Quote:
Originally Posted by lucagalbu
Yes, this part it's a bit confused eheh! I meant that it is not hard at all to take into account also the spin coupling. In effect I have rewritten it in a totally different way!
|
Since you didn't say how you rewrote it, is this what you were trying to say? "If a magnetic field is present, its effects can be shown and any spin interactions can also be incorporated."
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucagalbu
The evolution at time ∆t can be obtained by multiplying the wave function at the initial time in the coordinate representation by the first of the two factors with which the time evolution operator has been represented. By a Fourier transform, the wave function is written in the momentum representation, and then multiplied by the second factor of the time evolution, diagonal in that space. The inverse Fourier transform allows us to write the wave function back in the coordinate space and from there the procedure is repeated.
|
I've probably misunderstood this, but I think the red "in" should be "as," since you're transforming the wave function and expressing it as a momentum representation (are you transforming the raw wave function, or the product of the multiplication?).
Does this make sense to you, or is it gibberish: The inverse Fourier transform allows us to recover the wave function within coordinate space and from there the procedure is repeated.
I'm curious as to who this is meant for - it seems too technical for lay people, but your opening and closing sentences seem like they're intended for a general audience, who would be lost at the first mention of Schrödinger's equation.
On the other hand, physicists would probably feel like you're talking down to them.
It might not be a bad idea at all to find a physics forum and run this by them too. At least they won't have to ask stupid questions like me, and they'll know if you've made any errors in the science.
