Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Bernard Diu, Frank Laloë-Quantum Mechanics, Volume 1 (1978)
Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Bernard Diu, Frank Laloë-Quantum Mechanics, Volume 1 (1978)
Enviado por
urbanolopesDireitos autorais
Formatos disponíveis
Compartilhar este documento
Compartilhar ou incorporar documento
Você considera este documento útil?
Este conteúdo é inapropriado?
Denunciar este documentoDireitos autorais:
Formatos disponíveis
Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Bernard Diu, Frank Laloë-Quantum Mechanics, Volume 1 (1978)
Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Bernard Diu, Frank Laloë-Quantum Mechanics, Volume 1 (1978)
Enviado por
urbanolopesDireitos autorais:
Formatos disponíveis
1. The uncertainty
relation thus makes us reject the semi-classical picture of the Bohr orbits (see
§C-2 of chapter VII).
References and suggestions for further reading:
Bohm (5.1), chap. 5, § 14. Complement C;
THE UNCERTAINTY RELATIONS AND ATOMIC PARAMETERS
The Bohr orbit has no physical reality when coupled with the uncertainty relations
(cf. complement B,). Later (chap. VII), we shall study the quantum theory of the
hydrogen atom. We are going to show immediately, however, how the uncer-
tainty relations enable one to understand the stability of atoms and even to
derive simply the order of magnitude of the dimensions and the energy of the
hydrogen atom in its ground state,
Let us consider, therefore, an electron in the coulomb field of a proton,
which we shall assume to be stationary at the origin of the coordinate system.
When the two particles are separated by a distance r, the potential energy
of the electron is:
ve) a)
Gna
where q is its charge (exactly opposite to that of the proton). We shall set:
2
: @
4ne9
Assume that the state of the electron is described by a spherically symmetric
wave function whose spatial extent is characterized by ro (this means that the
probability of presence is practically zero heyond 2r4 or 379). The potential
energy corresponding to this state is then on the order of:
8)
For it to be as low as possible, it is necessary to take ry as small as possible
That is, the wave function must be as concentrated as possible about the proton
Bui it is aisu necessary iv take i ie cueigy iniy avvuni, This is
where the uncertainty principle comes in: if the electron is confined within
a volume of linear dimension ro, the uncertainty 4p in its momentum is at
least of the order of hiro. In other words, even if the average momentum is zero,
the kinetic energy T associated with the state under consideration is not zero
R
oat @
Teta
oe
2m (AP) fe
If we take ro smaller in order to decrease the potential energy, the minimum
kinetic energy (4) increases.
‘The lowest total energy compatible with the uncertainty relation is thus
the minimum of the function:
oo ee
i eer ae ieee 6)
2mr3 rg
E,
47 This minimum is obtained for:
#
To = dy = 6
me’
and is equal to:
me
po 7)
om oe U)
Variation with respect to re (extension of
‘the wave function) ofthe potential energy F,
the Kinetic energy 7, and the total eneesy
T+ V of & hydrogen atom, The func-
tions T and 7 vary inversely, so the total
‘energy passes through minimum value
for some value of T and V. The cortespon-
fing value ap ofr gives the order of magai-
tude of the hydrogen atom’s sie,
Expression (6) is the one found in the Bohr model for the radius of the
first orbit, and (7) gives correctly the energy of the ground state of the hydrogen
atom (see chap. VIT; the wave function of the ground state is indeed e~"*°), Such
quantitative agreement can only be accidental, since we have been reasoning
fon the basis of orders of magnitude. However, the preceding calculation reveals
an important physical idea: because of the uncertainty relation, the smaller the
extension of the wave function, the greater the kinetic energy of the electron.
The ground state of the atom results from a compromise between the kinetic
energy and the potential energy.
We stress the fact that this compromise, based on the uncertainty relation,
is totally different from what would be expected in classical mechanics. If the
electron moved in a classical circular orbit of radius ro, its potential energy
would be equal to:
a
iets @)
The corresponding kinetic energy is obtained by equating the electrostatic force
and the centrifugal force*:
a
0)
7
3
* In fact, the laws of classical electromagnetism indicate that an accelerated electron radiates,
‘which already torbids the existence of stable orbit.
48 which gives
ees
Ta jmt ase (10)
The total energy would then be equal to:
y= Tat Va ay
‘The most favorable energetic situation would occur at rp = 0, which would
give an infinite binding energy. Thus, we can say that it is the uncertainty
relation which enables us to understand, as it were, the existence of atoms.
ns for further reading:
Feynman II] (1.2), § 2-4. The same type of reasoning applied to molecules:
Schiff (1.18), first section of § 49. Complement Dy
AN EXPERIMENT ILLUSTRATING THE UNCERTAINTY RELATION
Young's double-slit experiment, which we analyzed in § A-2 of chapter I, led us
to the following conclusions: both wave and particle aspects of light are
needed to explain the observed phenomena; but they seem to he mutually
exclusive, in the sense that it is impossible to determine through which slit each
photon has passed without destroying, by this very operation, the interference pattern.
‘The wave and particle aspects are sometimes said to be complementary.
We are going to consider Young's doubie-siit experiment again to demonstrate
how complementarity and uncertainty relations are intimately related. To try to
cast doubt on the uncertainty relation, one can imagine more subtle devices
than the one of chapter I, which used photomultipliers placed behind the slits.
We shall now analyze one of these devices.
FIGURE 1
Sole 6
Diagram of a device using a
F
‘movable plate 2 whose momentum
90 ig measured before and after the
——— ‘pastage of the photon to determine
‘whether the photon passed through
FF, oc through F, before arriving at
vite
polnt on the sereen,
Assume that the plate %, in which the slits are pierced, is mounted so
that it can move vertically in the same plane. Thus, it is possible to measure the
vertical momentum transferred to it. Consider (fig. 1) a photon which strikes
the observation screen & at point M (for simplicity, we choose a source ¥ at infinity).
The momentum of this photon changes when it crosses 2. Conservation of
momentum implies that the plate # absorbs the difference, But the momentum
thus transferred to # depends on the path of the photon ; depending on whether it
passed through F, or F,, the photon has a momentum of:
Ps ~B sin 0, (a)
50 THE UNCERTAINTY RELATION : AN EXPERIMENT eo
or:
@)
«@ is the photon’s momentum, 6, and 0, are the angles made by F,M and
F,M with the incident sieation)
We then allow the photons to arrive one by one and gradually construct
the interference pattern on the screen &. For each one, we determine through which
slit it has passed by measuring the momentum acquired by the plate #, It
therefore seems that interference phenomena can still be observed on & although
we know through which slit each photon has passed.
Actually, we shall see that the interference fringes are not visible with this
device. The error in the preceding argument consists of assuming that only the
photons have a quantum character. In reality, it must not be forgotten that
quantum mechanics also applies to the plate # (macroscopic object). If we want
to know through which hole a photon has passed, the uncertainty 4p in the
vertical momentum of # must be sufficiently small for us to be able to measure
the difference between p, and p;:
4p < |p - Pil 8)
But then the uncertainty relation implies that the position of # is only known
to within 4x, with:
av zt «)
[ps - pil
If we designate by a the separation of the two slits and by d the distance
between the plate # and the screen &. and if we assume that @, and @, are small
(dja > 1), we find (fig. 1):
x= aj
sin 8, ~
x + a/2
(5)
sin 8, ~ 6, ~
a
(x denotes the position of the point of impact M on &). Formulas (1) and (2)
then give :
[pa — Pil = 102 — | = 55 6)
where a =< is the wavelength of light. Substituting this value into formula (4),
we obtain:
eet a
a
31 COMPLEMENT Dy
But # is precisely the fringe separation we expect to find on 6. If the vertical
position of the slits F, and F, is defined only to within an uncertainty greater
than the fringe separation, it is impossible to observe the interference pattern,
The preceding discussion clearly shows that it is impossible to construct a
quantum theory which is valid for light and not for material systems without
running into serious contradictions. Thus, in the above example, if we could
treat the plate # as a classical material system, we could invalidate the comple-
mentarity of the two aspects of light. and. consequently. the quantum theory of
radiation. Inversely, a quantum theory of matter alone would come up against
analogous difficulties. In order to obtain an overall coherence, we must apply
quantum ideas to all physical systems.
Roterences and suggestions for turther
ng
Bohm (5.1), chaps. $ and 6; Messiah (1.17), chap. IV § II; Shi (1.18), § 45
Jammer (5.12), chaps. 4 and 5; also see reference (5.7).
2 rwo-omeutoua wave scar @
Complement &;
A SIMPLE TREATMENT
OF A TWO-DIMENSIONAL WAVE PACKET
1. Introduction
2. Angular dispersion and lateral dimensions
3. Discussion,
1. Introduction
In § C-2 of chapter 1, we studied the shape of one-dimensional wave
packets, obtained by superposing plane waves which all propagate in the same
direction [formula (C-7)]. If this direction is that of the Ox axis, the resulting
function is independent of » and z. It has a finite extension along Ox, but is not
limited in the perpendicular directions : its value is the same at all points of a
plane parallel to yOz.
We intend to examine here another simple type of wave packets: the
plane waves which we are going to combine have coplanar wave vectors,
which are (nearly) equal in magnitude but have slightly different directions. The
goal is to show how the angular dispersion leads to a limitation of the wave
packet in the directions perpendicular to the average wave vector.
‘We saw in § C-2 of chapter I how, by studying the superposition of
three specific waves of the one-dimensional packet, one can understand the most
important aspects of the phenomena, In particular, one can find the fundamental
relation (C-18) of this chapter. We are going to limit ourselves here to a
simplified model of this type. The generalization of the results which we are
going to find can be carried out in the same way as in chapter I (see also
complement F,).
2. Angular dispersion and lateral dimensions
Consider three plane waves, whose wave vectors k,, k, and k, are shown
in figure I. All three are in the xOy plane; k, is directed along Ox; k, and k, are
symmetric with respect to k,. the angle between each of them and k, being 40,
which we assume to be small. Finally, the projections of k,, k, and k, on Ox are
equal:
faa = kay = hae © [hy] = w
The magnitudes of these three vectors differ only by terms which are second
order in 40, which we shall neglect. Their components along the Oy axis are :
ky, =0
” 2)
{i = by, =k sd o
3 @ courenenr
We shall choose, as in § C-2 of chapter I, real amplitudes g(k) which satisfy
the relations
ak) = otk,
ae) ®
‘he arrangement of the wave veetors k,; Ky and ky
associated with three plane waves which will be super~
ahs [posed co construct a two-dimensional wave packer,
| gE oun 1
ok,
This model represents schematically a more complex situation, in which one
would have a real wave packet, as in equation (C-6) of chapter 1, with the
following characteristics : all the wave vectors are perpendicular to Oz and have
the same projection on Ox (only the component along Oy varies); the function
|g(k)| has, with respect to this single variable &,, the shape shown in figure 2;
its width Af, is related very simply to the angular dispersion 240:
Ak, = 2kA8 @
The superposition of the three waves defined above giv
2
VO, y) = ¥ afk"
1 1
= thy] et 4 Letaret ans 4D uaens ae
att e +3 +3 |
= gtk,)e™[L + cos (k 40 y)] (5)
(there is no z-dependence, which is why this is called a two-dimensional wave
packet).
GuRE 2
‘The three values chosen for k, represent very
schematically a peaked function |a(k)] (dashed
line). rwo-omensionn wave eaceer @
In order to understand what happens, we can use figure 3, where we represent,
for each of the three components, the successive wave fronts corresponding to phase
differences of 2n. The function |y(x, y)| has a maximum at y = 0: the three waves
interfere constructively on the Ox axis. When we move away from this axis,
v(x, y)| decreases (the phase shift between the components increases) and goes
to mero aly = + 2 where dy is given by:
A
cos (1.10%) =-1 Cy
that is, for:
kA0 Ay = 2n a
The phases of the (k,) and (k,) waves are then in opposition with that of the (k,)
wave (fig. 3). Using (4), we can rewrite (7) in a form which is analogous
to that of relation (C-11) of chapter I:
Ay. Ak, = 4x (8)
FIGURE 3
Equal phase planes of the three
waves assoclated with the three k
vectors of figure 1: these waves are
in phase at y = 0, but interfere des-
truetively at y = 4 2n/ 4k,
Thus an angular dispersion of the wave vectors limits the lateral dimensions
of the wave packets. Quantitatively, this limitation has the form of an uncertainty
relation [formulas (7) and (8)].
3. Discussion
Consider a plane wave with wave vector k propagating along Ox. Any
attempt to limit its extension perpendicular to Ox causes an angular dispersion
to appear, that is, transforms it into a wave packet analogous to the ones we are
studying here.
35 ‘Assume, for example, that we place in the path of the plane wave a screen
pierced by a slit of width dy. This will give rise to a diffracted wave (cf. fig. 4).
We know that the angular width of the diffraction pattern is given by:
240 = 27 0)
where 1 = ] ig the incident wavelength, This is indeed the same situation
as above : formulas (7) and (9) are identical.
— —"
—_. ~~ toes
‘When the uncertainty 4y is decreased, the
Aitfeaction of the wave by the diaphragm
Increases the uncertainty Ak,
36 Complement F,
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
ONE- AND THREE-DIMENSIONAL PROBLEMS
1. Three-dimensional wave packet
8, Simple case
». General case
2, Justification of one-dimensional models
The space in which a classical or quantum particle moves is, of course,
three-dimensional. This is why we wrote the Schrédinger equation (D-1) in
chapter I for a wave function y/(r) which depends on the three components x, , 2
of r. Nevertheless, we have repeatedly used in this chapter a one-dimensional
model, in which only the x-variable is considered, without justifying this model
in a very precise way. Therefore, this complement has two purposes: first (§ 1).
to generalize to three dimensions the results given in § C of chapter I; then (§ 2),
to show how one can, in certain cases, rigorously justify the one-dimensional
model.
1. Thre
jonal wave packet
SIMPLE CASE
Let us begin by considering a very simple case, for which the following
two hypotheses are satisfied
— the wave packet is free [V(r)
in equation (C-6) of chapter I:
‘J and can therefore be written as
Jomeneoner ©
We, ) =
Ga?
— moreover, the function g(k) is of the form:
9k) = aC.) * galley) x ga(k,) (2)
Recall the expression for «o(k) in terms of k:
We oh
fh) = SE = SK + +k) 6)
Substitute (2) and (3) into (1). It is possible to separate the three integrations
with respect to k,, k, and k, to obtain
WE) = Wil, D x VAD) x Wale @)
37 COMPLEMENT Fi
with:
a,lk,) eft A dk,
(6)
and analogous expressions for ,(y, 1) and ,(z, #).
WC, #) indeed has the form of a one-dimensional wave packet. In this
particular vase, ¥(r, 0) is thus oblained simply by taking the product (4) of
three one-dimensional wave packets, each of which evolves in a totally independent
way.
b. GENERAL CASE
In the general case, where the potential V(r) is arbitrary, formula (1) is
not valid. It is then useful to introduce the three-dimensional Fourier transform
(k, 1) of the function y (r, £) by writing:
ver) =— f atk, t) dk 6
A priori, the t-dependence of g(k, t), which brings in V(r), is arbitrary. Moreover,
there is no reason in general why we should be able to express g(k, 1) in the
form of a product, as in (2). In order to generalize the results of § C-2 of
chapter I, we make the following hypothesis about its k-dependence: |g(k, 1) is
(at a given time #) a function which has a very pronounced peak for values of k
close to Ky and takes on a negligible value when the tip of k leaves a domain D,
centered at ky and of dimensions 4k,. 4k,. dk. As above, we set:
atk, #) = |o(k, #)| ee? (7)
so that the phase of the wave defined by the vector k can be written:
Eker) = alk, N+ kx thy thee 8)
We can set forth an argument similar to that of § C-2 of chapter I. First of all,
the wave packet attains a maximum when all the waves, for which the tip
of k is in D,, are practically in phase, that is, when & varies very little within D,.
In general, é(kc, , ¢) can be expanded about Ko, Its variation between ky and k is,
to first order in 5k = k —k,:
6506 2) = 3 os of aera]
a [ae alk, oj °)
58 one. ano vuneeoimensonat enosiens @
that is, more concisely*, using (8):
E(k, r, 1) = Ok. [WSK Nneny
= Ok. fr + [Wolk. Vea] (10)
We see from (10) that the variation of &(k,r, ¢) within the domain D, will be
minimal for:
F(t) = — [¥utks Veto qy
We have scen that, under these conditions, |y(r, #)| is maximum. Relation (11)
therefore defines the position ry(t) of the center of the wave packet and constitutes
the generalization to three dimensions of equation (C-15) of chapter I.
In what domain D,, centered at ry, and of dimensions 4x, Ay, 4z, does the
wave packet (6) take on non-negligible values? |y(r, #)| becomes much smaller
than |y(r4, 1) when the various k waves destroy each other by interference,
that is, when the variation of £(k,r, ) within the domain D, is of the order
of 2n (or roughly, of the order of I radian). Set dr =r — ry; if (11) is taken
into account, relation (10) can be written :
5E(k, r,t) = 5k. or (12)
The condition Sg(k, r, ¢) 2 1 immediately gives us the relations which exist
between the dimensions of D, and those of Dy:
(4x. Ak, 21
Ay. dk, = 1
Az. Ak, 21 (13)
The Heisenberg uncertainty relations then follow directly from the relation p = hi k:
Ax. dp. h
Ay. dpy zh
42. Ap, zh (4)
These inequalities constitute the generalization to three dimensions of (C-23)
of chapter I.
Finally, note that the group velocity Vg of the wave packet can be
obtained by differentiating (11) with respect to ¢:
Ve + [Meal Meany .
In the special case of a free wave packet which does not, however, necessarily
satisfy (2), we have:
a(k, 1) = afk, 0) — a(k)t 16)
where o(k) is given by (3). Formula (15) then gives:
Vo = [otha = 22 an
which is the generalization of equation (C-31) of chapter I.
* The symbol V designates a " gradient” : by definition, V f(x, 92) the vector whose coordi-
nates ate fx, Af jy, Af dz. The index kin Vy means that. as in (9) the differentitions must be Der~
formed with respect to the variables k,, k, and k,-
9 COMPLEMENT F,
2. Justification of one-dimensional model
When the potential is time-independent, we saw in § D-1 of chapter 1
that it is possible to separate the time and space variables in the Schrédinger
equation. This leads to the eigenvalue equation (D-8). We intend to show here
how it is possible, in certain cases, to extend this method further and to separate
as well the x, y, z variables in (D-8),
Assume that the potential energy V(r) can be written:
Mn) = Vn.) = KO) + KO) + KE) i)
and let us see if there exist solutions of the eigenvalue equation of the form:
vis as 6) = waka) x vais » wie) 3}
‘An argument analogous to the one set forth in chapter I (§ D-I-a) shows
that this is possible if
ia 20)
[- ES + res fos = e.o.00 @)
and if we have two other similar equations where x is replaced by y (or z),
V, by W (or K), and E, by E, (or E,). In addition, it is also necessary that
the relation:
ae en
be satisfied.
Equation (20) is of the same type as (D-8), but in one dimension,
The x, y and z variables are separated *,
‘What happens, for example, if the potential energy V(r) of a particle
depends only on x? V(r) can then be written in the form (18), where = V
and ¥, — ¥,—0. Equations (20) in y and = correspond to the case already
studied, in § C-1 of chapter I, of the free particle in one dimension; their
solutions are plane waves e»”’ and e=*. All that remains is to solve equation (20),
which amounts to considering a problem in only one dimension; nevertheless,
the total energy of the particle in three dimensions is now :
w
B= E+ 5, [K +H] 22)
The one-dimensional models studied in chapter I thus actually correspond to a
particle in three dimensions moving in a potential V(r) which depends only on x,
The solutions g,(y) and @,(z) are then very simple and correspond to particles
which are “free along Oy” or along Oz. This is why we have concentrated
all our attention on the study of the x-equation.
It can be shown (cf. chap. II, § F-4-a-f) that, when V(r) has the form (18), all the solutions
of the eigenvalue equation (D-8) are linear combinations of those we find here.
60 Complement G,
ONE-DIMENSIONAL GAUSSIAN WAVE PACKET:
SPREADING OF THE WAVE PACKET
1. Definition of a gaussian wave packet
2, Caleulation of Ax and dp; uncertainty relation
3. Evolution of the wave packet
4. Caleulanion of Ux. 1)
. Velocity of the wave packet
€. Spreading of the wave packet
In this complement, we intend to study a particular (one-dimensional) free
wave packet, for which the function g(k) is gaussian. The reason why this
example is interesting lies in the fact that the calculations can be carried out
exactly and to the very end, Thus, we can first verify, in this special case,
the various properties of wave packets which we pointed out in § C of chapter I.
We shall then use these properties to study the variation in time of the width
of this wave packet and to reveal the phenomenon of spreading over time.
1. Definition of a gaussian wave packet
Consider, in a one-dimensional model, a free particle [V(x) = 0] whose
wave function at time f = 0 is:
Fa eee ara
Wx, 0) = “4 f NM elt die ay
oe},
This wave packet is obtained by superposing plane waves e* with the coef-
ficients:
eo gatos o
0
Vin (ny*
which correspond to a gaussian function centered at k =k, (and multiplied
by a numerical coefficient which normalizes the wave function). This is why
the wave packet (1) is called gaussian.
In the calculations which follow, we shall repeatedly come upon integrals
of the type:
(eB) = [ ent gg 6
61 where « and P are complex numbers [for the integral (3) to converge, we
must have Re a? > 0]. The method of residues enables us to show that this
integral does not depend on B:
Ke, B) = 1(a, 0) 4
and that, when the condition — 2/4 < Arga < + m/4 is fultilled (which is always
possible if Re a? > 0), i(2, 0) is given by:
1,0) = 4100) ©
‘Now alll that remains is to evaluate /(1, 0), which can be done classically, through
1, 0) = f , dt=Vx ©
Thus we have:
@
®
j °° eure? ag
with : — 2/4 < Argx < 1 n/4,
Let us now calculate Y(x, 0). To do this, let us group, in the exponents
of (1), the k-dependent terms into a perfect square, by writing them in the
form:
a a’ 2x 2
~ Se tap 4 he = Si ty BY + kee rc)
‘We can then use (7). which yields:
72\ie
0) = (22) eto ese 9
¥50) = (=) ewe 0°
We find, as could be expected, that the Fourier transform of a gaussian
function is also gaussian (cf. appendix I),
At time ¢ = 0, the probability density of the particle is therefore given by
ss
[a g-senee 00)
hex, 0} aa
The curve which represents |(x.0)|? is the familiar hell-shaped curve.
The center of the wave packet [the maximum of |y(x,0)|*] is situated at the
point x — 0. This is indeed what we could have found if we had applied the
general formula (C-16) of chapter I since, in this particular case, the function
g(k)is teal.
62 2. Calculation of 4x and 4p; uncertainty relation
It is convenient, when one is studying a gaussian function f(x) = e~*"™, to
define its width Ax precisely by
ax => ap
v2
When x varies from 0 to + 4x, f(x) is reduced by a factor of 1//e. This
definition, which is, of course, arbitrary, has the advantage of coinciding with
that of the “root-mean-square deviation” of the x variable (cf. chap. III, § C-5),
With this convention, we can calculate the width 4x of the wave packet (10),
which is equal to:
ax =$ a2
We can proceed in the same way to calculate the width 4k, since |g(k, 0)|?
is also a gaussian function, This gives:
1
Ak == (13-a)
or:
i
y= (138)
Thus we obtain:
Ax. Ap = (a)
a result which is entirely compatible with Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation,
Evolution of the wave packet
® CALCULATION OF (x, 1)
In order to calculate the wave function Y(x, ¢) at time ¢, all we need to do
is use the general formula (C-6) of chapter I, which gives the wave function
of a free particle; we obtain:
+o es
Ye oe : eta gua ween ie a5)
ae a ' i : ne
with off) = BE (dispersion relation for a fiee particle). We shall see that at
time f, the wave packet still remains gaussian. Expression (15) can be transformed
by grouping, as above, all the k-dependent terms in the exponents into a perfect
square, We can then use (7), and we
63 ne
Wx) = (=) RAT OR (16-a)
(o* +) a@ 42
where y is teal and independent of »
Tike 2he
g=-0- with tan 26 (16-b)
2m ‘ma?
Let us calculate the probability density |Y(x, 1)? of the particle at time 1. We
obtain:
a
a(x — Bo
: 1 2a’ iG = ‘) |
Wwe, of 5 8 )- ae ayy
1 ae ee)
Vo nat im
Let us show that the norm of the wave packet, J [Ox nf? dx, is not
time-dependent (we shall see in chapter III that this property results from the
fact that the Hamiltonian H of the particle is Hermitian). We could, to this end,
uuse (7) again in order to integrate expression (17) from — co to + co. It is
quicker to observe from expression (15) that the Fourier transform of (x, 1)
is given by
Ak, t) = 6 MM G( Ke, 0) «sy
atk, #) therefore obviously has the same norm as a(k. 0). Now the Parseval-Plancherel
equation tells us that (x, 1) and g(k, t) have the same norm, as do (x, 0) and g(k, 0).
From this we deduce that Y(x, #) has the same norm as p(x, 0)
b. _VELOGITY OF THE WAVE PACKET
We see i (17)
ic probability density ji, 1]? is a gaussian function,
centered at x = Vit, where the velocity ¥V, is defined by:
Y= ee (19)
We could have expected this result, in view of the general expression (C-32)
of chapter 1, which gives the group velocity Vg.
©. SPREADING OF THE WAVE PACKET
Let us take up formula (17) again. The width Ax(t) of the wave packet at
time 1, from definition (11), is equal to:
(20) enussian wave raceer @
We see (¢f. fig. 1) that the evolution of the wave packet is not confined to
a simple displacement at a velocity ¥%. The wave packet also undergoes a
deformation, When ¢ increases from — vo to 0, the width of the wave packet
decreases, reaching a minimum at 1 =0. Then, as 1 continues to increase,
Ax(1) grows without bound (spreading of the wave packet).
thats oF
aa | _
ON NO .
<0 0 1>0
rigune 1
For negative 1, the gaussian wave packet decreases in width as It propagates. At time 1 = 0, itis &
“minimum” wave packet : che product 4x. dp is equal ¢o 8/2. Then, for 1 > 0, the wave packet
spreads again as it propagates.
It can be scen in (17) that the height of the wave packet also varies,
but in opposition to the width, so the norm of (x, 1) remains constant.
The properties of the function g(k,¢) are completely different. In fact
ef. formula (18)]:
latk, 0] = la(k, | Ql)
Therefore. the average momentum of the wave packet (#X.) and its momentum
dispersion (hk) do not vary in time, We shall see later (cf. chap. III) that this
arises from the fact that the momentum is a constant of the motion for a free particle.
Physically, it is clear that since the free particle encounters no obstacle, the
anomentuin distribution cannot cimuge.
The existence of a momentum dispersion 4p = h4k = hi/a means that the
Ap a
velocity of the particle is only known to within 4v =P =". Imagine a
group of classical particles starting at time ¢ = 0 from the point x = 0, with
‘a velocity dispersion equal to Av. At time 1, the dispersion of their positions
will be 5x,
figure 2. Let us draw on the same graph the curve which gives the evolution in
time of 4x(1); when 1 becomes infinite, 4x(r) practically coincides with 6x,, [the
branch of the hyperbola which represents x(t) has for its asymptotes the straight
lines which correspond to 6x,,]. Thus, we can say that, when 1 is very large,
there exists a quasi-classical interpretation of the width 4x. On the other hand,
when ? approaches 0, Ax(t) takes on values which differ more and more
from 5x,,. The quantum particle must indeed constantly satisfy Heisenberg’s uncer-
h
= Aol] = a: this dispersion increases linearly with 1, as shown in
65 @ comrisnen a,
tainty relation 4x. 4p > h/2 which, since 4p is fixed, imposes a lower limit
on dx. This corresponds to what can be seen in figure 2.
FIGURE 2
Variation in time of the width Ax of the wave packet of figure 1, For large ¢, 4x approaches the dis-
persion x., of the positions of a group of classical particles which left x = 0 at time 1 = 0 with a
velocity dispersion p/m.
(i)
66
COMMENTS:
The spreading of the packet of free waves is a general phenomenon
which is not limited to the special case studied here. It can be shown
that, for an arbitrary free wave packet, the variation in time of its
width has the shape shown in figure 2 (cf. exercise 4 of complement Ly,)-
In chapter T, a simple argument led us in (C-17) to Ax. Ak ~ 1, without making any
particular hypothesis about g(k), except for saying that g(k) has a peak of width Ak
whose shape is that of figure 3 of chapter I (which is indeed the ease in this complement),
Then how did we obtain 4x . dk > I (for example, for a gaussian wave packet when £
is large)?
OF course, this is only an apparent contradiction. In chapter I, in order to
find dx. dk = 1, we assumed in (C-13) that the argument a(X) of y(t ) could be approxi
‘mated by a linear function in the domain Ak. Thus we implicitly assumed a supplementary
luyputiesis. that tie uvuliucat isis uke « uegiigibie conuibutiou w te pimase of gi)
in the domain 4k. For example, for the terms which are of second order in (k — ko),
it is mecessury that:
Ke =] = Co lTY> = Ce] Pugl¥>
= LiKe lar cule = Lore (C-20)
In the same way
CO1Y> = COTW = CO] Pw YD
= feecoim>cmiy> = fe oe a (2
Let us arrange the components of the bra (go | horizontally, to form
a row matrix (having one row and an infinite number of columns)
Kee > Ce] ur > wm CO] m> (C22)
Using this convention, ¢ |) is the matrix product of the column matrix which
represents jy) and the row matrix which represents <@ |. The result is a matrix
having one row and one column, that is, a number.
In the { |w,> } basis, ¢@| has a continuous infinity of components ¢@|w, >.
The various values of @ are placed along a horizontal axis. To each of these values
1238 CHAPTER _THE MATHEMATICAL TOOLS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS
corresponds a component <@|w,) of <9
G = 1). Its eigenvalue equation is written :
Pylo>=Alo>
that is,
lwr<¥le>
The ket on the leftthand side is always collinear with |y) or zero, Consequently, the
eigenvectors of P, are : on the one hand, | y > itself, with an eigenvalue of 2 = 1; on the other
hhand, all the kets | y orthogonal to | >, for which the associated eigenvalue is A ~ 0.
‘The spectrum of P, therefore includes only two values : I and 0. The first one is simple, the
second, infinitely degenctate (if the slate space vonsideted is infinite-dimensional). The eigen
subspace associated with 4 = 0 is the supplement* of | > (see §D-2-c).
Alor (D7)
COMMENTS :
(i) Taking the Hermitian conjugate of both sides of equation (D-1), we obtain:
is an eigenket of 4 with an eigenvalue A, it can also be said
that (| is an eigenbra of 4* with an eigenvalue 2*. However, let us stress
the fact that, except in the case where A is Hermitian (§ D-2-a), nothing can
be said a priori about < | A
(ii) To be completely rigorous, one should solve the eigenvalue equation (D-1) in the space &
That is, one should consider only those eigenvectors | y> which have a finite norm.
In fact, we shall be obliged to use operators for which the eigenkets do not satisfy this
condition (§ E). Therefore, we shall grant that vectors which are solutions of (D-1) can
be “generalized kets”.
». FINDING THE EIGENVALUES AND EIGENVECTORS OF AN OPERATOR
Given a linear operator A, how does one find all its eigenvalues and the
corresponding cigenvectors? We are concerned with this question from a purely
practical point of view. We shall consider the case where the state space is of finite
dimension N, and we shall grant that the results can be generalized to an infinite-
dimensional state space.
Let us choose a representation, for Caco ue }, and let us project
} ante u,>:
= ACuly> (D-9)
Inserting the closure relation between A and | >, we obtain:
LcmlAly . Using the definition of the scalar product in
bs
= Oty — 18) E42)
0 = fer orl)
where relation (A-55) has been used. In the same way:
(
(Po — Po) (E-4-b)
= fer fle
14s CHAPTER I THE MATHEMATICAL TOOLS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS
using (A-47), The bases which we have just defined are therefore orthonormal
in the extended sense.
The fact that the set of the |r.) or that of the |p.) constitutes a
basis in 6, can be expressed by a closure relation in &,. This is written in an
analogous manner to (C-10), integrating here, however, over three indices instead
of one,
We therefore have the fundamental relations:
=p. = Hd(p, — P.)HP, — Pi)5(P. - P:) (22)
and
= (nh)? Fip — P’) 23)
with
F(p) = (2x8)??? f ae F(t) (24)
©. THE SCHRODINGER EQUATION IN THE {|p)} REPRESENTATION
Let us introduce the “wave function in the {|p} representation” by:
Vo.) =< P|Y> 25)
Using (12), we shall look for the equation which gives the time evolution of ¥(p, 1).
Projecting (12) onto the ket |p >, we obtain:
HE Cpl vo > = 5 p|PE| wey > + (29)
Using (23), we find:
26)
Using the adjoint relation of (25), we obtain:
He) = ane [dae Fo en
Vip) is therefore the Fourier transform of Y(q).
The action of the P operator in the { |p) } representation corresponds to
multiplication by p: that of the Q operator corresponds. as can easily be shown
using (27), to the operation ih 4
Thus we obtain symmetrical results in the (|q)} and {|p)} represen-
tations. This is not surprising : in our hypotheses, it is possible to exchange the P
and @ operators, simply changing the sign of the commutator in relation (2)
Instead of introducing the operator S(A), we could therefore have considered T'(2')
defined by:
TIA) = eon (28)
and we could have developed the same arguments, replacing P by Q and i by ~ i
everywhere.
neces:
Messiah (1.17), Vol. I, §VIII-6; Dirac (1.13), §25; Merzbacher (1.16), chap. 14,87.
191 ‘COMPLEMENT
Complement Fi
THE PARITY OPERATOR
1. The parity operator
8. Definition
D. Simple properties of 1
©. Eigensubspaces of II
Even and odd operators
a. Definitions
». Selection rules
4. Functions of operators
3. Bigenstates of an even observable B,
4. Application to an important special case
1. The parity operator
©. DEFINITION
Consider a physical system whose state space is 6. The parity operator 17 is
defined by its action on the basis vectors |r) of &,*:
mr> o
‘The matrix elements of IT are therefore, in the { |r) } representation:
el [ey = Srl) de +e) e
Consider an arbitrary vector |¥/) of &,:
Ivo = ferwater @G)
If the variable change r’ = — r is performed, | y) can be written:
v>=faru-ni-e “
Now caleulate /1 |y}; we obtain:
ny> feru-oir> 6
* Care must be taken not to confuse | ~ fo) and — |p ). The former is an eigenvector of R,
with eigenvalue ~ tp and waverunction ¢ .(t) = Olt + fo). UMelater isan eigenvector oF K with eigen-
value fp and wavefunction ~ g,,(¢) = ~ le ~ Fo)
192 Comparison of (3) and (5) shows that the action of 17 in the { |r) } representation
is to change to — r:
} representation:
6Pady = [ORCHID CrLPalY?
= J evo te
z vo (C-20)
since P is then represented by a V [formula (E-26) of chapter 11).
29 CHAPTER Ill THE POSTULATES OF QUANTUM MECHANICS:
The root-mean-square deviation
= =) and
m ios
. a iii
o\ | fo
a a
guee 2
Foe the first excited level, the function G(p) is obtained by taking the difference between two fune-
‘Hons F, which have the same width asin figure I-a but are now more widely separated (dashed-tine
‘curve in figure a). The curve obtained is the solid line in figure a. The probability density 3,(p) then
has two maxima located in the neighborhood of p = + 2nh/a (Big. b).
°
0
Fr + ma) is negligible (because of the separation of the centers of the wo
curves):
Fu =| 0-7) + ros “aT
are ~ 28) rly + 28] an
Lape ay
The function Fp) then has the shape shown in figure 3.
Tt can be seen that when nis large, the probability density has two symmetrical
peaks, of width 2, centered at p = + ™. It is then possible to predict with
almost complete certainty the results of a measurement of the momentum of the
particle in the state | @, >: the value found will be nearly equal to +a or
fh Hau i
= the relative accuracy* improving as n increases (the two opposite
+ The absolute accuracy is independent of n, since the width ofthe curves is always “2”,
m PARTICLE IN AN INFINITE POTENTIAL WELL e@
values + ah being equally probable). This is simple to understand: for large n,
the function g,(x), which varies sinusoidally, performs numerous oscillations inside
the well; it can then be considered to be practically the sum of two progressive
waves corresponding to opposite momenta p =
Pa Fhe) Pat
‘aah 0 wink
mh mn
a a
aure 3
‘When mi large (a very excited level), the probability density has two pronounced peaks, centered at
the values p = 4 nnbja, which are the momenta associated with the classical motion at the same
energy.
When n decreases, the relative accuracy with which one can predict the possible
values of the momentum diminishes. We see, for example, in figure 2-b, that
when n = 2, the function 2,(p) has two peaks whose widths are comparable to theit
distance from the origin, "In this case, the wave function undergoes only one
oscillation inside the well, It is not surprising that, for this sinusoid “truncated”
at x = Oand x = a, the wavelength (and therefore, the momentum of the particle)
is poorly defined. Finally, for the ground state, the wave function is represented
by half a sinusoidal arc : the relative values of the wavelength and momentum of the
particle are then very poorly known (fig. 1-b).
COMMENTS:
(i) Let us calculate the momentum of a classical particle of energy £, given
in (1); we have:
Ph _ nx? hP
om oma (12)
that is:
Pat
(13)
‘When m is large, the two peaks of @,(p) therefore correspond to the classical
values of the momentum,
m3 COMPLEMENT Aw
(ii) We see that, for large n, although the absolute value of the momentum is
well-defined, its sign is not. This is why 4P, is large: for probability distri-
butions with two maxima like that of figure 3, the root-mean-square
deviation reflects the distance between the two peaks; it is no longer related
to their widths.
2. Evolution of the parti
‘'s wave function
Each of the states | g, >, with its wave function g,(x), describes a stationary
state, which leads to time-independent physical predictions. Time evolution
appears only when the state vector is a linear combination of several kets | 9, >.
We siaii vunsider here @ very simpic vase, fur witivis ai time ¢ = the viaic vovion
| ¥(0) >is:
he
0 > +102 (14)
| wo) > yille >+]e.>1
® WAVE FUNCTION AT THE INSTANT ¢
Apply formula (D-54) of chapter III; we immediately obt
(15)
of, omitting a global phase factor of | (1) >:
1 teat
[minre FT lar +e 12>] 9)
with:
- 4
oy, = 2A ER tu)
b. EVOLUTION OF THE SHAPE OF THE WAVE PACKET
The shape of the wave packet is given by the probability density :
1 1
Wes Of? = 3 220) +5020) + e00) galo)e08 ost (18)
We see that the time variation of the probability density is due to the interference
term in @,@,. Only one Rohr frequency appears, vz, = (F, — F,)/h, since the
initial state (14) is composed only of the two states |p, ) and | gy >. The curves
corresponding to the variation of the functions g?, gy? and yg ate traced in
figures 4-a, b and c.
74 PARTICLE IN AM INFINITE POTENTIAL WELL e
pr &
FIGURE 4
Graphical representation of the fmetions 9} (the probability deasty of the particle in the
‘ground state), 3 (the probability density of the particle in the first excited state) and .0,
(the eros term respoasible forthe evolution of the shape af the wave packet).
Using these figures and relation (18), it is not difficult to represent graphically
the variation in time of the shape of the wave packet (¢f. fig. 5): we see that the
wave packet oscillates between the two walls of the well.
\\. KJ pr
ISX
t=0 O<0<#flwy, t= wo,,
ane =
ov 1 fn
| = |
THao,, t= 3r/loy, Talon,
iaure 5
Period motion ofa wave packet obtained by superposing the ground state and the fist excited state
of a particle in an infinite well. The frequency of the motion isthe Bobr frequency c,/2n.
5 MOTION OF THE CENTER OF THE WAVE PACKET
Let us calculate the mean value < X(t) of the position of the particle at
time 1, It is convenient to take:
X =X =a (19)
since, by symmetry, the diagonal matrix elements of X" are zero:
Coula'lonra [(x=$)sint (22) ox =0
i * a) ., (2nx'
ost ¢9 [ (»~§) sn CE (20)
We then have:
(X(t) = Re fe" g, |X" 92>} 1)
Ser ¥"| 92> = /h).
289, COMPLEMENT Diy
Complement Dyn
MEASUREMENTS BEARING ON ONLY ONE PART
OF A PHYSICAL SYSTEM
1. Calculation of the physical predictions
2. The physical meaning of @ tensor product state
3. The physical meaning of state which is not a tensor product
The concept of a tensor product, introduced in §F of chapter II, cnabled us to see
how to construct, starting with the state spaces of two subsystems, that of the global
system obtained by considering them together. We intend to pursue this stuay nere,
using the postulates of chapter IIT to see what results can be obtained, when the
state of the global system is known, from measurements bearing on only one
subsystem,
1. Calculation of the physical predictions
Consider a system composed of two parts (1) and (2) (for example, a system
of two electrons). If &(1) and (2) are the state spaces of parts (1) and (2), the
state space of the global system (I) + (2) is the tensor product (1) ® (2). For
example the state of a two-electron system is described by a wave function
of six variables, W(x,,)1, 7,3 %2, 2522) associated with a ket of &(1)@ &(2)
(Cf. chap. IL. §F-4-b).
It is possible to imagine measurements which bear on only one of the two
parts [part (1), for example) of the global system, The observables (1) correspon
ding to these measurements are defined in &(1) @ &(2) by extending the obser-
vables A(I) acting only in &(1)* (cf. chap. II, § F-2-b) :
A(l) => A(l) = A(1) @12) 0)
opeiaior in 82}.
The spectrum of A(1) in &(1) ® &(2)is the same as that of 4(1) in &(1).On the
other hand, we have seen that all the eigenvalues of A(I) are degenerate
in &(1)@ &(2), even if none of the eigenvalues of (I) is degenerate in &(1)
[on the condition, of course, that the dimension of & (2) be greater than 1]. When a
measurement is made on system (1) alone, the global system may therefore be in
several different states after the measurement, whatever the result (the state after the
‘measurement depends not only on the result but also on the state before the
measurement). From a physical point of view. this multiplicity of states corresponds
to the degrees of freedom of system (2), about which no information is sought
in the measurement.
+ For the sake of elaity, we shall adopt through
and its extension (1)
is complement different notations for 4(1)
290 MEASUREMENTS BEARING ON ONE Pant or A system @
Let P,(1) be the projector, in (I), onto the eigensubspace related to the
cigenvalue a, of A(1):
PAY) = ¥ pany gen} @)
where the kets |ui(1)> are g, orthonormal eigenvectors associated with a,.
Let P,(1) be the projector, in &(1) @ (2), outo the cigensubspace related to the
same eigenvalue a, of A(1). P,(1) is obtained by extending P,(1) into &(1)@ 8(2):
P(t) = Pl) @ 12) 3)
To write the identity operator (2) of &(2), let us use the closure relation for an
arbitrary orthonormal basis { | (2) } of &(2)
He) = Tio) >< oy] 4)
Substituting (4) into (3) and using (2), we obtain :
YL] mi) x2) > < o4(0) 22) | o)
Thus, knowing the state |W of the global system (assumed to be norma-
lized to 1), we can calculate the probability #"(a,) of finding the result a, in a
measurement of A(1) on part (1) of this system. Using general formula (B-14)
of chapter III, which here gives:
P,(1)
P™a,) = CH | Pll) |W > (6)
we find :
FMA) = XY KC walt) 2) ¥ OP o)
Similarly, the state |") of the system after the measurement can be calculated ;
according to formula (B-31) of chapter III, it is given by:
ee (8)
ADH?
lWo=
Nee
that is, using (5):
$Y J abt) 14) > ¢ ubltyex2)] 0 >
Wo= O}
Teer iamn mia sp
(EE eon@ wor
COMMENTS :
(i) The choice of an orthonormal basis, { |»4(2)) }, in &(2) is arbitrary. We see
from (3), (6) and (8) that the predictions concerning subsystem (1) do not
depend on this choice. Physically, it is clear that if no measurement is
291 performed on system (2), no state or set of states of this system can
play a preferential role.
(ii) If the state |y > before the measurement is a tensor product :
|¥> = |@(1)> ® | x2)> (10)
[where | (i) and |(2)> are two normalized states of &(1) and &(2)], it is
easy to see, using (3) and (8), that the state | y’ } is also a tensor product
iw > =|@)> @ | x2)> (uy
with :
DL oll
< (1) Pa(1) | (1) >
The state of system (1) has therefore changed, but not that of system (2).
(iii) If the eigenvalue a, of 4(1) is non-degenerate in 8(1) — or, more generally,
if A(1) actually represents a complete set of commuting observables of 4(1) —
the index i is no longer necessary in formula (2) and those which follow.
‘The state of the system after a measurement yielding the result a, can always
be put in the form of a product of two vectors. This can be seen by writing
relation (9) in the form :
|¥> = |ms(1)> ® | x2) > (13)
where the normalized vector | z'(2)) of 6(2) is given by:
EY] ex) > < my(1)02) | >
z
(2)
|x'Q)>= (4)
kuaa ivr
Vi
Therefore, whatever the state |) of the global system before the measure-
ment, the state of the system afler a measurement bearing on part (1) alone
is always a tensor product when this measurement is complete with respect
to part (1) [although partial as regards the global system (1) + (2)]
2. The physical me
ing of a tensor product state
To see what a product state represents physically, let us apply the results of
the preceding paragraph to the particular case where the initial state of the global
system is of the form (10), We immediately obtain, using (6) and (3):
PM%a,) = ¢ 9(1) 2) | Pall) @ 12) | (1) x2) > (15)
The very definition of the tensor product P,(1) @1 (2) and the fact that | z(2)> is
normalized then allow us to write:
PMa,) = ¢ w(t) | Pat) | 1) > < x02) [1Q) | x2)>
= Cot) | PA(1) | e1)> (16)
292 MEASUREMENTS BEARING ON ONE PART OF A SYSTEM
'(q,) does not depend on | z(2)>, but only on |p(1)>. When the state of the
global system has the form (10), all physical predictions relating to only one
of the two systems do not, therefore, depend on the state of the other one and are
expressed entirely in terms of |g(1)> [or of |x(2)>], depending on whether it is
system (1) alone [or system (2) alone] that is being observed.
A product state | 9(1)> ® |x(2)) can therefore be considered to represent the
simple juxtaposition of two systems, one in the state |(1)> and the other in
the state | (2) >. In such a state, the two systems are also said to be uncorrelated
(more precisely, the results of the two types of measurements, bearing cither on one
system or on the other, correspond to independent random variables), Such a situation
is realized when the two systems have been separately prepared in the states | g(1)>
and |(2)> and then united without interacting.
3. The physical meaning of a state which is not a tensor product
Now consider the case in which the state of the global system is not a product
state, that is, where |y> cannot be written in the form |g(1)> @ | x(2)>. The
predictions of measurement results bearing on only one of the two systems can
then no longer be expressed in terms of a ket |(1)> [or |x(2)>] in which
system (1) [or (2)] would be found, In this case, general formulas (6) and (7) must
be used to find the probabilities of the various possible results. We assume here
without proof that such a situation generally reflects the existence of correlations
between systems (1) and (2). The results of measurements bearing on either
system (1) or system (2) correspond to random variables which are not independent
and can therefore be correlated. It can be shown, for example, that an interaction
‘between the two systems transforms an initial state which is a product into one which
is no longer a product : any interaction between two systems therefore introduces,
in general, correlations between them.
When the state of the global system is not a product | (1) > ® | x(2)>. how
can each partial system (1) or (2) be characterized, since the ket |(1)> or | 7(2)>
can no longer be associated with it? This question is very important since, in
general, every physical system has interacted with others in the past (even if it is
isolated at the instant wien it is being studied}, The suue of tie giobai system
{ system (1) + systems (2) with which it has interacted in the past } is therefore not
in general a product state, and it is not possible to associate a state vector | @(1))
with system (1) alone. To resolve these difficulties. one must describe system (1),
not by a state vector, but by an operator, called the density operator. Some
indication of the corresponding formalism, fundamental to statistical quantum
mechanics, is given in complement Ey (§5-b).
However, system (I) can always be described by a state vector when a
complete set of measurements has been performed on it. We have seen that
whatever the state of the global system (1) + (2) before the measurement,
a complete measurement on system (1) places the global system in a product
state [¢f. formulas (13) and (14)]. The vector associated with (1) is the unique
eigenvector (to within a multiplicative factor) associated with the results of the
complete set of measurements done on it. This set of measurements has therefore
293 COMPLEMENT Din
erased all correlations resulting from previous interactions between the two systems.
If, at the moment of measurement, system (2) is already far away and no longer
interacting with system (1), it can then be completely forgotten.
COMMENT:
It is easy to deduce from (14) that, when the state | y> before the
measurement is not a product state, the state vector | z'(2) > associated with
system (2) after the measurement depends on the result of the complete
set of measurements made on system (1) [recall that this is not the case
when | y > is a product state; ef. comment (ii) of §1]. This result may at first
seem surprising the state of system (2) after a set of measurements performed
‘on system (1) does depend on the result of these measurements, even if
system (2), at the moment of measurement, is already very far away from
system (1) and no longer interacting with it. To this “paradox”, studied in
detail by certain physicists, are attached the names of Einstein, Podolsky
and Rosen,
References and suggestions for further reading
‘The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox : see the subsection Hidden variables and
paradoxes” of section 5 of the bibliography; Bohm (5.1), §§22.15 to 22.19;
@'Espagnat (5.3), chap. 7.
Photons produced in the decay of positronium : Feynman III (1.2), §18.3: Dicke
and Wittke (1.14), chap. 7. we pens ovenaron @
Complement Ejn
THE DENSITY OPERATOR
1, Outline of the problem
2. The concept of a statistical mixture of states
3. The pure case, Introduction of the density operator
a, Description by a state vector
'. Description by a density operator
©. Properties of the density operator in a pure case
4. A statistical mixture of states (non-pure case)
. General properties of the density operator
©. Populations: coherences
‘5. Applications of the density operator
1. Sysiem in thermodynamic equilibrium
. Separate description of part of a physical system. Concept of a partial trace
1. Outline of the problem
Until now, we have considered systems whose state is perfectly well known,
We have shown how to study their time evolution and how to predict the results
of various measurements performed on them. To determine the state of a system
at a given instant, it suffices to perform on the system a set of measurements
corresponding to a C.S.C.O, For example, in the experiment studied in §A-3 of
chapter 1, the polarization state of the photons is perfectly well known when
the light beam has traversed the polarizer.
‘However, in practice, the state of the system is often not perfectly deter-
mined. This is true, for example, of the polarization state of photons coming from
a source of natural (unpolarized) light, and also for the atoms of a beam emitted by
a furnace at temperature T, where the atoms’ kinetic energy is known only statistic-
ally. ‘The problem posed by the quantum description of such systems is the following :
how can we incorporate into the formalism the incomplete information we possess
about the state of the system, so that our predictions make maximum use of this
partial information? To do this, we shall introduce here a very useful mathematical
tool, the density operator, which facilitates the simultaneous application of the
postulates of quantum mechanics and the results of probability calculations.
2, The concept of a statistical mixture of states
When one has incomplete information about a system, one typically appeals
to the concept of probability. For example, we know that a photon emitted by
a source of natural light can have any polarization state with equal probability.
295
Comme Tarsouos, — Quantum mechanics, ~ I " © covrsenenr en
Similarly, a system in thermodynamic equilibrium at a temperature T has a
probability proportional to ¢~£-"T of being in a state of energy E,.
More generally, the incomplete information one has about the system usually
presents itself, in quantum mechanics, in the following way : the state of this
system may be either the state |, > with a probability p, or the state |y, > with
a probability p,, etc... Obviously :
Piet ee! «wy
We then say that we are dealing with a statistical mixture of states |, >, |W. >, ... with
probabilities p,. p,, ..
Now let us see what happens to the predictions concerning the results of
measurements performed on this system. If the state of the system were | yy).
we could use the postulates stated in chapter III to determine the probability of
obtaining one or another measurement result. Since such a possibility (the
state |y, >) has a probability of p,, it is clear that the results obtained must be
weighted by the p, and then summed over the various values of k, that is, over
all the states of the statistical mixture.
COMMENTS :
(i) The various states |, >, [Wz )s -» ate not necessarily orthogonal. However,
they can always be chosen normalized ; in this complement, we shall assume
that this is the case.
(ii) It must be noted that in the present case, the probabilities intervene on
two different levels :
— first, in the initial information about the system (until now, we have
not introduced probabilities at this stage: we considered the state vector to
be perfectly well known, in which case all the probabilities p, are zcro,
except one, which is equal to 1);
— then, when the postulates concerning the measurement are applied
(leading to probabilistic predictions, even if the initial state of the system
is perfectly well known).
There are thus two totally different reasons necessitating the introduction
of probabilities on these two levels: the incomplete nature of the initial
information about the state of the system (such situations are also envisaged
in classical statistical mechanics), and the (specifically quantum mechanical)
uncertainty related to the measurement process.
(iii) A system described by a statistical mixture of states (with the probability p,
of the state vector being |, )) must not be confused with a system whose
state |y> is a linear superposition of states*
I¥>=Lelv> 2)
Its often said in quantum mechanics, when the state vector is the ket | >
given in (2), that “the system has a probability |o,|? of being in the state |), >”.
* We assume, inthis comment (i), that the states | 4 ) are orthonormal, Ihis hypothesis 1s not
essential but it simplifies the discussion,
296 ‘TE DENSITY OPERATOR
If we want to be precise, this must be understood to mean that if we perform
a set of measurements corresponding to a C.S,C.O. which hus | yy) as an
eigenvector, the probability of finding the set of eigenvalues associated
with |, > is |c|?. But we have stressed, in §E-I of chapter III, the fact that
a system in the state |W > given in (2) is not simply equivalent to a system having
the probability |c,|? of being in the state |y,), |e,[? of being in the
state |y,>, ete. In fact, for a linear combination of |y,>, there exist, in
general, interference effects between these states (due to cross terms of the
type qez., obtained when the modulus of the probability amplitudes is
squared) which are very important in quantum mechanics.
We therefore see that it is impossible, in general, to describe a statis-
tical mixture by an “average state vector” which would be a superposition
of the states |, >. As we indicated earlier, when we take a weighted sum of
we can never obtain interferon
prakal
states |¥, > of a statistical mixture.
3. The pure case. Introduction of the density operator
To study the behavior of a statistical mixture of states, we have envisaged
‘one method : calculation of the physical predictions corresponding to a possible
state |, >; weighting the results so obtained by the probability p, associated with
this state and summation over k. Although correct in principle, this method often
leads to clumsy calculations. We have indicated [comment (ii)] that it is impossible
to associate an “average state vector” with the system. Actually, itis an “average
operator” and not an “average vector” which permits a simple description of the
statistical mixture of states : the density operator.
Before studying this general case. we shall begin by again examining the
simple case where the state of the system is perfectly known (all the probabilities p,
are zero, except one). The system is then said to be in a pure state. We shall show
that characterizing the system by its state vector is completely equivalent to
characterizing it by a certain operator acti the state space, the density operator.
The usefulness of this operator will become apparent in §4, where we shall show that
nearly all the formulas involving this operator, and derived for the pure case, remain
valid for the description of a statistical mixture of states.
2. DESCRIPTION BY A STATE VECTOR
‘Consider a system whose state vector at the instant ¢ is:
[WO > = Deal) a> 6)
where the {|u,) } form an orthonormal basis of the state space, assumed to be
discrete (extension to the case of a continuous basis presents no difficulties). The
coefficients c,(r) satisfy the relation :
Lieto? = 1 (4)
which expresses the fact that |y(r)) is normalized.
207 If A is an observable, with matrix elements :
<4] ]4,> = Arp (5)
the mean value of A at the instant ¢ is:
(AD = CHO 41H) = Y AMG 4, (6)
Finally, the evolution of | y(t) is described by the Schrédinger equation :
da
mF 1YO> — HO | HO> o
where H(t) is the Hamiltonian of the system.
b. DESCRIPTION BY A DENSITY OPERATOR
Relation (6) shows that the coefficients ¢,(t) enter into the mean values
through quadratic expressions of the type c¥(t)c,(t). These are simply the matrix
elements of the operator | y(t) > W(t) | the projector onto the ket | y(t) (ef. chap. II,
§B-3-b), as can be seen from (3) :
/? and 1 =
. In
the same way, the right-hand side of this same equation can be put, with
the notaticn of (B-50), into the form
CHAPTER I|_THE MATHEMATICAL TOOLS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS
or
(C2)
It can be seen that, for a continuous set,
=
| wy | > = (a — a’)
wo =D] a> Cul =1
; Pay fu
we > < wy
Table (II-7)
3. Representation of kets and bras
a. REPRESENTATION OF KETS
In the { |u,> } basis, the ket |y ) is represented by the set of its components,
that is, by the set of numbers c, = (u;|W>. These numbers can be arranged
vertically t ¢
of rows):
Kw |y>
(C-16)
, that is, by a function of a. It is then possible
to draw a vertical axis, along which are placed the various possible values of a.
To each of these values corresponds a number,
i
= LHL M > Su (C4)
4. TRANSFORMATION OF THE MATRIX ELEMENTS OF AN OPERATOR
Tf, in ¢t,|A|t,>, we insert (C-45) between ¢ 1, | and A, and again between 4
and |7,, we obtain:
KH IA> = Cte Poa Poul >
= LK lad Cul Alay > Cyl rd (C55)
that is:
Au= YS Ay Su (C56,
a
4m the same way:
Ay = 6m A> = Cu Pod Pal?
HVdularcnlale>
=Acu ly (0-10)
7
* Ina vector space , two sub-spaces & and & are said to be supplementary if all kes |W > of
can be written |Y > = |, > + [We > whete |) and [Vs ) belong, respectively, tof, and &, and if
and &, are disjoint (no common non-zero ket: the expansion |¥ > = | # > + |Vs ) is then unique}
‘Actually, there exists an infinity of sub-subspaces 6 supplementary to a given subsspace é,. One can fx,
by forcing it tobe orthogonal tod. This shall be done throughout this book, eventhough the word "ortho:
gonal” wall not be explicitly writen belore supplement.
Example: In ordinary three-dimensional space, i, isa plane P, 6, can be any arbitrary straight
line, not eontained in P. The orthogonal supplement of 6 is the straight line passing through the origin
land onhogonal to P.
133 CHAPTER _THE MATHEMATICAL TOOLS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS
With the usual notation :
= Ay (on
equations (10-10) can be written:
Day g = 40, (D-12)
7
or
LY [Ay - 28,)e;= 0 (D-13)
(D-13) can be considered to be a system of equations where the unknowns are
the ¢,, the components of the eigenvector in the cinuseu represeutativu. This sysicut
is linear and homogeneous.
a, The characteristic equation
The system (D-13) consists of N equations (i = 1, 2, ..., W)in N unknowns ¢,
(Gi = 1,2,.., N). Since it is linear and homogeneous, it has a non-trivial solution
(the trivial solution is the one for which all the c; are zero) if and only if the
determinant of the cocfficients is zcro. This condition is written:
0 | (D-14)
[Det [w — 21)
where of is the N x N matrix of elements 4,; and J is the unit matrix.
Equation (D-14), called the characteristic equation (or secular equation),
enables us to determine all the eigenvalues of the operator A, that is, its spectrum.
(D-14) can be written explicitly in the form:
A
Az Ais s+ + Aw
Ag Ages Age Aa
(sy
| 4m 4m Ava +++ Am — 4
This is an Nth order equation in A; consequently, it has N roots, real or imaginary,
distinct or identical. It is easy to show, by performing an arbitrary change of basis,
that the characteristic equation is independent of the representation chosen.
Therefore, the eigenvalues of an operator are the roots of its characteristic equation.
B. Determination of the eigenvectors
Now let us choose an eigenvalue 2p, a solution of the characteristic equa-
ion (D-14), and let us look for the corresponding eigenvectors. We are going to
distinguish between two cases:
(i) First, assume that 4g is a simple root of the characteristic equation. We
can then show that the system (D-13), when 2 — do, is comprised of (N— 1)
independent equations, the Nth one following from the preceding ones and hence
134 D._EIGENVALUE EQUATIONS. OBSERVABLES
redundant. But we have N unknowns; there is therefore an infinite number of
solutions, but all the ¢, can be determined in a unique way in terms of one of them,
say c,. If we fix ¢,, we obtain for the (N — 1) other , a system of (N — 1) linear,
inhomogeneous equations (the “ right-hand side” of each equation is the term in c,)
with a non-zero determinant [the (N — 1) equations are independent]. The solution
of this system is of the form:
“ (D-16)
since the initial system (D-13) is linear and homogeneous. 2° is, of course, equal
to 1 by definition, and the (N — 1) eoefficients a9 for j # 1 are determined from
the matrix elements 4,, and 2p. The eigenvectors associated with Ap differ only
by the value chosen for c,. They are therefore all given by
Folens > — Lap eats) — 6 1¥0 O47)
with:
[Yoo = Yay |u;> (0-18)
Therefore, when A, is a simple root of the characteristic equation, only one eigen-
vector corresponds to it (to Within a constant factor): it is a non-degenerate eigen-
value.
(ii) When dg is a multiple root of order q > 1 of the characteristic equation,
there are two possibilities :
— in general. when 2 = Ao. the system (D-13) is still composed of (N — 1)
independent equations. Only one eigenvector then corresponds to the eigenvalue Ap,
The operator 4 cannot be diagonalized in this case : the eigenvectors of 4 are not
sufficiently numerous for one to be able to construct with them alone a basis of the
state space.
— nevertheless, when 4 = dq, it may happen that the system (D-13) has
only (N — p) independent equations (where p is a number greater than I but not,
larger than q). To the eigenvalue 3, there then corresponds an eigensubspace of
dimension p, and Ag is a p-fold degenerate eigenvalue. Let us assume, for example,
thai, fur A = ap, (D-13) is eumpused of (V — 2} tincatly indepoudeni cquaiivus.
These equations enable us to calculate the coefficients c, in terms of any two of
them, for example ¢, and ¢,
Ge ie (b-19)
(obviously: py 0). All the eigenvectors associated with Ay
are then of the form
|Woler ea) > = e4 [Va > +e |Va> (D-20)
with:
Ib ~ DBP u)>
135
Compu Tassoeon — Quorum mechaner = ‘ CHAPTER H_THE MATHEMATICAL TOOLS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS
Thu (D-21)
\ve>
The vectors |yu(e,,¢,)> do indeed constitete a two-dimensional vector space,
this being characteristic of a two-fold degenerate eigenvalue.
When an operator is Hermitian, it can be shown that the degree of degener-
acy p of an eigenvalue A is always equal to the multiplicity q of the corresponding
root in the characteristic equation. Since, in most cases, we shall be studying only
Hermitian operators. we shall only need to know the multiplicity of each root
of (D-14) to obtain immediately the dimension of the corresponding eigensubspace.
Thus, in a space of finite dimension N, a Hermitian operator always has N linearly
independent eigenvectors (We shall see later that they can be chosen to be ortho-
normal): this operator can therefore be diagonalized (§ D-2-b).
2. Observables
‘4. PROPERTIES OF THE EIGENVALUES AND EIGENVECTORS
OF A HERMITIAN OPERATOR
‘We shall now consider the very important case in which the operator 4 is
Hermitian :
Aad (D-22)
(The eigenvalues of a Hermitian operator are real
Taking the scalar product of the eigenvalue equation (D-1) by |y >, we obtain:
ClAly> =Acule> (v-23)
But ¢y|4|y> is a real number if A is Hermitian, as we see from:
Kv Al de> = lA = Cv Ald (D-24)
where the Inst equation follows from hypothesis (1-22), Since C4] Ay) and
=o ay
© EIGENVECTORS.
We stall fix the sciative pinases of the different eigenvectors of Q with respect
to the eigenvector |0 >, of eigenvalue 0, by setting
lq> = S(@)lo> (12)
Applying S(A) to both sides of (12) and using (7), we obtain:
SUA) g> = S(A)S(q)10> = SA + g)|0> =1q + A> (13)
The adjoint expression of (13) is written:
= Wg - a) (18)
The action of the operator (4) in the { |q } representation is therefore a transla-
tion of the wave function over a distance 4 parallel to the q-axis*. For this reason,
(2) is called the translation operator.
©. THE ACTION OF P IN THE [jg] REPRESENTATION
When ¢ is an infinitely small quantity, we have:
S(- 0) = eh 1 + 15 P + OF) (a9)
Consequently :
a|S— a |h> = Wa) + iE Cal Pw > + OF) (20)
‘On the other hand, equation (18) yields:
=[5,cHa|]] vor + coo}
sve) >| (D3)
According to (D-1), we can write
lwo =f Ho) | Mo > (04)
dt ih
Taking the Hermitian conjugates of both sides of (D-4), we find
1 1
pi Mo Ho = — 5 Cv He) (D-5)
d
qi ual =
since H («is Hermitian (itis an observable). Substituting (D-4) and (D-5) into (D-3),
we obtain:
a wen | yo = = FSM | Mol wa + F< Mo] He | Yn y
ay 6
The property of the norm conservation is very useful in quantum
mechanics. For example, it becomes indispensable when we interpret the square
of the modulus |y(r, 1)|? of the wave function of a spinless particle as being the
position probability density. The fact that the state | y/(tg) } of the particle is norma-
lized at time tg is expressed by the relation :
Ute) | Wie) = fer Mesto? = 1 0-7)
where ¥(F, fo) =
)|W > and (P - ¢P>)Iy >
be proportional. The proportionality coefficient — id, can easily be calculated.
When AQ . AP = h/2, the equation :
<@" |") = AaPy — Ah + (40) (as)
has for its double root :
a _ 249P
aa 16)
2 2Pes ie
Let us write relation (14) in the {|g >} representation (for simplicity, we
assume the eigenvalues g of Q to be non-degenerate). Using the fact (ef. comple-
ment Ey) that in this representation, P acts like ae we obtain :
[a+ mage - (O> =< P>] ye) =o a)
with :
ya) =
Você também pode gostar
- Seismology: Surface Waves and Earth OscillationsNo EverandSeismology: Surface Waves and Earth OscillationsBruce BoltAinda não há avaliações
- Inequalities for Differential and Integral EquationsNo EverandInequalities for Differential and Integral EquationsAinda não há avaliações
- Differential Equations: Stability, Oscillations, Time LagsNo EverandDifferential Equations: Stability, Oscillations, Time LagsNota: 5 de 5 estrelas5/5 (1)
- Engineering Optimization: An Introduction with Metaheuristic ApplicationsNo EverandEngineering Optimization: An Introduction with Metaheuristic ApplicationsAinda não há avaliações
- Introductory Lectures on Equivariant Cohomology: (AMS-204)No EverandIntroductory Lectures on Equivariant Cohomology: (AMS-204)Ainda não há avaliações
- Introduction to Fourier Analysis on Euclidean Spaces (PMS-32), Volume 32No EverandIntroduction to Fourier Analysis on Euclidean Spaces (PMS-32), Volume 32Ainda não há avaliações
- Mechanics of Liquids and Gases: International Series of Monographs in Aeronautics and Astronautics: Division II: AerodynamicsNo EverandMechanics of Liquids and Gases: International Series of Monographs in Aeronautics and Astronautics: Division II: AerodynamicsAinda não há avaliações
- Factorization Methods for Discrete Sequential EstimationNo EverandFactorization Methods for Discrete Sequential EstimationAinda não há avaliações
- Integral and Finite Difference Inequalities and ApplicationsNo EverandIntegral and Finite Difference Inequalities and ApplicationsAinda não há avaliações
- Introduction to the Theory of Linear Partial Differential EquationsNo EverandIntroduction to the Theory of Linear Partial Differential EquationsAinda não há avaliações
- Tables of Laguerre Polynomials and Functions: Mathematical Tables Series, Vol. 39No EverandTables of Laguerre Polynomials and Functions: Mathematical Tables Series, Vol. 39Ainda não há avaliações
- Banach Algebra Techniques in Operator TheoryNo EverandBanach Algebra Techniques in Operator TheoryAinda não há avaliações
- Elementary Differential Geometry, Revised 2nd EditionNo EverandElementary Differential Geometry, Revised 2nd EditionAinda não há avaliações
- Gravitation and Relativity: International Series in Natural PhilosophyNo EverandGravitation and Relativity: International Series in Natural PhilosophyNota: 1 de 5 estrelas1/5 (1)
- Quantum Detection and Estimation TheoryNo EverandQuantum Detection and Estimation TheoryNota: 4.5 de 5 estrelas4.5/5 (2)
- Group Theoretical Methods in PhysicsNo EverandGroup Theoretical Methods in PhysicsRobert SharAinda não há avaliações
- Nonlinear Dynamic in Engineering by Akbari-Ganji’S MethodNo EverandNonlinear Dynamic in Engineering by Akbari-Ganji’S MethodAinda não há avaliações
- Strangers' Voices In My Head: A Journey Through What Made Me Who I Am from My MindNo EverandStrangers' Voices In My Head: A Journey Through What Made Me Who I Am from My MindAinda não há avaliações
- Special and Different: The Autistic Traveler: Judgment, Redemption, & VictoryNo EverandSpecial and Different: The Autistic Traveler: Judgment, Redemption, & VictoryAinda não há avaliações
- Extreme Rhyming Poetry: Over 400 Inspirational Poems of Wit, Wisdom, and Humor (Five Books in One)No EverandExtreme Rhyming Poetry: Over 400 Inspirational Poems of Wit, Wisdom, and Humor (Five Books in One)Ainda não há avaliações
