2

In my Modern quantum mechanics, J. J. Sakurai p.119-120, when considering the integral of the propagator $K$ in whole space, he gets:

$$G(t)= \int d^3 x' K(\textbf{x'},t;\textbf{x'},0) = \sum_a \exp \left(\frac{-iE_{a^{'}}t }{\hbar} \right).$$ Then he considers the Laplace-Fourier transform of G(t): \begin{equation} \label{eq1} \begin{split} \tilde{G}(E) = & -i\int^{\infty}_0 dt G(t)\exp(iEt/\hbar) \\ & = -i\int^{\infty}_0dt\sum_{a^{'}} \exp(-iE_{a^{'}}t/\hbar) \exp(iEt/\hbar)/ \hbar. \end{split} \end{equation}

But why does he say that this integrand oscillates indefinitely, and the result can be changed into a definite one by making the change $E \rightarrow E + i \varepsilon$ to obtain: $$\tilde{G}(E)=\sum_{a^{'}}\frac{1}{E-E_{a'}}~?$$

Qmechanic
  • 220,844
Homer Y
  • 21

2 Answers2

1

This is known as the $\epsilon$ prescription. We have:

\begin{equation} \begin{aligned} \tilde{G}(E) =& - \frac{i}{\hbar} \sum_{a^{'}} \int^{\infty}_0 dt \exp\left [ \frac{it (E - E_{a'})}{\hbar} \right]\\ =& - \frac{i}{\hbar} \sum_{a^{'}} \frac{\hbar}{i} \left( \frac{1}{E - E_{a'}} \right) \exp\left [ \frac{it (E - E_{a'})}{\hbar} \right] \Bigg|_0^{\infty} \end{aligned} \end{equation}

Now, the problem is that we cannot evaluate the upper limit of the integral because

$$\lim_{t \to \infty}\exp (itx)$$

does not exist for real $x$. The limit does not converge to a definite value; it keeps oscillating instead.

The trick to force convergence upon the integral is to add to $E$ an infinitesimal constant $\epsilon > 0$:

$$ E \rightarrow E + i \epsilon$$

Now, the upper limit of the integral goes to zero because of exponential suppression: \begin{equation} \lim_{t \to \infty}- \frac{i}{\hbar} \sum_{a^{'}} \frac{\hbar}{i} \left( \frac{1}{(E + i \epsilon) - E_{a'}} \right) \exp\left [ \frac{it (E - E_{a'})}{\hbar} \right] \exp \left[ \frac{-\epsilon t}{\hbar} \right] = 0 \end{equation}

while the lower limit (with minus sign included) gives:

\begin{equation} \lim_{t \to 0} \frac{i}{\hbar} \sum_{a^{'}} \frac{\hbar}{i} \left( \frac{1}{(E + i \epsilon) - E_{a'}} \right) \exp\left [ \frac{it (E - E_{a'})}{\hbar} \right] \exp \left[ \frac{-\epsilon t}{\hbar} \right] = \sum_{a^{'}} \left( \frac{1}{(E + i \epsilon) - E_{a'}} \right) \end{equation}

The $\epsilon$ prescription was used for convergence of the integral. The integral has now been done so we can safely take $\epsilon \to 0$ in the end to get:

$$\tilde{G}(E) = \sum_{a^{'}} \frac{1}{E - E_{a'}}$$

Analytic continuations such as this $\epsilon$ prescription are used in many places in physics. One of the key motivations is convergence.

Avantgarde
  • 3,992
0

$$G(t)= \int d^3 x' K(\textbf{x'},t;\textbf{x'},0) = \sum_a \exp \left(\frac{-iE_{a^{'}}t }{\hbar} \right).$$ Then he considers the Laplace-Fourier transform of G(t): \begin{equation} \label{eq1} \begin{split} \tilde{G}(E) = & -i\int^{\infty}_0 dt G(t)\exp(iEt/\hbar) \\ & = -i\int^{\infty}_0dt\sum_{a^{'}} \exp(-iE_{a^{'}}t/\hbar) \exp(iEt/\hbar)/ \hbar. \end{split} \end{equation}

But why does he say that this integrand oscillates indefinitely, and the result can be changed into a definite one by making the change $E \rightarrow E + i \varepsilon$

He says the integrand oscillates indefinitely, because it does. Consider one term in the integrand. It looks like: $$ e^{i(E - E_1)t} = \cos((E - E_1)t) + i \sin((E - E_1)t)\;, $$ where both $E$ and $E_1$ are assumed to be real, since they are energies, and where I set $\hbar=1$ for convenience. Thus, both the cosine and the sine oscillate back and forth forever as $t\to\infty$.

So, technically, the upper limit of $\infty$ on the integrand is not proper, since the limit does not exist--the integrand approaches no limit as the time goes to infinity, rather it simply oscillated back and forth between 1 and -1.

However, if we are allowed to "add a little imaginary part" then we can force the integrand to go to zero at infinity and the integral becomes well defined.

hft
  • 27,235