What's wrong with my Schrodinger equation?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the consistency between the abstract form of the Schrödinger equation and its representation in the position basis. Participants explore the implications of applying the Schrödinger equation to states of well-defined position and the conditions under which such applications are valid.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about deriving the position representation of the Schrödinger equation from its abstract form and identifies a contradiction in their calculations.
  • Another participant argues that the Schrödinger equation is not universally applicable to all kets, particularly those that are time-varying, and emphasizes that only specific kets satisfy the equation.
  • A different participant questions the validity of applying the Schrödinger equation to a theoretical state of well-defined position, suggesting that the two forms should be compatible under certain assumptions.
  • One participant asserts that it is rare for a time-varying ket to satisfy the Schrödinger equation, drawing an analogy to classical mechanics and Newton's laws.
  • Another participant points out that the assumption that the position ket |x⟩ satisfies the Schrödinger equation is incorrect, noting that |x⟩ is time-independent.
  • Several participants discuss the correct way to express the relationship between the abstract and position representations of the Schrödinger equation, suggesting that integrals should be introduced consistently on both sides of the equation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the application of the Schrödinger equation to states of well-defined position. There are competing views on the validity of certain assumptions and the conditions under which the equation can be applied.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their assumptions regarding the time-dependence of kets and the specific conditions under which the Schrödinger equation holds. The discussion reflects a nuanced understanding of the mathematical framework involved.

tpg
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone, I'm having an issue trying to make the abstract form of the Schrödinger equation:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\psi\right\rangle = H\left|\psi\right\rangle[/tex]

be consistent with the form that operates on wavefunctions in the position representation:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\psi(x) = H\psi(x)[/tex]

If I try to do this by plugging in [tex]\left|\psi\right\rangle =\int dx\,\psi(x)\left|x\right\rangle[/tex] to the abstract form, I end up with a contradiction. Starting with the RHS:

[tex]i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\psi\right\rangle & = & i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left(\int dx\,\psi(x)\left|x\right\rangle \right)[/tex]
[tex]& = & i\hbar\int dx\,\left(\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}\left|x\right\rangle +\psi\frac{\partial\left|x\right\rangle }{\partial t}\right)[/tex]

If we then use the Schrödinger equation again on [tex]\frac{\partial\left|x\right\rangle }{\partial t}[/tex]

[tex]\frac{\partial\left|x\right\rangle }{\partial t} & = & -\frac{i}{\hbar}H\left|x\right\rangle =\frac{i\hbar}{2m}\int dx'\,\left|x'\right\rangle \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x'^{2}}\left(\left\langle x'|x\right\rangle \right)[/tex]
[tex]& = & \frac{i\hbar}{2m}\int dx'\,\left|x'\right\rangle \delta''(x-x')[/tex]
[tex]& = & \frac{i\hbar}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\left|x\right\rangle }{\partial x^{2}}[/tex]

Where above we use the identity [tex]\int dx\,\phi(x)\delta''(x-a)=\phi''(a)[/tex]. I think we can now use parts a couple of times, together with the fact that [tex]\psi (x)[/tex] and [tex]\psi' (x)[/tex] go to zero at infinity, to say that

[tex]\int dx\,\psi\frac{\partial\left|x\right\rangle }{\partial t} & = & \frac{i\hbar}{2m}\int dx\,\psi\frac{\partial^{2}\left|x\right\rangle }{\partial x^{2}}[/tex]
[tex]& = & \frac{i\hbar}{2m}\int dx\,\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}\left|x\right\rangle[/tex]

Now, the RHS of the TDSE will go to [tex]-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\int dx\,\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}\left|x\right\rangle[/tex].
If we multiply by [tex]\left\langle x\right|[/tex] from the left on both sides,
we end up with

[tex]i\hbar\left(\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t}+\frac{i\hbar}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}\right) & = & -\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}[/tex]
[tex]\Rightarrow\quad\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t} & = & 0[/tex]

Clearly this is not right, as from the second form of the Schrödinger equation written down above, we get

[tex]\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial t} & = & \frac{i\hbar}{2m}\frac{\partial^{2}\psi}{\partial x^{2}}[/tex]

Can somebody help me find whereabouts I am going wrong here? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Schrödinger equation is not an identity. In particular, there's absolutely no reason to think

[tex]\frac{\partial\left|x\right\rangle }{\partial t} & = & -\frac{i}{\hbar}H\left|x\right\rangle[/tex]

In general, for a (possibly time-varying) ket [itex]| \psi \rangle[/itex], there absolutely no reason to think

[tex] i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\left|\psi\right\rangle = H\left|\psi\right\rangle[/tex]

Kets that do satisfy this equation are very special; they are the ones that describe a system governed by quantum dynamics.
 
So is the application of the Schödinger equation to a theoretical state of well-defined position invalid? I'm working on a theoretical basis here, and under that assumption surely the two forms of the Schödinger equation ought to be compatible?
 
It is a very rare thing for a (possibly) time-varying ket to satisfy the Schrödinger equation; therefore, it is almost never valid to apply the Schrödinger equation to such a ket. The only times you can do so are when the ket has been assumed to satisfy the equation (or has been proven to do so, or has been specifically constructed to satisfy the equation, or other similar circumstances)

Quantum mechanics is primarily concerned with studying those (possibly) time-varying kets that do satisfy the Schrödinger equation, so you will see and use a lot of them despite their rarity.


We can look at a comparable situation in classical mechanics; consider a massive particle with position function [itex]\vec{r}(t)[/itex] traveling through some uniform force field. The corresponding physical equation is Newton's law: [itex]F = m d^2 r(t) / dt^2[/itex]. However, very, very few functions [itex]\vec{r}(t)[/itex] actually satisfy Newton's law!

Apply Schrödinger's equation to an arbitrary ket is directly analogous to applying Newton's law to an arbitrary function. Schrödinger's equation is not a property of general kets -- it is only a property of those kets describing the time evolution of a quantum system! (And possibly a few other kets that satisfy it by chance or by construction)
 
At first glance I would say the step:
tpg said:
[...] If we then use the Schrödinger equation again on [tex]\frac{\partial\left|x\right\rangle }{\partial t}[/tex]
[...]

is not correct. You shouldn't assume [itex]|x\rangle[/itex] satisfies the Schrödinger equation.


Also [itex]|x\rangle[/itex] is time independent so its time derivative should be zero.

This with your derivation of the r.h.s. of TDSE should give you the correct wave-function equation.
 
Ah - I see. Of course, a state of well defined position will not remain that way, hence the Schrödinger equation does not apply. Thank you both very much for clearing that up.

In that case, does anyone know how to derive one form of the Schrödinger equation from the other?
 
tpg said:
Ah - I see. Of course, a state of well defined position will not remain that way, hence the Schrödinger equation does not apply. Thank you both very much for clearing that up.

In that case, does anyone know how to derive one form of the Schrödinger equation from the other?

Hi tpg

It is usual to write psi(x)=<x|psi>, where bra <x| is the dual vector of ket |x>. In this expression, |x> means the "freezed" state of the traveling particle |psi> when it is at position x. So |x> is a fixed vector without time-dependence. Therefore you can retrieve one form from the other by factorizing <x|.

Btw, if we introduce an integral in expression: [tex]\left|\psi\right\rangle =\int dx\,\psi(x)\left|x\right\rangle[/tex], we should do it on both sides. I would say that the correct form should be: [tex]\int dx\,\left|\psi\right\rangle =\int dx\,\psi(x)\left|x\right\rangle[/tex]
 
ArjenDijksman said:
Hi tpg
...
Btw, if we introduce an integral in expression: [tex]\left|\psi\right\rangle =\int dx\,\psi(x)\left|x\right\rangle[/tex], we should do it on both sides. I would say that the correct form should be: [tex]\int dx\,\left|\psi\right\rangle =\int dx\,\psi(x)\left|x\right\rangle[/tex]

Think that through.
 
ArjenDijksman said:
Btw, if we introduce an integral in expression: [tex]\left|\psi\right\rangle =\int dx\,\psi(x)\left|x\right\rangle[/tex], we should do it on both sides. I would say that the correct form should be: [tex]\int dx\,\left|\psi\right\rangle =\int dx\,\psi(x)\left|x\right\rangle[/tex]

jambaugh said:
Think that through.

Hello jambaugh,

You're right, what I wrote in that part was nonsense. [tex]\left|\psi\right\rangle =\int dx\,\psi(x)\left|x\right\rangle[/tex] is a good expression. Or otherwise stated: [tex]\left|\psi\right\rangle =\int dx\,\left|x\right\rangle\langle x\left|\psi\rangle[/tex]


Arjen
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
641
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
375
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
971
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K