Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Supplements for Part II

Kenichi Konishi, Giampiero Paffuti

Published Mar 5, 2009• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract Supplements on perturbation theory Change of boundary conditions Some problems in quantum mechanics can be approximated by a motion of a particle conflned in a definite region of space, bounded by certain surface, S0(x) = 0 In the case of Schro¨dinger’s equation a typical eigenvalue problem is of the form,: Supposing that we know how to solve the problem (21.1), what about the problem in which the boundary is slightly changed, i.e., in which the boundary is now given by A possible strategy is to seek for a change of the variables such that i.e., such that in terms of the new variables the equation determining the boundary has the original form S0 and therefore with the same problem as the original one (whose solution is known).

DOI
10.1093/oso/9780199560264.003.0021

Related papers

Perturbation theory in quantum mechanics—II

Alan Herries Wilson

Abstract In a previous paper the theory of perturbations was discussed for system which possess only discrete spectra. The theory is now extended to systems with both discrete and continuous spectra, and in addition a slightly more general method of perturbation is considered. The Hamiltonian H of the perturbed systems is split up into three parts H0, H1, H2 (t), two of which can be chosen arbitrarily. The solutions of the perturbed problem can then be worked out in terms of the characteristic functions corresponding to the Hamiltonian H0 + H2 (T), where T is any arbitrary fixed time. In general, however, the series of perturbations does not converge, and different modes of splitting up the Hamiltonian will lead to different formal results. The perturbation theory does usually give the correct physical results, and it is therefore necessary to give some explanation of how this happens. In (I) the asymptotic nature of certain solutions was emphasised, but this does not extend to the more general systems treated here. It is suggested that the usual boundary conditions do not give an adequate description of any but the simplest atomic problems, and that more detailed restrictions, determined by the experimental conditions, ought to be substituted. As this is impossible in practice, an alternative method is to regard the motion as a perturbation on that Hamiltonian H0 + H2 (T) which most nearly corresponds to the experimental conditions. (For example, we may regard an electron as free or bound according as the experiment determines the number of free or bound electrons respectively, whereas in the usual theory the initial Hamiltonian is taken as fundamental.) This criterion, together with the initial conditions, suffices to fix the division of H into the three parts H0, H1, H2 (t) which at first were chosen arbitrarily. The formal solution can be worked out on this basis, and it is then assumed that this solution is asymptotic to the one which would be obtained if the full boundary conditions were used. This suggestion is in accordance with the fact that a hydrogen atom in an electric field gives rise not only to the usual Stark effect, but also to an ionisation effect. In § 2 the perturbation equation are derived in a slightly more general form than has previously been given. The theories of Born,* Dirac and Oppenheimer are particular cases of that given here, and are obtained by particular choices of H0, H1, H2 (t). To obtain Born’s theory we take H1 = 0, and for Oppenheimer’s we take H2 (t) = H2 (T) and T = 0. In Dirac’s theory we have H1 = 0, H2 (0) = 0 and T = 0. Each of these theories is appropriate for the solution of special problems, but the more general method of this paper is required for the full discussion of the perturbation theory.

Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character•May 2, 1929•5 citations

TIME-DEPENDENT PERTURBATION METHODS

Vishnu S. Mathur, Surendra Singh

We now consider systems for which the Hamiltonian contains time-dependent interaction terms. In such cases we cannot reduce the time-dependent Schro¨dinger equation to an eigenvalue equation. However, if the time-dependent terms can be regarded as small perturbations, we can develop a form of perturbation theory that can be used to calculate the effects of time-dependent terms. Consider a system for which the Hamiltonian may be written as the sum of a dominant unperturbed part Hˆ0 and a small perturbation Hˆ ′ as Hˆ = Hˆ0 + λHˆ ′(t) , (10.1.1) where the unperturbed Hamiltonian Hˆ0 is independent of time, whereas the perturbation Hˆ ′ may depend on time. The parameter 0 < λ < 1 has been introduced to keep track of various orders of approximations as in the case of time-independent perturbation theory discussed in Chapter 8. The basic idea is that a small perturbation to the Hamiltonian will produce a small change in the wave function. For a time-dependent perturbation, this change means that a system, initially in a particular eigenstate of Hˆ0, will find itself in a time-dependent admixture of the eigenstates. Thus the time-dependent perturbation causes the system to undergo transition to different eigenstates of Hˆ0. So for time-dependent perturbations our interest lies in calculating the probabilities for transition to different states.

Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks•Dec 12, 2008•0 citations

Stationary State Perturbation Theory

Kurt Gottfried

The vast majority of problems in quantum mechanics cannot be solved exactly. As in all theories of physics approximation methods are therefore of great importance. Here we shall deal with time-independent problems, which means that we seek the eigenvalues and eigenstates of H . In perturbation theory we split H into two pieces, H = H 0 + H 1 , where we know the spectrum and eigenstates of H 0 , and H 1 is, in some sense, small. Needless to say, a split of this type is often not possible, or at least unknown. In that case one frequently replaces the system by a simpler model for which perturbation theory works, and which, it is hoped, captures some of the essential features of the actual problem at hand. This art of finding models is something that can only be taken up within the context of a particular subject (e.g., solid state or nuclear physics). Here we shall treat systems where good zero-order solutions are rather obvious.

CRC Press eBooks•Mar 9, 2018•0 citations

A Note on the Quantum-Mechanical Perturbation Theory

Per‐Olov Löwdin

The solution of the quantum-mechanical eigenvalue problem is discussed for cases when a series of approximate eigenfunctions is known. If these ``unperturbed'' states are divided into two classes, a perturbation formula is derived giving the influence of one class of states on the other in the final solution. The formula contains as special cases: (i) the Schrödinger-Brillouin formula for the eigenvalue of a nondegenerate state, (ii) a new simple formula for treating a class of degenerate states, and (iii) the splitting of the secular equation in cases where the system naturally consists of two independent parts in mutual interaction.

The Journal of Chemical Physics•Nov 1, 1951•945 citations

A Solution of the Schrödinger Equation by a Perturbation of the Boundary Conditions

H. Froehlich

A perturbation method is developed which allows a simple calculation of the eigenvalues of the Schrödinger equation by a slight change in the boundary condition.Received 29 September 1938DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.54.945©1938 American Physical Society

Physical Review•Dec 1, 1938•35 citations

The quantum probability equation: I. Bound state perturbation theory

Geoffrey C Milward, Colin Wilkin C

The partial-wave Schrödinger equation with real boundary conditions is recast as an equation for the probability density. When a small additional potential is included, the changes in the bound-state energy eigenvalues are obtained, up to third order in the perturbation, purely in terms of the perturbing potential and the unperturbed probability density. Although the approach is different, our results are equivalent to those derived by Bender (Bender C M 1978 Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists and Engineers (New York: McGraw-Hill) p 330). Knowledge of neither the unperturbed energy spectrum nor the wavefunctions of excited states is required. Evaluations of the second-order energy shift are given for some soluble S -wave problems.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Oct 5, 2000•5 citations
Abstract Supplements on perturbation theory Change of boundary conditions Some problems in quantum mechanics can be approximated by a motion of a particle conflned in a definite region of space, bounded by certain surface, S0(x) = 0 In the case of Schro¨dinger’s equation a typical eigenvalue problem is of the form,: Supposing that we know how to solve the problem (21.1), what about the problem in which the boundary is slightly changed, i.e., in which the boundary is now given by A possible strategy is to seek for a change of the variables such that i.e., such that in terms of the new variables the equation determining the boundary has the original form S0 and therefore with the same problem as the original one (whose solution is known).
Abstract In a previous paper the theory of perturbations was discussed for system which possess only discrete spectra. The theory is now extended to systems with both discrete and continuous spectra, and in addition a slightly more general method of perturbation is considered. The Hamiltonian H of the perturbed systems is split up into three parts H0, H1, H2 (t), two of which can be chosen arbitrarily. The solutions of the perturbed problem can then be worked out in terms of the characteristic functions corresponding to the Hamiltonian H0 + H2 (T), where T is any arbitrary fixed time. In general, however, the series of perturbations does not converge, and different modes of splitting up the Hamiltonian will lead to different formal results. The perturbation theory does usually give the correct physical results, and it is therefore necessary to give some explanation of how this happens. In (I) the asymptotic nature of certain solutions was emphasised, but this does not extend to the more general systems treated here. It is suggested that the usual boundary conditions do not give an adequate description of any but the simplest atomic problems, and that more detailed restrictions, determined by the experimental conditions, ought to be substituted. As this is impossible in practice, an alternative method is to regard the motion as a perturbation on that Hamiltonian H0 + H2 (T) which most nearly corresponds to the experimental conditions. (For example, we may regard an electron as free or bound according as the experiment determines the number of free or bound electrons respectively, whereas in the usual theory the initial Hamiltonian is taken as fundamental.) This criterion, together with the initial conditions, suffices to fix the division of H into the three parts H0, H1, H2 (t) which at first were chosen arbitrarily. The formal solution can be worked out on this basis, and it is then assumed that this solution is asymptotic to the one which would be obtained if the full boundary conditions were used. This suggestion is in accordance with the fact that a hydrogen atom in an electric field gives rise not only to the usual Stark effect, but also to an ionisation effect. In § 2 the perturbation equation are derived in a slightly more general form than has previously been given. The theories of Born,* Dirac and Oppenheimer are particular cases of that given here, and are obtained by particular choices of H0, H1, H2 (t). To obtain Born’s theory we take H1 = 0, and for Oppenheimer’s we take H2 (t) = H2 (T) and T = 0. In Dirac’s theory we have H1 = 0, H2 (0) = 0 and T = 0. Each of these theories is appropriate for the solution of special problems, but the more general method of this paper is required for the full discussion of the perturbation theory.
We now consider systems for which the Hamiltonian contains time-dependent interaction terms. In such cases we cannot reduce the time-dependent Schro¨dinger equation to an eigenvalue equation. However, if the time-dependent terms can be regarded as small perturbations, we can develop a form of perturbation theory that can be used to calculate the effects of time-dependent terms. Consider a system for which the Hamiltonian may be written as the sum of a dominant unperturbed part Hˆ0 and a small perturbation Hˆ ′ as Hˆ = Hˆ0 + λHˆ ′(t) , (10.1.1) where the unperturbed Hamiltonian Hˆ0 is independent of time, whereas the perturbation Hˆ ′ may depend on time. The parameter 0 < λ < 1 has been introduced to keep track of various orders of approximations as in the case of time-independent perturbation theory discussed in Chapter 8. The basic idea is that a small perturbation to the Hamiltonian will produce a small change in the wave function. For a time-dependent perturbation, this change means that a system, initially in a particular eigenstate of Hˆ0, will find itself in a time-dependent admixture of the eigenstates. Thus the time-dependent perturbation causes the system to undergo transition to different eigenstates of Hˆ0. So for time-dependent perturbations our interest lies in calculating the probabilities for transition to different states.
The vast majority of problems in quantum mechanics cannot be solved exactly. As in all theories of physics approximation methods are therefore of great importance. Here we shall deal with time-independent problems, which means that we seek the eigenvalues and eigenstates of H . In perturbation theory we split H into two pieces, H = H 0 + H 1 , where we know the spectrum and eigenstates of H 0 , and H 1 is, in some sense, small. Needless to say, a split of this type is often not possible, or at least unknown. In that case one frequently replaces the system by a simpler model for which perturbation theory works, and which, it is hoped, captures some of the essential features of the actual problem at hand. This art of finding models is something that can only be taken up within the context of a particular subject (e.g., solid state or nuclear physics). Here we shall treat systems where good zero-order solutions are rather obvious.
The solution of the quantum-mechanical eigenvalue problem is discussed for cases when a series of approximate eigenfunctions is known. If these ``unperturbed'' states are divided into two classes, a perturbation formula is derived giving the influence of one class of states on the other in the final solution. The formula contains as special cases: (i) the Schrödinger-Brillouin formula for the eigenvalue of a nondegenerate state, (ii) a new simple formula for treating a class of degenerate states, and (iii) the splitting of the secular equation in cases where the system naturally consists of two independent parts in mutual interaction.
The partial-wave Schrödinger equation with real boundary conditions is recast as an equation for the probability density. When a small additional potential is included, the changes in the bound-state energy eigenvalues are obtained, up to third order in the perturbation, purely in terms of the perturbing potential and the unperturbed probability density. Although the approach is different, our results are equivalent to those derived by Bender (Bender C M 1978 Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists and Engineers (New York: McGraw-Hill) p 330). Knowledge of neither the unperturbed energy spectrum nor the wavefunctions of excited states is required. Evaluations of the second-order energy shift are given for some soluble S -wave problems.