Finding A Solution Using the Ladder Operators

In summary: So, in summary, the conversation is about a reader having trouble with a derivation in Griffiths' Quantum Mechanics textbook regarding the Schrodinger equation for a quantum harmonic oscillator potential. They question the author's reasoning and wonder if there is a simpler way to solve the equation. They also discuss the relationship between \psi satisfying the PDE and being an eigen-function of H. It is concluded that \psi must be an eigenvector of H to satisfy the stationary Schrödinger equation and that being mapped to a scalar multiple of itself by the Hamiltonian operator is equivalent to satisfying the PDE.
  • #1
Bashyboy
1,421
5
Hello,

I am reading Griffiths Quantum Mechanics textbook, and am having some difficulty with a derivation on page 56. To me, there seems to be something logically wrong with his arguments, but I can not pin-point precisely what it is.

To provide you with a little background, Griffiths is trying to solve the Schrodinger equation for a quantum harmonic oscillator potential, employing what he refers to as the "algebraic method." He already has defined the raising and lower operators, and has already shown us how to factor the Hamiltonian operator. Here is where I am having trouble:

"Now, here comes the crucial step: I claim that if [itex]\psi[/itex] satisfies the Schrodinger equation with energy E (that is:[itex]H \psi = E \psi[/itex]), then [itex]a_+ \psi[/itex] satisfies the Schrodinger equation with energy [itex]E + \hbar \omega[/itex]..."

The rest involves him going through the proof. As I mentioned above, there seems to be something wrong with the author's reasoning, but I can't quite pin-point it. To me, it seems that I could have chosen absolutely operator I wish, call it [itex]*_1[/itex], and say that the energy is [itex]E+*_2[/itex], and just find a relationship that looks like the Schrodinger equation, which appears to be what he did.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Give a try to your idea.
Take the x operator for example.
You will see that x ψ is not an eigenvector of H even when ψ is an eigenvector (i.e. Hψ=Eψ).
 
  • #3
Ah, okay. What you have said sort of naturally leads to my next question. Obviously, [itex]\psi[/itex] is a solution to the Schrodinger equation if it satisfies the PDE. But is this equivalent to [itex]\psi[/itex] being an eigen-function of the Hamiltonian; in short, is the following statement true: [itex]\psi[/itex] satisfies the Schrodinger PDE iff [itex]\psi[/itex] is an eigen-function of H?
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Bashyboy said:
Ah, okay. What you have said sort of naturally leads to my next question. Obviously, [itex]\psi[/itex] is a solution to the Schrodinger equation if it satisfies the PDE. But is this equivalent to [itex]\psi[/itex] being an eigen-function of the Hamiltonian; in short, is the following statement true: [itex]\psi[/itex] satisfies the Schrodinger PDE iff [itex]\psi[/itex] is an eigen-function of H?

Yes.

The time-dependent Schrodinger equation is:

[itex]H \psi(x,t) = i \hbar \frac{d}{dt} \psi(x,t)[/itex]

If [itex]\psi_0(x)[/itex] satisfies [itex]H \psi_0 = E \psi_0[/itex] for some real number [itex]E[/itex], then [itex]\psi(x,t) = e^{\frac{-i E t}{\hbar}} \psi_0(x)[/itex] satisfies the time-dependent Schrodinger equation.
 
  • #5
This may seem a bit naive, but is there a way of proving that [itex]\psi[/itex] being mapped to a scalar multiple of itself by the Hamiltonian operator is the same as [itex]\psi[/itex] satisfying the PDE? Or does this follow from the fact that the Schrodinger equation can be written, equivalently, as [itex]H \psi = E \psi[/itex]?
 
  • #6
What you say is not naive, it is just totally unclear.
Are you talking about the stationary Schrödinger equation or the time-dependent equation?
If ψ is a solution of the stationary equation, then -by definition- it is one of the eigenvectors of H, and it is -also by definition- the spatial part of a "stationary" solution of the full-time-dependent Schrödinger equation (see stevendaryl).
 
  • #7
Bashyboy said:
This may seem a bit naive, but is there a way of proving that [itex]\psi[/itex] being mapped to a scalar multiple of itself by the Hamiltonian operator is the same as [itex]\psi[/itex] satisfying the PDE? Or does this follow from the fact that the Schrodinger equation can be written, equivalently, as [itex]H \psi = E \psi[/itex]?

Yes. Saying that [itex]\psi[/itex] is mapped to a scalar multiple of itself by the Hamiltonian operator is just saying that there is some [itex]E[/itex] such that [itex]H \psi = E \psi[/itex]. Any [itex]\psi[/itex] that satisfies that equation solves the Schrodinger equation.
 

FAQ: Finding A Solution Using the Ladder Operators

What are ladder operators in quantum mechanics?

Ladder operators are mathematical operators used in quantum mechanics to describe the energy levels of a quantum system. They are represented by mathematical expressions that raise or lower the energy state of a system by a fixed amount.

How are ladder operators used to find solutions in quantum mechanics?

Ladder operators are used to find solutions in quantum mechanics by applying them to the wave function of a system. The resulting wave function will have a higher or lower energy state, depending on which ladder operator is used. The process is repeated until the desired energy state is reached.

What is the significance of finding solutions using ladder operators?

Finding solutions using ladder operators is significant because it allows us to determine the energy levels of a quantum system and make predictions about its behavior. This is important in understanding the behavior of atoms, molecules, and other quantum systems.

Can ladder operators be used for all quantum systems?

No, ladder operators can only be used for systems that have discrete energy levels, such as atoms and molecules. They cannot be used for systems that have continuous energy levels, like free particles.

Are there any limitations to using ladder operators to find solutions?

Yes, there are limitations to using ladder operators to find solutions. They can only be used for systems with known energy levels, and the solutions may not always accurately reflect the behavior of the system in the real world. Additionally, the calculations can become very complex for systems with multiple particles or energy levels.

Back
Top