Questioning the Propagator: Diagonal or Not?

  • Thread starter sumeetkd
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Propagator
In summary, the propagator is a diagonal matrix that affects the probability of a particle at x,t. First, it is not in general in real space, but in momentum space it is. Secondly, the x is just a label here, and the dynamics is in the time variable. Finally, if you consider a string with a wave propagating in it, you will see that it is perfectly possible to describe the motion of each point on the string without referring to other points on it, for example u(t) = cos(t/f - kx), for fixed x.
  • #1
sumeetkd
9
0
This might turn out to be a stupid question but ...i couldn't understand

The propagater is defined as exp[-iHt/(h/2pi)]...this would be the matrix
so U(t)|[tex]\psi[/tex](x,0)> (matrix . vector) would give |[tex]\psi[/tex](x,t)>

What i couldn't understand is that the propagator is a diagonal matrix..but it is obvious that
probability of a particle at x,t will be affected by the entire wave distribution.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
First of all, why do you say that the propagator is a diagonal matrix? In general, in "real" space it is not (while in momentum space, it is, as momentum states have a well-defined energy hence are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian).
Secondly, note that x is just some label here, the dynamics is in the time variable.
Finally, if you consider a string with a wave propagating in it, you will see that it is perfectly possible to describe the motion of each point on the string without referring to other points on it, for example u(t) = cos(t/f - kx), for fixed x.
 
  • #3
I am a total beginner so there are some leaps in my logic.

In real basis the propagator turns out to be sigma over n of (h^2/2m) d^2n/dx^2n for the diagonal terms rest terms being zero. hence the doubt.

The thing about the string was ok for the classical case, but in the quantum case
the probability at x at a later time would be integral( <x|U|x'><x'|psi(x,0)>).
That is there is a contribution from each point in space to the probability distribution that would exist at (x,t).

Hence i felt there should be off diagonal terms.

The problem is also that if you take it in the p basis and then take x components you get non zero terms but in the real basis i was not able to understand how the off diagonal terms are non zero.

Thanks for your help compuchip. please let me know, even if i have made some real sad mistake in calculations
 

FAQ: Questioning the Propagator: Diagonal or Not?

What is the purpose of questioning the propagator's diagonality?

The purpose is to determine whether the propagator is diagonal or not, which can provide important insights into the system being studied.

What does it mean for a propagator to be diagonal?

A diagonal propagator means that each element in the matrix is only dependent on itself and not on any other elements. This can simplify calculations and provide a clearer understanding of the system.

Why is it important to know if the propagator is diagonal or not?

Knowing the diagonality of the propagator can provide information about the underlying structure and dynamics of the system. It can also help in finding simpler solutions to problems and making predictions.

How is the diagonality of a propagator determined?

The diagonality of a propagator can be determined by analyzing the matrix elements and checking for any dependencies between them. If there are no dependencies, then the propagator is diagonal.

What are the implications of a non-diagonal propagator?

A non-diagonal propagator means that there are dependencies between elements, which can make calculations more complex and may indicate underlying correlations or interactions within the system.

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top