5
$\begingroup$

Having defined the expectation value of position as follows $$ \langle x \rangle = \int x {\lvert\Psi(x,t)\rvert}^2dx $$ The time derivative of the expectation value is derived in my literature in the following way:

$$ \frac{d\langle x \rangle }{dt} = \int x\partial_t{\lvert\Psi\rvert}^2dx = \ldots $$

From here it is straightforward algebra and calculus to the answer.
$$ \frac{d\langle x \rangle }{dt} = \frac{-i\hbar}{2m}\int\overline{\Psi}\partial_x\Psi dx $$ What strikes me as odd is the fact that the author didn't write

$$ \frac{d\langle x \rangle }{dt} = \int \partial_t\left(x\lvert\Psi\rvert^2dx\right) $$

Somehow, the position $x$ is treated as a constant. There is no explanation to why this is the case. From above, $x$ is somehow unchanging in time and the only thing that alters the expectation value is the wave function. This might be the case but then what is the interpretation of $x$?

Why doesn't $x$ vary in time?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ straightforward algebra and calculus? without needing any extra input from physics? $\endgroup$ – arivero Aug 24 '15 at 3:45
7
$\begingroup$

Because in QM, the wave function contains all the relevant information, and $x$ is the coordinate parameter.

You are expecting $x$ to be dependent on time because you are used to see it as the particle's coordinate, i.e. a function of time that says where the particle is for each time parameter value.

But here, $\psi$ has this information, and $x$ is just the parameter value for which you want to evaluate the odds of finding the particle. So $x$ is not the position of the particle in the sense that is a time function giving the particle's position; its just another parameter on which $\psi$ depends.

This is similar to wave mechanics, in the sense that you use $x$ as a variable on which the function of wave form depends, but is not a particular coordinate of the wave, is just a coordinate of the space where the wave exists.

$\endgroup$
7
$\begingroup$

The position $x$ is not a variable, it is an operator in quantum mechanics. Similarily, it's not always necessary to think of a quantum states as being given by a wavefunction $\psi(x)$, nor is it necessary to express the theory's time-dependence by write $\psi(x,t)$.

In abstract Dirac notation, the expectation value of position in a state $\lvert\psi\rangle$ is $$ \langle x \rangle = \langle\psi\rvert x \lvert\psi\rangle$$ and if you want to know its time-dependence, you have to decide whether to look at the time-dependence in the Schrödinger picture, where we write the time-dependence of the theory in the states $\lvert\psi(t)\rangle = \mathrm{e}^{-\mathrm{i}Ht}\lvert\psi(0)\rangle$ and the operators are constant in time, or in the Heisenberg picture, where the states are time-independent and the dependence is in the operators as $A(t) = \mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}Ht}A(0)\mathrm{e}^{-\mathrm{i}Ht}$.

Plugging in, we see that, in both cases, the time-dependence of the expectation value is $$ \langle x \rangle (t) = \langle \psi(0) \rvert \mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}Ht}A(0)\mathrm{e}^{-\mathrm{i}Ht}\lvert \psi(0)\rangle$$ and whether you say that it is the position operator that varies or the state (or some mixture) is a matter of taste.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.