1
$\begingroup$

Quantum Mechanics, Volume 1 by Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Bernard Diu and Frank Laloe. Complement L-III, exercise 4 (page 342).

Basically consider a free particle, and calculate the variance(uncertainty) of $(\Delta X)^2$ by using Ehrenfest's theorem.

I got $$\langle X\rangle =\frac{\langle p\rangle }{m}t+K, \langle X^2\rangle =\frac{\langle p^2\rangle }{m^2}t^2+\frac{c_1}{m}t+c_2$$ and $$\langle xp+px\rangle =\frac{2}{m}\langle p^2\rangle t+c_1 ,$$where $c_1,c_2,K$ are arbitrary constant from integration with respect to time $t$.

The answer in the text book is $$(\Delta X)^2 =\frac{1}{m}(\Delta p)_0^2t^2+(\Delta X)_0^2.$$

According to my calculation, there is an extra term $$(\frac{c_1}{m}-\frac{2\langle p\rangle }{m}K)t .$$

If I assume $c_1=K=0$, then it's done.

However, this does not seem to be the case the textbook suggested, instead, it seemed to be suggesting that $$\langle xp+px\rangle |_0=c_1=2\langle p\rangle K=2\langle p\rangle \langle x\rangle |_0 .$$

(Notice $\langle p\rangle $ and $\langle p^2\rangle $ are independent of time. Further, if one assumes transitional symmetry, then as a term in measurement $$(\frac{c_1}{m}-\frac{2\langle p\rangle }{m}K)t$$ must disappear, so even without the context of the textbook $$\langle xp+px\rangle |_0=c_1=2\langle p\rangle K=2\langle p\rangle \langle x\rangle |_0$$ for a free particle.)

My question is:

  1. How to prove $$\langle xp+px\rangle |_0= 2\langle p\rangle \langle x\rangle |_0$$

  2. If the expression is not true, what happened to the transitional symmetry?

(* the subscript $0$ meant measure at time $t=0$)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @CosmasZachos for free particle assume $V=constant=0$ for simplification. The homework point out that the explicit time dependency essentially reduced to the explicit time dependence of $<p>$ and $<p^2>$ after taking $\frac{d}{dt}<p>$ and $\frac{d}{dt}<p^2>$, both of them equatl to a constant. Then one may try to integrate back. (Just decompose it a little further and then one may integrate the functions as polynomials.) $\endgroup$ – J C Sep 28 '18 at 14:09
  • $\begingroup$ It's OK. You did your QM right, but you dismissed the "with a suitable choice of the time origin" instruction. It is just a glorified change of variables reducing to their expression. You really want me to do it for you? $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Sep 28 '18 at 15:20
  • $\begingroup$ @CosmasZachos I thought about that as well, but you see, in QM there is transitional symmetry. So the $K$ in $<x>$ can be changed arbitrarily, and it does not have to be $0$, but as one might have thought, moving the reference frame of calculation by $K$ would not change the $(\Delta X)^2$. Therefore, come back to the case, $<xp+px>|_0=2<x><p>|_0$ must hold, or the transitional symmetry is nolonger hold. If transitional symmetry is nolonger hold, there is a much bigger question... So... how to prove $<xp+px>|_0=2<x><p>|_0$ ? $\endgroup$ – J C Sep 28 '18 at 17:08
  • $\begingroup$ No, you certainly do not wish to prove that. The book certainly does not suggest that in any way. See my answer. $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Sep 28 '18 at 18:48
  • $\begingroup$ @CosmasZachos I'm not saying that your approach won't work to obtain the solution in the textbook. I'm saying that. (If) The textbook is correct, (then) and $<px+xp>|_0=2<p><x>|_0$. $\endgroup$ – J C Sep 28 '18 at 19:22
3
$\begingroup$

Your text instructs you to heed "with a suitable choice of the time origin". Certainly not to nullify the extra term $$A_0 t\equiv \frac{t}{m} \langle \{(p-\langle p\rangle_0),( x-\langle x\rangle_0) \}\rangle_0 $$ you correctly found. Instead, to absorb it into a shifted time variable.

To wit, from your original $$(\Delta X)^2 _t=\frac{1}{m}(\Delta p)_0^2~t^2+(\Delta X)_0^2 +A_0 ~t,$$ pick a time $\tau$, so $$(\Delta X)^2 _\tau=\frac{1}{m}(\Delta p)_0^2~\tau^2+(\Delta X)_0^2 +A_0 ~\tau,$$ which you may subtract from the above to get $$(\Delta X)^2 _t -(\Delta X)^2 _\tau =\frac{1}{m}(\Delta p)_0^2~(t^2 -\tau^2)+A_0 ~(t-\tau)\\ = \frac{1}{m}(\Delta p)_0^2~(t -\tau ) ^2 + \left ( \frac{2\tau}{m}(\Delta p)_0^2 +A_0\right ) ~(t-\tau) . $$

You then solve for $\tau$ to nullify the big parenthesis, $$ \tau =-mA_0/2 (\Delta p)_0^2 = \frac{\langle p\rangle \langle x\rangle_0 -\langle xp+px\rangle_0/2}{(\Delta p)^2_0} = \frac{-\langle \{(p-\langle p\rangle_0),( x-\langle x\rangle_0) \}\rangle_0}{2(\Delta p)^2_0}, $$ substituting your initial conditions. Note this does not vanish for all distributions (initial conditions): it it absolutely not constrained by the TDSE, or measurements, or anything else. It is a constant.

You then see that for this origin of time, $$ (\Delta X)^2 = (\Delta X)^2 _\tau + \frac{1}{m}(\Delta p)_\tau^2~(t -\tau ) ^2 , $$ your book's expression, recalling that $(\Delta p)_0=(\Delta p)_\tau$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It doesn't matter what the book stated, we knew by changing $K$(make reference frame/ initial origion further) would not change the measurement $(\Delta X)^2$ by transitional symmetry. Thus the extra $t$ trem which dependent on the condition of $K$ must disappear. Change the time is esentially shift in intial position, but the things is that it should work for all intial position. Change $t$ didn't solve the question. I still put an upvote though. $\endgroup$ – J C Sep 28 '18 at 19:18
  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure what dissatisfies you. I did exactly what the full statement of the problem dictates. Indeed, there is a large invariance group in the 3 first order ODEs you are solving, and time-shifts amount to a combination of the rest. Convince yourself of the equivalence of the dependent variables' shifts. I simply wrote down the most compact answer, as suggested by the text. $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Sep 28 '18 at 19:25
  • $\begingroup$ Your answer would be changing if your $\tau$ is changing right? But that's not correct. Because if you repeated the experiement twice, with changing $\tau$, in my case $K$. $(\Delta X)^2$ should stay the same. The change of reference frame should not affect the experimental outcome. Otherwise physicsts in Europe would have a different science that of US. $\endgroup$ – J C Sep 28 '18 at 19:28
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Sigh... Yes, that's what "suitable" is all about. Only the $\tau$ solved for reduces the answer to that of the book. The authors know what they are asking. $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Sep 28 '18 at 19:32

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.