Why do we consider the evolution (usually in time) of a wave function ?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The evolution of a wave function in quantum mechanics (QM) is primarily considered with respect to time, as exemplified by the wave function $\psi(x,t) = e^{kx - \omega t}$. Time serves as the evolution parameter because it allows for the prediction of future states of a system, which is essential for understanding dynamic changes. While it is theoretically possible to incorporate time into the configuration space, practical laboratory experiments necessitate time as a distinct parameter. Pauli's early insights highlight that treating time as an observable leads to contradictions regarding the stability of matter, reinforcing the necessity of time as a parameter in QM.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics fundamentals
  • Familiarity with wave functions and their mathematical representations
  • Knowledge of the role of time in physical theories
  • Basic grasp of commutation relations in quantum mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the implications of relativistic quantum mechanics on wave functions
  • Study the concept of time as an observable in quantum theory
  • Investigate Pauli's contributions to quantum mechanics and their relevance today
  • Learn about the stability of matter and energy spectra in quantum systems
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focused on quantum mechanics, theoretical physicists, and researchers exploring the foundations of quantum theory.

rajesh_d
Messages
5
Reaction score
1
Why do we consider evolution of a wave function and why is the evolution parameter taken as time, in QM.

Look at a simple wave function $\psi(x,t) = e^{kx - \omega t}$. $x$ is a point in configuration space and $t$ is the evolution parameter. They both look the same in the equation, then why consider one as an evolution parameter and other as configuration of the system.

My question is why should we even consider the evolution of the wave function in some parameter (it is usually time)?. Why can't we just deal with $\psi(\boldsymbol{x})$, where $\boldsymbol{x}$ is the configuration of the system and that $|\psi(\boldsymbol{x})|^2$ gives the probability of finding the system in the configuration $\boldsymbol{x}$?

One may say, "How to deal with systems that vary with time?", and the answer could be, "consider time also as a part of the configuration space". Why wonder why this could not be possible.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do we consider evolution of a wave function and why is the evolution parameter taken as time, in QM.
Because we want to know what happens next. Generally a system will change in time... so the square modulus of the wavefunction only give the correct probability-density at a particular point in time.

Yes we can work time into the configuration space - this is the point of relativistic quantum mechanics.

Even so, we have to do experiments in a laboratory which is mired in time - so the coordinate that is usually most convenient to evolve the wavefunction with respect to is still time.
 
Time in quantum theory is necessarily a parameter labelling the "causal sequence of events" or something like that, no matter whether you consider non-relativistic or relativistic quantum theory.

The reason has been given by Pauli very early in the development of quantum theory: If time would be taken as an observable than it would have the commutation relation
[\hat{t},\hat{H}]=\mathrm{i}\hbar.
This would mean, as for the case of the position and momentum operator in non-relativistic quantum theory, that the spectrum of both the time and the Hamilton operator would be whole \mathbb{R}, and this contradicts the stability of matter since for that the energy must have a lower boundary, so that a ground state of lowest energy exists.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K