Skip to main content
Physics

Return to Question

deleted 7 characters in body; edited tags
Source Link
Qmechanic ♦
Qmechanic ♦
  • 213.1k
  • 48
  • 590
  • 2.3k

The following is a section "Correlation Amplitude and the Energy-Time Uncertainty Relation" from Sakurai's Modern Quantum Mechanics book page 79:

enter image description here enter image description here

Question:

  • What is the importance of the observation that if the interval for which $|E-E_0| \approx \frac{\hbar}{t}$ holds is much narrower than $\Delta E$ then there essentially no contribution to $C(t)$? Lastly, what is essentially the point of these observations?

Thanks.

The following is a section "Correlation Amplitude and the Energy-Time Uncertainty Relation" from Sakurai's Modern Quantum Mechanics book page 79:

enter image description here enter image description here

Question:

  • What is the importance of the observation that if the interval for which $|E-E_0| \approx \frac{\hbar}{t}$ holds is much narrower than $\Delta E$ then there essentially no contribution to $C(t)$? Lastly, what is essentially the point of these observations?

Thanks.

The following is a section "Correlation Amplitude and the Energy-Time Uncertainty Relation" from Sakurai's Modern Quantum Mechanics book page 79:

enter image description here enter image description here

Question:

  • What is the importance of the observation that if the interval for which $|E-E_0| \approx \frac{\hbar}{t}$ holds is much narrower than $\Delta E$ then there essentially no contribution to $C(t)$? Lastly, what is essentially the point of these observations?
Source Link
user100411
user100411

Correlation Amplitude in QM

The following is a section "Correlation Amplitude and the Energy-Time Uncertainty Relation" from Sakurai's Modern Quantum Mechanics book page 79:

enter image description here enter image description here

Question:

  • What is the importance of the observation that if the interval for which $|E-E_0| \approx \frac{\hbar}{t}$ holds is much narrower than $\Delta E$ then there essentially no contribution to $C(t)$? Lastly, what is essentially the point of these observations?

Thanks.

1
2