0
$\begingroup$

The energy operator is:

$${\displaystyle {\hat {E}}=i\hbar {\frac {\partial }{\partial t}}}\tag1$$

and the momentum operator is

$${\displaystyle {\hat {p}}=-i\hbar {\frac {\partial }{\partial x}}}.\tag2$$

I know that we obtain the first by differentiating the plane wave solution of the Schrodinger equations with $t$ and the second by $x$.

Say I have the expression for one of them, can I derive the other one using the Hamiltonian equations of motion from classical mechanics?

Can I obtain $(1)$ from $(2)$ or vice versa via:

$${\displaystyle {\frac {\mathrm {d} {\boldsymbol {q}}}{\mathrm {d} t}}={\frac {\partial {\mathcal {H}}}{\partial {\boldsymbol {p}}}},\quad {\frac {\mathrm {d} {\boldsymbol {p}}}{\mathrm {d} t}}=-{\frac {\partial {\mathcal {H}}}{\partial {\boldsymbol {q}}}}.}$$

$\endgroup$
9
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ No, eq. 1 is not the energy operator. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2 at 15:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Eq. 1 does not define an operator on state vectors in the Hilbert space of the system. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2 at 15:10
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Related: Why can't $ i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial t}$ be considered the Hamiltonian operator? and links therein. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Commented Jun 2 at 15:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @TobiasFünke What's this then ? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2 at 15:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AgniusVasiliauskas I don't know. But as Valter pointed out already, it is not an operator on the Hilbert space of the system. This is a mathematical fact. See also the link provided by Qmechanic. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2 at 15:27

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

As it stands, the question is meaningless since Eq.(1) is not the definition of an operator in the Hilbert space as, instead, Eq.(2) is.

The point is that $t$ labels different states in the Hilbert space. Contrarily, an operator acts at given time on a unique given state.

Up to factors, the Schroedinger equation equals the action of an operator $H\psi_t$ (on the state at a certain time), with the $t$ derivative of a curve taking values in the Hilbert space $\mathbb{R} \ni t \mapsto \psi_t$. Eq.(1) refers to this second type of action.

$H\psi$ does not need a $t$ parametrized curve of states to be defined.

Concersely, $\frac{d}{dt}\psi_t$ needs such a curve to be defined.

Maybe, taking the remarks above into accout,it is possible to turn the question into a meaningful one.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks. I am now having trouble finding the correct definition of the energy operator. This answer (linked) defines it as the Hamiltonian: "the energy operator $E^$ (also called Hamiltonian...)", but I think that is not true. Could you please state the correct definition of the energy operator in your answer, just to have it all in one place. I would be really grateful. Here is the answer I was referring to: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/122213/… $\endgroup$
    – User198
    Commented Jun 2 at 21:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Indeed, the Hamiltonian is the operator corresponding to the energy observable. Notice that it is not a time derivative but, in non relativistic theory, has the form $P^2/2m+ V(x)$. The answer by ACuriousMind is quite clear on the issue you are considering. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 3 at 5:54
0
$\begingroup$

There's a conceptual mistake there. What follows could find an answer with the relationship between Poisson brackets in classical mechanics and the commutator in quantum mechanics.

The conceptual mistake. The conceptual mistake you make is the same you'd make in classical mechanics defining the momentum saying that it's the time derivative is the external force $\mathbf{F}$ acting on the system.

In classical mechanics, the equation of motion tells that ime derivative of the momentum equals (and NOT is) the force acting on it.

In general, you have:

  • the state of the system
  • the set of forces acting on it
  • the equation of motion relating the evolution of the state of the system with the set of forces acting on it

Relationship between Poisson brackets and commutator in the equations of motion. Hamilton equations of motion in classical mechanics read

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{d \mathbf{q}}{dt} & = \{ \mathbf{q}, H \} \\ \frac{d \mathbf{p}}{dt} & = \{ \mathbf{p}, H \} \end{aligned}$$

while the time derivative of the operators (in Heisenberg picture, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenberg_picture) reads

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{d \hat{\mathbf{q}}}{dt} & = - \frac{i}{\hbar} [ \hat{\mathbf{q}}, H ] \\ \frac{d \hat{\mathbf{p}}}{dt} & = - \frac{i}{\hbar} [ \hat{\mathbf{p}}, H ] \ , \end{aligned}$$

with the correspondence between classical and quantum equations,

$$[\hat{A}, \hat{H}] \quad \leftrightarrow \quad i \hbar \{ A, H \} \ .$$

$\endgroup$

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.