3

Studying quantum mechanics I have encountered several times in proofs this expression: $$ \frac{\mathrm{d}\langle\phi|\hat{H}|\psi\rangle}{\mathrm{d}t} = \biggl\langle\frac{\mathrm{d}\phi}{\mathrm{d}t}\bigg\rvert\hat{H}\bigg\lvert\psi\biggr\rangle + \biggl\langle\phi\bigg\rvert\frac{\mathrm{d}\hat{H}}{\mathrm{d}t}\bigg\lvert\psi\biggr\rangle + \biggl\langle\phi\bigg\rvert\hat{H}\bigg\lvert\frac{\mathrm{d}\psi}{\mathrm{d}t}\biggr\rangle $$

What does the derivative of an operator mean mathematically ? Is something that can be rigorously mathematically defined? Or is just the juxtaposition of the derivative and the operator?

Moreover I was wondering if it is possible to derive this form of Liebniz rule. If I explicitly do the integrals I can carry in the time derivative, but I don't understand how to apply a derivative to a mathematical object which is defined only by its action on a well defined function.

David Z
  • 76,371
skdys
  • 1,173
  • Possible duplicate / related? http://physics.stackexchange.com/q/55773/ –  Dec 19 '16 at 18:57
  • Would [math.se] be a better home for this question? – Qmechanic Dec 19 '16 at 21:24
  • 1
    @catapillar Definitely related, but after going through both questions I believe they are asking different things. Also, taking into account the relevant meta post I don't think this needs to go to [math.SE], since it presents a physical context for the mathematical question it's asking, which makes it on topic here - though I could definitely see the other side of it. – David Z Dec 19 '16 at 21:56
  • I posted in physics because maybe it is an abuse of notation used by physics and because I want to understand how to write down and interpret that derivative. For example in the adiabatic theorem I've found the hypothesis of $\dot{\hat{H}}$ negligible. How have I to evaluate such a term? – skdys Dec 19 '16 at 23:00
  • I read the question flagged as duplicated, it definitely answers the question about the mathematical formalism behind the derivative of an operator. Actually I was looking for an answer a bit more practical in order to understand how to write down the derivative of an operator, and how to prove the Liebeniz rule maybe passing from the bra-ket formalism to the wave function one. – skdys Dec 19 '16 at 23:08

0 Answers0