What is the Momentum Operator Identity in Modern Quantum Mechanics?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the momentum operator identity in modern quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on a mathematical expression involving state vectors and their derivatives. The original poster seeks clarification on how to demonstrate a specific equation from a quantum mechanics textbook.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the nature of the series expansion related to the equation, with some questioning whether the terms should be treated as constants or variables. There is a discussion about differentiating functions and the implications of variable assignments in the context of the expansion.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants providing hints and suggestions regarding the series expansion. Some express uncertainty about the correctness of the approach and the assumptions being made, indicating a productive exploration of the topic without reaching a consensus.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of specific equations from a textbook, and participants are grappling with the interpretation of variables in the context of series expansions. The original poster expresses difficulty in understanding the material, which may influence the discussion's direction.

malawi_glenn
Science Advisor
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
2,436

Homework Statement


I want to show:

\langle x' - \triangle x' \vert \alpha \rangle = \langle x' \vert \alpha \rangle - \triangle x' \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x'}\langle x' \vert \alpha \rangle

Homework Equations



\vert \alpha \rangle is a state.

The Attempt at a Solution



i have no clue, can anyone give me a hint? Is the bra being splitted into two, or what?

This is a part of eq (1.7.15) in Sakurai mordern quantum mechanics, 2ed.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's just the first term in a power series expansion. Like f(x-a)=f(x)-a*df(x)/dx.
 
aha okay I'll try that one, thanks a lot!
 
But I think the first term of the series expansion must be a constant but not a function of x.

So I'm wondering..
 
crazypoets said:
But I think the first term of the series expansion must be a constant but not a function of x.

So I'm wondering..

In f(x-a)=f(x)-a*df(x)/dx I'm thinking of 'x' as the constant (point to expand around) and 'a' as the expansion variable.
 
But f is differentiated by 'x' in f(x-a)=f(x)-a*df(x)/dx.

I think if 'a' is the variable the series expansion must be

<br /> <br /> f(x-a)=f(x)-a*\frac{df(x-a)}{da} |_{a=0}<br /> <br />

I'm studying the part of QM and have difficulty in understanding the eq (1.7.15).

I want to verify that eq,

but I think there may be some mistakes in the explanation by series expansion.
 
crazypoets said:
But f is differentiated by 'x' in f(x-a)=f(x)-a*df(x)/dx.

I think if 'a' is the variable the series expansion must be

<br /> <br /> f(x-a)=f(x)-a*\frac{df(x-a)}{da} |_{a=0}<br /> <br />

I'm studying the part of QM and have difficulty in understanding the eq (1.7.15).

I want to verify that eq,

but I think there may be some mistakes in the explanation by series expansion.

Now that has the wrong sign in the derivative if you are taking it d/da. It will give you -f'(x). If you want to be super precise how about (to first order in a),

<br /> f(x-a)=f(x)-a \frac{df(z)}{dz} |_{z=x}<br />

the variable in the differentiation symbol is really just a dummy, not x or a. Or just f(x-a)=f(x)-a*f'(x) is also clear.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
631
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
365
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K