How to prove a relation between the evolution operators in the Schrödinger and interaction pictures of...

Multi tool use
Multi tool use












0












$begingroup$


Consider a Hamiltonian $H$ of two components, a time-independent $H_0$ and a time-dependent $V(t)$,



$$H(t)=H_0+V(t),.$$



In the Schrödinger picture of quantum mechanics, the state $left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}$ evolves according to:



$$mathrm{i}hbarfrac{partial}{partial t}left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}=H(t)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},.$$



This equation admits a formal solution given by,
$$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}=U(t,t_0)left|psi(t_0)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},.$$



$U(t,t_0)$ is the evolution operator corresponding to $H(t)$, defined by
$$U(t,t_0)=mathcal{T}expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}intlimits_{t_0}^{t}mathrm{d}t'H(t')right),,$$
where $mathcal{T}$ is the time-ordering operator.



One define the states and operators in the interaction picture as
$$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},,$$
$$A_{mathrm{I}}(t)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)A_{mathrm{S}}(t)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright),.$$



$A_{mathrm{S}}(t)$ is the operator in the Schrödinger picture, such as $V(t)$, which in general could depend on time.



One could prove that
$$mathrm{i}hbarfrac{partial}{partial t}left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=V_{mathrm{I}}(t)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}},.$$



This resolves into
$$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=U'(t,t_0)left|psi(t_0)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}},,$$



where
$$U'(t,t_0)=mathcal{T}expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}intlimits_{t_0}^{t}mathrm{d}t'V_{mathrm{I}}(t')right),.$$



I know that $U$ and $U'$ are related to each other by
$$U'(t,t_0)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$



This can be proved by a differentiation procedure (and essentially this is how the interaction picture is derived from the Schrödinger one). But how can one prove this based on the expansion in Neumann's series of the evolution operators only?






mathematical-physics







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    0












    $begingroup$


    Consider a Hamiltonian $H$ of two components, a time-independent $H_0$ and a time-dependent $V(t)$,



    $$H(t)=H_0+V(t),.$$



    In the Schrödinger picture of quantum mechanics, the state $left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}$ evolves according to:



    $$mathrm{i}hbarfrac{partial}{partial t}left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}=H(t)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},.$$



    This equation admits a formal solution given by,
    $$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}=U(t,t_0)left|psi(t_0)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},.$$



    $U(t,t_0)$ is the evolution operator corresponding to $H(t)$, defined by
    $$U(t,t_0)=mathcal{T}expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}intlimits_{t_0}^{t}mathrm{d}t'H(t')right),,$$
    where $mathcal{T}$ is the time-ordering operator.



    One define the states and operators in the interaction picture as
    $$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},,$$
    $$A_{mathrm{I}}(t)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)A_{mathrm{S}}(t)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright),.$$



    $A_{mathrm{S}}(t)$ is the operator in the Schrödinger picture, such as $V(t)$, which in general could depend on time.



    One could prove that
    $$mathrm{i}hbarfrac{partial}{partial t}left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=V_{mathrm{I}}(t)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}},.$$



    This resolves into
    $$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=U'(t,t_0)left|psi(t_0)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}},,$$



    where
    $$U'(t,t_0)=mathcal{T}expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}intlimits_{t_0}^{t}mathrm{d}t'V_{mathrm{I}}(t')right),.$$



    I know that $U$ and $U'$ are related to each other by
    $$U'(t,t_0)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$



    This can be proved by a differentiation procedure (and essentially this is how the interaction picture is derived from the Schrödinger one). But how can one prove this based on the expansion in Neumann's series of the evolution operators only?






    mathematical-physics







    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      0












      0








      0


      1



      $begingroup$


      Consider a Hamiltonian $H$ of two components, a time-independent $H_0$ and a time-dependent $V(t)$,



      $$H(t)=H_0+V(t),.$$



      In the Schrödinger picture of quantum mechanics, the state $left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}$ evolves according to:



      $$mathrm{i}hbarfrac{partial}{partial t}left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}=H(t)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},.$$



      This equation admits a formal solution given by,
      $$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}=U(t,t_0)left|psi(t_0)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},.$$



      $U(t,t_0)$ is the evolution operator corresponding to $H(t)$, defined by
      $$U(t,t_0)=mathcal{T}expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}intlimits_{t_0}^{t}mathrm{d}t'H(t')right),,$$
      where $mathcal{T}$ is the time-ordering operator.



      One define the states and operators in the interaction picture as
      $$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},,$$
      $$A_{mathrm{I}}(t)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)A_{mathrm{S}}(t)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright),.$$



      $A_{mathrm{S}}(t)$ is the operator in the Schrödinger picture, such as $V(t)$, which in general could depend on time.



      One could prove that
      $$mathrm{i}hbarfrac{partial}{partial t}left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=V_{mathrm{I}}(t)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}},.$$



      This resolves into
      $$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=U'(t,t_0)left|psi(t_0)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}},,$$



      where
      $$U'(t,t_0)=mathcal{T}expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}intlimits_{t_0}^{t}mathrm{d}t'V_{mathrm{I}}(t')right),.$$



      I know that $U$ and $U'$ are related to each other by
      $$U'(t,t_0)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$



      This can be proved by a differentiation procedure (and essentially this is how the interaction picture is derived from the Schrödinger one). But how can one prove this based on the expansion in Neumann's series of the evolution operators only?






      mathematical-physics







      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      Consider a Hamiltonian $H$ of two components, a time-independent $H_0$ and a time-dependent $V(t)$,



      $$H(t)=H_0+V(t),.$$



      In the Schrödinger picture of quantum mechanics, the state $left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}$ evolves according to:



      $$mathrm{i}hbarfrac{partial}{partial t}left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}=H(t)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},.$$



      This equation admits a formal solution given by,
      $$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}}=U(t,t_0)left|psi(t_0)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},.$$



      $U(t,t_0)$ is the evolution operator corresponding to $H(t)$, defined by
      $$U(t,t_0)=mathcal{T}expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}intlimits_{t_0}^{t}mathrm{d}t'H(t')right),,$$
      where $mathcal{T}$ is the time-ordering operator.



      One define the states and operators in the interaction picture as
      $$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{S}},,$$
      $$A_{mathrm{I}}(t)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)A_{mathrm{S}}(t)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright),.$$



      $A_{mathrm{S}}(t)$ is the operator in the Schrödinger picture, such as $V(t)$, which in general could depend on time.



      One could prove that
      $$mathrm{i}hbarfrac{partial}{partial t}left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=V_{mathrm{I}}(t)left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}},.$$



      This resolves into
      $$left|psi(t)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}}=U'(t,t_0)left|psi(t_0)rightrangle_{mathrm{I}},,$$



      where
      $$U'(t,t_0)=mathcal{T}expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}intlimits_{t_0}^{t}mathrm{d}t'V_{mathrm{I}}(t')right),.$$



      I know that $U$ and $U'$ are related to each other by
      $$U'(t,t_0)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$



      This can be proved by a differentiation procedure (and essentially this is how the interaction picture is derived from the Schrödinger one). But how can one prove this based on the expansion in Neumann's series of the evolution operators only?






      mathematical-physics




      mathematical-physics






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Jan 22 at 9:22









      Willi TschauWilli Tschau

      486




      486






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0












          $begingroup$

          It is not correct that $$U'(t,t_0)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$ You can simply see this when setting $Vequiv 0$. We then have that
          $$ U(t,t_0) = expleft[-i (t-t_0) H_0right]$$
          while $$U'(t,t_0)= 1 neqexpleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Respectfully disagree (I wanted to say Holy Cow!). In the case you considered, couldn't you just split $U(t,t_0)$ into $exp(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t)timesexp(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t_0)$. $H_0$ commutes with itself!
            $endgroup$
            – Willi Tschau
            Jan 22 at 15:51













          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3082919%2fhow-to-prove-a-relation-between-the-evolution-operators-in-the-schr%25c3%25b6dinger-and-i%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          0












          $begingroup$

          It is not correct that $$U'(t,t_0)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$ You can simply see this when setting $Vequiv 0$. We then have that
          $$ U(t,t_0) = expleft[-i (t-t_0) H_0right]$$
          while $$U'(t,t_0)= 1 neqexpleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Respectfully disagree (I wanted to say Holy Cow!). In the case you considered, couldn't you just split $U(t,t_0)$ into $exp(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t)timesexp(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t_0)$. $H_0$ commutes with itself!
            $endgroup$
            – Willi Tschau
            Jan 22 at 15:51


















          0












          $begingroup$

          It is not correct that $$U'(t,t_0)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$ You can simply see this when setting $Vequiv 0$. We then have that
          $$ U(t,t_0) = expleft[-i (t-t_0) H_0right]$$
          while $$U'(t,t_0)= 1 neqexpleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Respectfully disagree (I wanted to say Holy Cow!). In the case you considered, couldn't you just split $U(t,t_0)$ into $exp(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t)timesexp(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t_0)$. $H_0$ commutes with itself!
            $endgroup$
            – Willi Tschau
            Jan 22 at 15:51
















          0












          0








          0





          $begingroup$

          It is not correct that $$U'(t,t_0)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$ You can simply see this when setting $Vequiv 0$. We then have that
          $$ U(t,t_0) = expleft[-i (t-t_0) H_0right]$$
          while $$U'(t,t_0)= 1 neqexpleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          It is not correct that $$U'(t,t_0)=expleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$ You can simply see this when setting $Vequiv 0$. We then have that
          $$ U(t,t_0) = expleft[-i (t-t_0) H_0right]$$
          while $$U'(t,t_0)= 1 neqexpleft(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}tright)U(t,t_0)expleft(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_{0}t_0right),.$$







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Jan 22 at 10:59









          FabianFabian

          19.8k3774




          19.8k3774












          • $begingroup$
            Respectfully disagree (I wanted to say Holy Cow!). In the case you considered, couldn't you just split $U(t,t_0)$ into $exp(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t)timesexp(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t_0)$. $H_0$ commutes with itself!
            $endgroup$
            – Willi Tschau
            Jan 22 at 15:51




















          • $begingroup$
            Respectfully disagree (I wanted to say Holy Cow!). In the case you considered, couldn't you just split $U(t,t_0)$ into $exp(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t)timesexp(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t_0)$. $H_0$ commutes with itself!
            $endgroup$
            – Willi Tschau
            Jan 22 at 15:51


















          $begingroup$
          Respectfully disagree (I wanted to say Holy Cow!). In the case you considered, couldn't you just split $U(t,t_0)$ into $exp(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t)timesexp(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t_0)$. $H_0$ commutes with itself!
          $endgroup$
          – Willi Tschau
          Jan 22 at 15:51






          $begingroup$
          Respectfully disagree (I wanted to say Holy Cow!). In the case you considered, couldn't you just split $U(t,t_0)$ into $exp(-frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t)timesexp(frac{mathrm{i}}{hbar}H_0t_0)$. $H_0$ commutes with itself!
          $endgroup$
          – Willi Tschau
          Jan 22 at 15:51




















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3082919%2fhow-to-prove-a-relation-between-the-evolution-operators-in-the-schr%25c3%25b6dinger-and-i%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          IODUPcm24 X4r0h57hw9o,2WX0kpU1aqHj87rMiOGxe,HfgO4YXYOtksNM 82ec
          -
          b MSR17usvzTeFSAIkX7ComJ8iuViytrFsIxI WnZTg TdEhzs1VTqiqDI7Y79AIHIVjSxfclnq eHW63bK RTLj1Xhww5aaWylB7igC

          Popular posts from this blog

          The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth

          Image
          Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth From The Cutting Room Floor < The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth Jump to: navigation, search This is a sub-page of The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth . Afterbirth is the first expansion pack for Rebirth and features a variety of improvements. Contents 1 Unused Graphics 1.1 Old Man Keeper 1.2 Skinless Hush 1.3 Miscellaneous Unused Hush Sprites 1.4 Generosity achievement 1.5 Afterbirth+ Room Editor 1.6 Bearded Ultra Greed 1.7 Early Ultra Greed 1.8 Unused Brownie Expression 1.9 Frail's Spinning Head 1.10 Mom's Dead Hand Alt 2 Unused Audio 2.1 Unused Dead Womb Layer 2.2 Unused Hush Battle Outro 2.3 The Stain Grunt Unused Graphics Old Man Keeper Image file: gfxuimain me...
          Read more

          menu

          Image
          menu    Wanted List (rus) Main Projects    FAMI Dumping project    Pirate cart's ID numbers list    My carts collection    Unpublished NES cheats    >All titles     Numbered titles     A titles     B titles     C titles     D titles     E titles     F titles     G titles     H titles     I titles     J titles     K titles     L titles     M titles     N titles     O titles     P titles     Q titles     R titles     S titles     T titles     U titles     V titles     W titles     X titles     Y titles     Z titles     Unique cheats     Buried secrets     Fixed generic cheats     Generic cheats     Secret passwords     Password generators     List of games with no cheats found    Unpublished Game Boy cheats    Unpublished Game Boy Color cheats Misc Stuff    Pirate Market    BONZA    FORTUNA    Decrypted SmyNES ROMs    NES inside (rus)    FCEUMM project Blog    cah4e3.wordpress.com Mail me:    cah4e3 at gmail dot c...
          Read more

          Dobbiaco

          Image
          Dobbiaco comune ( IT ) Dobbiaco ( DE ) Toblach Dobbiaco Vecchia Localizzazione Stato   Italia Regione Trentino-Alto Adige Provincia Bolzano Amministrazione Sindaco Guido Bocher (lista civica Indipendenti-Unabhängige) dal 10-5-2015 (2º mandato) Lingue ufficiali Tedesco, Italiano Territorio Coordinate 46°44′07.35″N 12°13′20.2″E  /  46.735375°N 12.222278°E 46.735375; 12.222278  ( Dobbiaco ) Coordinate: 46°44′07.35″N 12°13′20.2″E  /  46.735375°N 12.222278°E 46.735375; 12.222278  ( Dobbiaco ) Altitudine 1 213 m s.l.m. Superficie 125,42 km² Abitanti 3 356 [2] (31-7-2017) Densità 26,76 ab./km² Frazioni Carbonin ( Schluderbach ), Santa Maria ( Aufkirchen ), Valle San Silvestro ( Wahlen ) Comuni confinanti Auronzo di Cadore (BL), Braies, Cortina d'Ampezzo (BL), Innervillgraten (AT-7), San Candido, Sesto, Valle di Casies, Villabassa Altre informazioni Cod. postale 39034 Prefisso 0474 Fuso...
          Read more