Fourier Transfrom and expectation value of momemtum operator

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the expectation value of the momentum operator using the Fourier transform. The initial equation involves substituting the momentum operator and transforming the wavefunction and its conjugate. A participant expresses confusion about applying the derivative operator and integrating, leading to an incorrect result. Another contributor suggests using an identity related to Dirac delta functions to resolve the issue. The conversation concludes with an acknowledgment that the provided guidance clarifies the approach to reach the desired result.
black_hole
Messages
71
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Using <\hat{p}n> = ∫dxψ*(x)(\hat{p})nψ(x) and \hat{p} = -ihbar∂x and the definition of the Fourier transform

show that <\hat{p}> = ∫dk|\tilde{ψ}(k)|2hbar*k

2. The attempt at a solution

Let n = 1 and substitute the expression for the momentum operator. Transform the wavefunction and its conjugate. Take out all constants.

\hat{p} = -ihbar/2pi∫dx∫dkeikx\tilde{ψ}*(k)∂xdkeikx\tilde{ψ}

Here I'm stuck. I tired applying the ∂x operator onto the eikx next to it. That cancels the negative sign, the i, and brings down a k. I thought I could change the the transform of the wavefunction and its conjugate into its norm squared and then I'd be left with ∫dxe2ikx but that integral does not give me 2pi.

have a made a mistake?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
black_hole said:
Here I'm stuck. I tired applying the ∂x operator onto the eikx next to it. That cancels the negative sign, the i, and brings down a k. I thought I could change the the transform of the wavefunction and its conjugate into its norm squared and then I'd be left with ∫dxe2ikx but that integral does not give me 2pi.

have a made a mistake?

You need to be more careful. The two Fourier transformations you do don't have the same index: you integrate over two different k's.
 
Um, ok. You're probably right. But I'm not sure I see what to do ...
 
You will need an identity concerning Dirac delta functions: \delta(k+k&#039;) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int e^{ix(k+k&#039;)} dx
 
black_hole said:
Um, ok. You're probably right. But I'm not sure I see what to do ...
What clamtrox is saying is that you should start off with
$$\langle \hat{p} \rangle = -\frac{i\hbar}{2\pi}\int dx \left[\int dk\,\tilde{\psi}(k)e^{ikx}\right]^* \frac{\partial}{\partial x} \left[\int dk'\,\tilde{\psi}(k')e^{ik'x}\right].$$ Do what you tried the first time, but this time you'll get something that looks like the identity clamtrox provided above, which will allow you to perform one of the integrals, leaving you with the result you want.
 
Ok Thanks guys! That makes more sense
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top