Skip to main content
added 81 characters in body
Source Link

1D is indeed not good one for radial operator (and if one uses it then it corresponds to half line with reflection boundary condition at x=0, and then the boundary term vanishes there so again h/i*d/dr is hermitian). But on higher dimensions, e.g. 3, one need to think of inner product with $r^2$ weight function, so it cancels the the boundary term. Of course this gives another term when doing integration by parts, and that is why $d/dr$ alone if not enough for hermiticity.

Of course this corresponds also to the fact that "plane wave" in radial coordinate has some function of $r$ in the denominator, because of energy conservation, e.g. $e^{ikr}/r$ in 3D.

Also see this nice paper, which describes the failure of this opproach in 2D.

1D is indeed not good one for radial operator (and if one uses it then it corresponds to half line with reflection boundary condition at x=0, and then the boundary term vanishes there so again h/i*d/dr is hermitian). But on higher dimensions, e.g. 3, one need to think of inner product with $r^2$ weight function, so it cancels the the boundary term. Of course this gives another term when doing integration by parts, and that is why $d/dr$ alone if not enough for hermiticity.

Of course this corresponds also to the fact that "plane wave" in radial coordinate has some function of $r$ in the denominator, because of energy conservation, e.g. $e^{ikr}/r$ in 3D.

1D is indeed not good one for radial operator (and if one uses it then it corresponds to half line with reflection boundary condition at x=0, and then the boundary term vanishes there so again h/i*d/dr is hermitian). But on higher dimensions, e.g. 3, one need to think of inner product with $r^2$ weight function, so it cancels the the boundary term. Of course this gives another term when doing integration by parts, and that is why $d/dr$ alone if not enough for hermiticity.

Of course this corresponds also to the fact that "plane wave" in radial coordinate has some function of $r$ in the denominator, because of energy conservation, e.g. $e^{ikr}/r$ in 3D.

Also see this nice paper, which describes the failure of this opproach in 2D.

added 170 characters in body
Source Link

1D is indeed not good one for radial operator (and if one uses it then it corresponds to half line with reflection boundary condition at x=0, and then the boundary term vanishes there so again h/i*d/dr is hermitian). But on higher dimensions, e.g. 3, one need to think of inner product with $r^2$ weight function, so it cancels the the boundary term. Of course this gives another term when doing integration by parts, and that is why $d/dr$ alone if not enough for hermiticity.

Of course this corresponds also to the fact that "plane wave" in radial coordinate has some function of $r$ in the denominator, because of energy conservation, e.g. $e^{ikr}/r$ in 3D.

1D is indeed not good one for radial operator. But on higher dimensions, e.g. 3, one need to think of inner product with $r^2$ weight function, so it cancels the the boundary term. Of course this gives another term when doing integration by parts, and that is why $d/dr$ alone if not enough for hermiticity.

Of course this corresponds also to the fact that "plane wave" in radial coordinate has some function of $r$ in the denominator, because of energy conservation, e.g. $e^{ikr}/r$ in 3D.

1D is indeed not good one for radial operator (and if one uses it then it corresponds to half line with reflection boundary condition at x=0, and then the boundary term vanishes there so again h/i*d/dr is hermitian). But on higher dimensions, e.g. 3, one need to think of inner product with $r^2$ weight function, so it cancels the the boundary term. Of course this gives another term when doing integration by parts, and that is why $d/dr$ alone if not enough for hermiticity.

Of course this corresponds also to the fact that "plane wave" in radial coordinate has some function of $r$ in the denominator, because of energy conservation, e.g. $e^{ikr}/r$ in 3D.

added 11 characters in body
Source Link

1D is indeed not good one for radial operator. But on higher dimensions, ie.eg. 3, one need to think of inner product with r2$r^2$ weight function, so it cancels the the boundary term. IfOf course this gives another term when doing integration by parts, and that is why d/dr$d/dr$ alone if not enough for hermiticity.

Of course this corresponds also to the fact that "plane wave" in radial coordinate has some function of r$r$ in the denumeratordenominator, because of energy conservation, ie.eg. e(ikr)/r$e^{ikr}/r$ in 3D.

1D is indeed not good one for radial operator. But on higher dimensions, i.e. 3, one need to think of inner product with r2 weight function, so it cancels the the boundary term. If course this gives another term when doing integration by parts, and that is why d/dr alone if not enough for hermiticity.

Of course this corresponds also to the fact that "plane wave" in radial coordinate has some function of r in the denumerator, because of energy conservation, i.e. e(ikr)/r in 3D

1D is indeed not good one for radial operator. But on higher dimensions, e.g. 3, one need to think of inner product with $r^2$ weight function, so it cancels the the boundary term. Of course this gives another term when doing integration by parts, and that is why $d/dr$ alone if not enough for hermiticity.

Of course this corresponds also to the fact that "plane wave" in radial coordinate has some function of $r$ in the denominator, because of energy conservation, e.g. $e^{ikr}/r$ in 3D.

added 180 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
Source Link
Loading