0

In Quantum Mechanics, a state vector $|\psi\rangle$ will evolve in time according to $$|\psi(t)\rangle=e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\hat H t}|\psi(0)\rangle$$ Imagine we have a system such that, for a short period of time $T$, the Hamiltonian increases by a constant and then returns to normal, such that $$\hat H=\hat H_0+ \begin{cases} 0 & \text{($t\lt0,\, t\gt T$)}\\ A & \text{($0\leq t\leq T$)}\\ \end{cases} $$ At $t=T$ we will have $$|\psi(T)\rangle=e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}AT}e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\hat H_0T}|\psi(0)\rangle$$ Now, following the first equation, since after $t=T$ there is no $A$, it should just become $$|\psi(t)\rangle=e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\hat H_0 t}|\psi(0)\rangle$$ But this seems strange, it's as if that period of interaction with whatever caused the extra energy had no effect on the particle whatsoever. I think it makes more sense to apply the time evolution operator separately and obtain $$|\psi(t)\rangle=\hat U(t-T)|\psi(T)\rangle=e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\hat H_0(t-T)}e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}AT}e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\hat H_0T}|\psi(0)\rangle=e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\hat H_0t}e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}AT}|\psi(0)\rangle$$ Is my idea wrong or is the time evolutikon operator different in this case? If so, the what would be the case for a time-dependent Hamiltonian?

1 Answers1

-2

Your first equation does not hold for a time dependent Hamiltonian.

akhmeteli
  • 26,888
  • 2
  • 27
  • 65
  • 1
    "Is my idea wrong ... in this case? If so, then what would be the case for a time-dependent Hamiltonian?" – BioPhysicist Dec 18 '18 at 03:38
  • @AaronStevens : With all due respect, I am under no obligation to check if OP's random guesses are correct or to give complete answers. I gave a partial answer, now the OP could find the correct expression for the time evolution operator in a general case, such as that in the answer at https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/45455/evolution-operator-for-time-dependent-hamiltonian , and apply it to their specific case. – akhmeteli Dec 18 '18 at 04:10
  • 1
    You should at least address all parts of the question. What you just said to me should be said to the OP in your answer. – BioPhysicist Dec 18 '18 at 04:23
  • @AaronStevens : "You should at least address all parts of the question." Again, with all due respect, this is just your opinion. According to the rules (https://physics.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer), "Any answer that gets the asker going in the right direction is helpful". – akhmeteli Dec 18 '18 at 04:27
  • 2
    "Read the question carefully. What, specifically, is the question asking for? Make sure your answer provides that – or a viable alternative. The answer can be “don’t do that”, but it should also include “try this instead”. Any answer that gets the asker going in the right direction is helpful, but do try to mention any limitations, assumptions or simplifications in your answer. Brevity is acceptable, but fuller explanations are better. " – BioPhysicist Dec 18 '18 at 04:36
  • 2
    All votes are subjective. Based on the entire section you reference (not just part of a sentence) I believe the answer could be better with barely any additional effort. Hence the -1. It's not personal, I just don't think it's a sufficient answer. My first comment was to let you know why do I didn't just leave you wondering why someone gave you a down vote. – BioPhysicist Dec 18 '18 at 04:36
  • @AaronStevens : I can assure you, I have no problems with your downvote, I just tried to explain that we disagree on the requirements for answers. I am sure the OP is smart enough to understand that if their equation is wrong they should look for the right equation. – akhmeteli Dec 18 '18 at 04:46
  • 2
    Unfortunately as written now this post is not an answer but a comment. Methinks it should be developed but with so little details it’s not super useful, although as a comment it is entirely correct, – ZeroTheHero Dec 18 '18 at 04:52
  • @ZeroTheHero : Again, according to the rules, this is an answer. – akhmeteli Dec 18 '18 at 04:55
  • 2
    This is silly. You may be technically right in the narrow sense so take your win if you want, but it would still benefit from being expanded, although this would repeat an answer posted in a duplicate to the original question. – ZeroTheHero Dec 18 '18 at 04:58
  • @ZeroTheHero : First, it does not matter who wins here. Second, I fully agree that my answer can be improved. However, I am not ready to accept your ideas, however noble, on what is an answer and what is not. So, apparently, your standards are higher than mine, but that does not mean I have to adopt your standards. The standards of this site are good enough for me. – akhmeteli Dec 18 '18 at 05:14