How Is the Schrödinger Equation Derived from the Hamilton-Jacobi Equation?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the Schrödinger equation from the Hamilton-Jacobi equation using the wave function representation. The key equation involved is the Hamilton-Jacobi equation, which is expressed in terms of the action S. Participants discuss substituting the wave function form, φ(x, t) = a(x, t) exp(i S(x, t)/ħ), into the Hamilton-Jacobi equation and simplifying the resulting expressions to find the leading terms. The challenge lies in understanding how to equate the derived terms to the standard form of the Schrödinger equation, particularly identifying the leading term as Δ_x φ. The conversation highlights the transition from classical to quantum mechanics through these mathematical relationships.
hunc
Messages
13
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am reading Mathematical Concepts of Quantum Mechanics (Stephen J. Gustafson, Israel Michael Sigal. Second edition). The book would like to find an evolution equation which would lead to the Hamilton-Jacobi equation
$$\frac{\partial S}{\partial t}=-h(x, \nabla S) $$
in the way the wave equation led to the eikonal one. The book also says that ##\phi (x, t) = a(x, t) \exp( i S(x,t)/\hbar)##. So I express ##S(x,t)## using ##\phi (x,t)## and substitute back to the Hamilton-Jacobi equation, taking ##h (x, \nabla S) = \frac{1}{2m}|\nabla S|^2+V(x)##.

The book means to take the leading terms when ##\hbar## small compared to a typical classical action ##S## and restore Schrodinger equation. I am kind of lost during the derivation.

Homework Equations


After the substitution, I have
$$i\hbar\partial_t \phi=-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}[(\frac{\nabla \phi}{\phi}-\frac{\nabla a}{a})^2-\frac{2im\partial_t a}{a\hbar}]\phi+V(x)\phi.$$
Comparing with Schrodinger equation, I figure that the leading term of
$$[(\frac{\nabla \phi}{\phi}-\frac{\nabla a}{a})^2-\frac{2im\partial_t a}{a\hbar}]\phi$$
should equal to ##\Delta_x \phi##, but don't know how.

The Attempt at a Solution


I am not sure what to search for the problem, but wiki have something on this. A nonlinear variant of the Schrödinger equation is expressed as
$$i\hbar\partial_t \phi=-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{(\nabla \phi)^2}{\phi}+V(x)\phi.$$
I am not sure what a nonlinear Schrödinger equation is after realizing it's not the same thing as the Schrödinger equation.

The book's goal seems to be the linear Schrödinger equation. Even though I do see how to obtain the nonlinear Schrödinger equation, I am not sure why ##(\frac{\nabla \phi}{\phi})^2## is a leading term. Could someone help me with this?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can derive it in the following way:

  1. Let \phi = a e^{\frac{iS}{\hbar}}
  2. Compute \frac{-\hbar^2}{2m} \nabla^2 \phi in terms of a and S and only keep the lowest-order terms, in powers of \hbar
  3. Similarly, compute i \hbar \frac{d}{dt} \phi in terms of a and S and keep the lowest-order terms in powers of \hbar.
  4. Now, use the fact that \frac{(\nabla S)^2}{2m} + V = -\frac{d}{dt} S to show that the results of 2 and 3 are equal (to lowest order in \hbar)
 
stevendaryl said:
You can derive it in the following way:

  1. Let \phi = a e^{\frac{iS}{\hbar}}
  2. Compute \frac{-\hbar^2}{2m} \nabla^2 \phi in terms of a and S and only keep the lowest-order terms, in powers of \hbar
  3. Similarly, compute i \hbar \frac{d}{dt} \phi in terms of a and S and keep the lowest-order terms in powers of \hbar.
  4. Now, use the fact that \frac{(\nabla S)^2}{2m} + V = -\frac{d}{dt} S to show that the results of 2 and 3 are equal (to lowest order in \hbar)
Thanks! It was my first attempt, which never really got carried out. I thought ##\nabla^2\phi## can bring in ##1/\hbar^2## and ##\partial_t \phi## only ##1/\hbar##... And I just go through it and all is fine.
And now I kind of want to ask what's the story about the wiki and the equation
$$
i\hbar\partial_t \phi=-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{(\nabla \phi)^2}{\phi}+V(x)\phi.$$
 
Well, if you let \phi = a e^{\frac{i}{\hbar} S}, then

\phi^* (-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \nabla^2 \phi) = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} a \nabla^2 a + \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} (\nabla a)^2 - \frac{i \hbar}{2m} (\nabla^2 S) a^2 + \frac{1}{2m} (\nabla S)^2 a^2

\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} |\nabla \phi|^2 = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} (\nabla a)^2 + \frac{1}{2m} (\nabla S)^2 a^2

So the difference between them is -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} a \nabla^2 a - \frac{i \hbar}{2m} (\nabla^2 S) a^2.
 
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