I have been reading up on the Schrödinger picture of quantum mechanics. In this picture it is often said (e.g. here) that the operators are time-independent unless they depend explicitly on time. I cannot see what this is telling us since it seems to be saying that operators are time-independent unless they are not. Is this not exactly the same for the Heisenberg picture which is said to have time-dependent operators? i.e. what does the above saying actually mean and how does it distinguish the time-dependence of operators in the Schrödinger and Heisenberg pictures?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Understanding Stagnation point in pitot fluid
What is stagnation point in fluid mechanics. At the open end of the pitot tube the velocity of the fluid becomes zero.But that should result...
-
Why can't we use fissions products for electricity production ? As far has I know fissions products from current nuclear power plants cr...
-
A rook stands in the lower left corner of an $m\times n$ chessboard. Alice and Bob alternately move the rook (horizontally or vertically, th...
-
Consider the lagrangian of the real scalar field given by $$\mathcal L = \frac{1}{2} (\partial \phi)^2 - \frac{1}{2} m^2 \phi^2 - \frac{\lam...
-
How can we know the order of a Feynman diagram just from the pictorial representation? Is it the number of vertices divided by 2? For exampl...
-
As the title says. It is common sense that sharp things cut, but how do they work at the atomical level? Answer For organic matter, such a...
-
Yesterday, I understood what it means to say that the moon is constantly falling (from a lecture by Richard Feynman ). In the picture below ...
-
Recently I was going through "Problems in General physics" by I E Irodov. In Electromagnetics chapter, there is a question how muc...
No comments:
Post a Comment