't commute.

Hey DrDu. I don't mean to persist, but just a headsup to ask if you have seen my response? If you don't have time right now it's totally okay just making sure.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
11K