2
$\begingroup$

Perhaps I am forgetting something ‘simple’ from Multivariable calculus, but could someone point to a reference or provide an explanation as to why $\frac{\partial x}{\partial t} = 0$ in the following manipulation:

(Taken from chapter 1 of Griffiths’ Introduction to Quantum Mechanics 3rd Ed., we are trying to find the time average of x)

$$\frac{d\langle x\rangle}{dt} = \frac{d}{dt} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} x|\Psi|^2 dx $$ $$ = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{\partial}{\partial t} (x|\Psi|^2)dx $$

$$ = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{\partial x}{\partial t}|\Psi|^2 + \frac{\partial |\Psi|^2 }{\partial t}xdx $$

Here, Griffiths tosses away the first term, implying that $\frac{\partial x}{\partial t} = 0$. And thus,

$$ = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{\partial |\Psi|^2 }{\partial t}xdx $$

For context: I am an undergraduate, taking quantum for the first time, with this book. I have not gotten past chapter 1 yet.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ $x$ and $t$ are independent variables. $\endgroup$
    – DanielC
    Commented Dec 21, 2019 at 22:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So, is it always the case that all the wave function’s variables are independent to one another.(e.g. in 3D space, are the other partials also 0). $\endgroup$
    – JohnA.
    Commented Dec 21, 2019 at 22:38
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ That is correct. $\endgroup$
    – DanielC
    Commented Dec 21, 2019 at 22:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Unless there is another line they have not used that fact at all in this manipulation, I'm assuming that the next line in the text doesn't have the term $\frac{\partial x}{\partial t}$? $\endgroup$
    – Triatticus
    Commented Dec 21, 2019 at 22:50
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, where is the $\partial_tx$ used here? $\endgroup$
    – Kyle Kanos
    Commented Dec 21, 2019 at 23:12

3 Answers 3

3
$\begingroup$

The book is working in the Schroedinger picture in which the states $|\Psi\rangle$ and their wavefunctions are time dependendent, so $$ \Psi(x,t)\equiv \langle x|\Psi(t)\rangle = \langle x|e^{iHt}|\Psi\rangle $$ depends on time $t$, but the operators such as $\hat x$, of which the variable $x$ in your integral is the eigenvalue, are time independent, so $dx/dt=0$.

There is another way of doing things called the Heisenberg picture in which we make the states time independent, but put the time dependence into the operators $$ \hat x(t) = e^{iHt}x(0) e^{-iHt}. $$ It gives the same answers, but it is less used in introductory books.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ While this answer is likely more illuminating, at this point in the book I have not encountered any eigenvalue formalism yet. I’m sure it will make more sense once I get to chapter 2 or 3. $\endgroup$
    – JohnA.
    Commented Dec 21, 2019 at 23:42
  • $\begingroup$ @JohnA Sorry! I don't know what book you are using! There are several books on my shelf called "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics." Yes. It it will all make sense in few chapters. Just go with the flow for now. $\endgroup$
    – mike stone
    Commented Dec 22, 2019 at 0:15
  • $\begingroup$ The OP specifically mentioned Griffiths Introduction to Quantum Mechanics as the textbook they were working through $\endgroup$
    – Triatticus
    Commented Dec 22, 2019 at 1:09
  • $\begingroup$ @Triatticus. Look at the edit log, the reference to Grifiths was only added after I made my comment. $\endgroup$
    – mike stone
    Commented Dec 22, 2019 at 1:20
1
$\begingroup$

From the useful comments below the main post, I will write the answer to my own question.

In this context, $x$ and $t$ are independent variables. In general, if there is no relation between the variables of a function, be it that one of them is a function of the other, or they are both a function of some other parameter (like here https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2425481/partial-derivative-of-independent-variable#2425508), this derivative is 0.

The better question is why $x$ and $t$ are independent. To see this, we have to consider what $x$ is; Griffiths doesn’t do such a good job explaining that. $x$ is not the position of some particle. $x$ is just the distance from an origin here. $|\Psi|^2$ is the probability we measure our particle at a point in space, $x$.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

As @danielc said, x and t are independent. X, y, z, t are independent coordinates. Griffiths should not even have brought it up.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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