Skip to content

Picture Translation Table

This page is a convention-fixed translation sheet for closed-system quantum pictures. The general derivation belongs to Picture Transformations. The broader Translation Table of Formulations compares pictures, kernels, path integrals, and phase-space methods conceptually; this page focuses narrowly on exact state-operator conversions and the signs that most often cause errors.

Let R(t)R(t) be unitary. Define picture PP from the Schrödinger picture by

∣ψP(t)⟩=R†(t)∣ψS(t)⟩.\lvert\psi_P(t)\rangle = R^\dagger(t) \lvert\psi_S(t)\rangle.

To preserve matrix elements, transform observables and density operators as

AP(t)=R†(t)AS(t)R(t),A_P(t) = R^\dagger(t)A_S(t)R(t), ρP(t)=R†(t)ρS(t)R(t).\rho_P(t) = R^\dagger(t)\rho_S(t)R(t).

The transformed state obeys a Schrödinger equation with

HP(t)=R†(t)HS(t)R(t)−iℏR†(t)R˙(t).H_P(t) = R^\dagger(t)H_S(t)R(t) - i\hbar R^\dagger(t)\dot R(t).

Every table below uses this dagger convention. Some sources instead define ∣ψP⟩=R∣ψS⟩\lvert\psi_P\rangle=R\lvert\psi_S\rangle; their formulas are valid but have the daggers and connection-term sign reversed.

ObjectSchrödinger to picture PPPicture PP to Schrödinger
state vector∣ψP⟩=R†∣ψS⟩\lvert\psi_P\rangle=R^\dagger\lvert\psi_S\rangle∣ψS⟩=R∣ψP⟩\lvert\psi_S\rangle=R\lvert\psi_P\rangle
bra⟨ψP∣=⟨ψS∣R\langle\psi_P\rvert=\langle\psi_S\rvert R⟨ψS∣=⟨ψP∣R†\langle\psi_S\rvert=\langle\psi_P\rvert R^\dagger
observableAP=R†ASRA_P=R^\dagger A_SRAS=RAPR†A_S=RA_PR^\dagger
density operatorρP=R†ρSR\rho_P=R^\dagger\rho_SRρS=RρPR†\rho_S=R\rho_PR^\dagger
state generatorHP=R†HSR−iℏR†R˙H_P=R^\dagger H_SR-i\hbar R^\dagger\dot RHS=RHPR†+iℏR˙R†H_S=RH_PR^\dagger+i\hbar\dot R R^\dagger
evolution operatorUP(t,t0)=R†(t)US(t,t0)R(t0)U_P(t,t_0)=R^\dagger(t)U_S(t,t_0)R(t_0)US(t,t0)=R(t)UP(t,t0)R†(t0)U_S(t,t_0)=R(t)U_P(t,t_0)R^\dagger(t_0)

The two endpoint factors in the evolution-operator row are essential. Setting R(t0)=IR(t_0)=I is convenient, but it is a convention rather than an identity that holds for every transformation.

For pure states,

⟨A⟩t=⟨ψS(t)∣AS(t)∣ψS(t)⟩=⟨ψP(t)∣AP(t)∣ψP(t)⟩.\begin{aligned} \langle A\rangle_t &= \langle\psi_S(t)\rvert A_S(t) \lvert\psi_S(t)\rangle \\ &= \langle\psi_P(t)\rvert A_P(t) \lvert\psi_P(t)\rangle. \end{aligned}

For mixed states,

⟨A⟩t=Tr⁡[ρS(t)AS(t)]=Tr⁡[ρP(t)AP(t)].\begin{aligned} \langle A\rangle_t &= \operatorname{Tr} \left[ \rho_S(t)A_S(t) \right] \\ &= \operatorname{Tr} \left[ \rho_P(t)A_P(t) \right]. \end{aligned}

The second equality uses unitarity and cyclicity of the trace. A picture is a change of mathematical representatives, not a change in the predicted probability distribution.

Transition amplitudes are likewise invariant when endpoint states and the evolution operator are translated consistently:

⟨ϕP(t)∣UP(t,t0)∣ψP(t0)⟩=⟨ϕS(t)∣US(t,t0)∣ψS(t0)⟩.\begin{aligned} &\langle\phi_P(t)\rvert U_P(t,t_0) \lvert\psi_P(t_0)\rangle \\ &\qquad= \langle\phi_S(t)\rvert U_S(t,t_0) \lvert\psi_S(t_0)\rangle. \end{aligned}

Let U(t,t0)U(t,t_0) be the full Schrödinger-picture evolution operator and choose

R(t)=U(t,t0),R(t0)=I.R(t)=U(t,t_0), \qquad R(t_0)=I.

Then

ObjectSchrödinger pictureHeisenberg picture
state∣ψS(t)⟩=U(t,t0)∣ψS(t0)⟩\lvert\psi_S(t)\rangle=U(t,t_0)\lvert\psi_S(t_0)\rangle∣ψH⟩=∣ψS(t0)⟩\lvert\psi_H\rangle=\lvert\psi_S(t_0)\rangle
observableAS(t)A_S(t)AH(t)=U†(t,t0)AS(t)U(t,t0)A_H(t)=U^\dagger(t,t_0)A_S(t)U(t,t_0)
density operatorρS(t)=UρS(t0)U†\rho_S(t)=U\rho_S(t_0)U^\daggerρH=ρS(t0)\rho_H=\rho_S(t_0)
state generatorHS(t)H_S(t)HHstate=0H_H^{\rm state}=0
state propagatorU(t,t0)U(t,t_0)UH(t,t0)=IU_H(t,t_0)=I

The notation HHstate=0H_H^{\rm state}=0 means that the transformed state equation has zero generator. The Hamiltonian can still be treated as an observable,

HHobs(t)=U†(t,t0)HS(t)U(t,t0),H_H^{\rm obs}(t) = U^\dagger(t,t_0)H_S(t)U(t,t_0),

and it need not vanish. Keeping these two roles distinct avoids the misleading statement that “the Hamiltonian is zero in the Heisenberg picture.”

The inverse observable translation is

AS(t)=U(t,t0)AH(t)U†(t,t0).A_S(t) = U(t,t_0)A_H(t)U^\dagger(t,t_0).

The Heisenberg operator equation is

dAHdt=iℏ[HHobs(t),AH(t)]+U†(t,t0)∂AS∂tU(t,t0).\frac{dA_H}{dt} = \frac{i}{\hbar} [H_H^{\rm obs}(t),A_H(t)] + U^\dagger(t,t_0) \frac{\partial A_S}{\partial t} U(t,t_0).

The last term is present when the Schrödinger-picture observable has explicit time dependence.

Split the Hamiltonian as

HS(t)=H0(t)+V(t).H_S(t) = H_0(t)+V(t).

Let U0(t,t0)U_0(t,t_0) solve

iℏ∂U0∂t=H0(t)U0(t,t0),U0(t0,t0)=I.i\hbar\frac{\partial U_0}{\partial t} = H_0(t)U_0(t,t_0), \qquad U_0(t_0,t_0)=I.

Choose R(t)=U0(t,t0)R(t)=U_0(t,t_0). Then

ObjectSchrödinger pictureInteraction picture
state∣ψS(t)⟩\lvert\psi_S(t)\rangle∣ψI(t)⟩=U0†(t,t0)∣ψS(t)⟩\lvert\psi_I(t)\rangle=U_0^\dagger(t,t_0)\lvert\psi_S(t)\rangle
observableAS(t)A_S(t)AI(t)=U0†(t,t0)AS(t)U0(t,t0)A_I(t)=U_0^\dagger(t,t_0)A_S(t)U_0(t,t_0)
density operatorρS(t)\rho_S(t)ρI(t)=U0†(t,t0)ρS(t)U0(t,t0)\rho_I(t)=U_0^\dagger(t,t_0)\rho_S(t)U_0(t,t_0)
state generatorH0(t)+V(t)H_0(t)+V(t)VI(t)=U0†(t,t0)V(t)U0(t,t0)V_I(t)=U_0^\dagger(t,t_0)V(t)U_0(t,t_0)
evolution operatorU(t,t0)U(t,t_0)UI(t,t0)=U0†(t,t0)U(t,t0)U_I(t,t_0)=U_0^\dagger(t,t_0)U(t,t_0)

The inverse translations are

∣ψS(t)⟩=U0(t,t0)∣ψI(t)⟩,\lvert\psi_S(t)\rangle = U_0(t,t_0) \lvert\psi_I(t)\rangle, AS(t)=U0(t,t0)AI(t)U0†(t,t0),A_S(t) = U_0(t,t_0) A_I(t) U_0^\dagger(t,t_0),

and similarly for ρS\rho_S. The interaction-picture evolution satisfies

iℏ∂UI∂t=VI(t)UI(t,t0).i\hbar \frac{\partial U_I}{\partial t} = V_I(t)U_I(t,t_0).

No approximation has been made. Approximation enters only when UIU_I, VIV_I, or the Dyson series is truncated or simplified.

At t0t_0, choose all three pictures to coincide. Since

U(t,t0)=U0(t,t0)UI(t,t0),U(t,t_0) = U_0(t,t_0)U_I(t,t_0),

the interaction and Heisenberg representatives are related by UIU_I:

ObjectInteraction to HeisenbergHeisenberg to interaction
state∣ψH⟩=UI†(t,t0)∣ψI(t)⟩\lvert\psi_H\rangle=U_I^\dagger(t,t_0)\lvert\psi_I(t)\rangle∣ψI(t)⟩=UI(t,t0)∣ψH⟩\lvert\psi_I(t)\rangle=U_I(t,t_0)\lvert\psi_H\rangle
observableAH(t)=UI†(t,t0)AI(t)UI(t,t0)A_H(t)=U_I^\dagger(t,t_0)A_I(t)U_I(t,t_0)AI(t)=UI(t,t0)AH(t)UI†(t,t0)A_I(t)=U_I(t,t_0)A_H(t)U_I^\dagger(t,t_0)
density operatorρH=UI†(t,t0)ρI(t)UI(t,t0)\rho_H=U_I^\dagger(t,t_0)\rho_I(t)U_I(t,t_0)ρI(t)=UI(t,t0)ρHUI†(t,t0)\rho_I(t)=U_I(t,t_0)\rho_HU_I^\dagger(t,t_0)

This direct conversion is often cleaner than translating back through the Schrödinger picture, especially in perturbative calculations.

For closed Schrödinger-picture evolution,

iℏdρSdt=[HS,ρS].i\hbar\frac{d\rho_S}{dt} = [H_S,\rho_S].

Under the general picture transformation,

iℏdρPdt=[HP,ρP].i\hbar\frac{d\rho_P}{dt} = [H_P,\rho_P].

The special cases are

dρHdt=0\frac{d\rho_H}{dt}=0

and

iℏdρIdt=[VI(t),ρI(t)].i\hbar\frac{d\rho_I}{dt} = [V_I(t),\rho_I(t)].

These formulas apply to closed-system unitary evolution. A reduced open-system state generally has additional dissipative or memory terms; changing picture then requires transforming the full generator, not only its Hamiltonian part.

For

AP(t)=R†(t)AS(t)R(t),A_P(t) = R^\dagger(t)A_S(t)R(t),

the full derivative is

dAPdt=R†∂AS∂tR+R˙†ASR+R†ASR˙.\begin{aligned} \frac{dA_P}{dt} &= R^\dagger \frac{\partial A_S}{\partial t} R \\ &\quad+ \dot R^\dagger A_SR + R^\dagger A_S\dot R. \end{aligned}

The first term is transformed explicit dependence. The last two terms arise because the picture itself moves. Do not identify one with the other.

If another source uses

∣ψ~P⟩=R∣ψS⟩,\lvert\widetilde\psi_P\rangle = R\lvert\psi_S\rangle,

then consistency requires

A~P=RASR†,ρ~P=RρSR†,\widetilde A_P = RA_SR^\dagger, \qquad \widetilde\rho_P = R\rho_SR^\dagger,

and

H~P=RHSR†+iℏR˙R†.\widetilde H_P = RH_SR^\dagger + i\hbar\dot R R^\dagger.

Do not borrow the state definition from one convention and the Hamiltonian formula from the other. A quick diagnostic is expectation-value invariance: inconsistent dagger placement fails immediately.

Before translating a calculation, state

  1. which picture is the source and which is the target;
  2. the reference time t0t_0;
  3. whether the transformed state uses RR or R†R^\dagger;
  4. whether R(t0)=IR(t_0)=I has actually been imposed;
  5. how states, observables, and density operators transform;
  6. whether ASA_S has explicit time dependence;
  7. the connection term in the transformed Hamiltonian;
  8. both endpoint factors in a transformed propagator;
  9. the Hamiltonian split used for the interaction picture;
  10. whether a later approximation is being confused with the exact picture change.
  • Transforming only the state. Observables or density operators must be translated consistently for predictions to agree.
  • Forgetting −iℏR†R˙-i\hbar R^\dagger\dot R. A time-dependent frame has its own generator.
  • Using R(t)R(t) at both propagator endpoints. The correct factors are R†(t)R^\dagger(t) and R(t0)R(t_0).
  • Assuming R(t0)=IR(t_0)=I silently. Include the initial factor unless the convention is declared.
  • Saying the Heisenberg Hamiltonian is zero without qualification. The state generator vanishes; the Hamiltonian observable need not.
  • Dropping explicit operator time dependence. It survives as a separately transformed derivative term.
  • Treating H0H_0 as time independent by definition. A time-dependent solvable H0(t)H_0(t) is allowed if its propagator U0U_0 is defined correctly.
  • Calling the interaction picture approximate. The picture is exact before any perturbative truncation.
  • Mixing the two common RR conventions. This reverses daggers and the connection-term sign.
  • Applying closed-system density formulas to reduced open dynamics. Nonunitary terms must also be transformed.
  • P. A. M. Dirac, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 4th ed., Oxford University Press, 1958.
  • C. Cohen-Tannoudji, B. Diu, and F. Laloë, Quantum Mechanics, Wiley, 1977.
  • R. Shankar, Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 2nd ed., Springer, 1994.
  • J. J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano, Modern Quantum Mechanics, 3rd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2020.
  • L. E. Ballentine, Quantum Mechanics: A Modern Development, 2nd ed., World Scientific, 2014.

Starting from ∣ψP⟩=R†∣ψS⟩\lvert\psi_P\rangle=R^\dagger\lvert\psi_S\rangle, derive HPH_P.

Solution

Differentiate the transformed state and use the Schrödinger equation:

iℏddt∣ψP⟩=iℏR˙†∣ψS⟩+R†HS∣ψS⟩=(iℏR˙†R+R†HSR)∣ψP⟩.\begin{aligned} i\hbar\frac{d}{dt} \lvert\psi_P\rangle &= i\hbar\dot R^\dagger \lvert\psi_S\rangle + R^\dagger H_S \lvert\psi_S\rangle \\ &= \left( i\hbar\dot R^\dagger R + R^\dagger H_SR \right) \lvert\psi_P\rangle. \end{aligned}

Differentiating R†R=IR^\dagger R=I gives R˙†R=−R†R˙\dot R^\dagger R=-R^\dagger\dot R. Hence

HP=R†HSR−iℏR†R˙.H_P = R^\dagger H_SR - i\hbar R^\dagger\dot R.

Show that

UP(t,t0)=R†(t)US(t,t0)R(t0)U_P(t,t_0) = R^\dagger(t)U_S(t,t_0)R(t_0)

maps the transformed initial state to the transformed final state.

Solution

The transformed initial state is

∣ψP(t0)⟩=R†(t0)∣ψS(t0)⟩.\lvert\psi_P(t_0)\rangle = R^\dagger(t_0) \lvert\psi_S(t_0)\rangle.

Then

UP(t,t0)∣ψP(t0)⟩=R†(t)US(t,t0)R(t0)R†(t0)∣ψS(t0)⟩=R†(t)∣ψS(t)⟩=∣ψP(t)⟩.\begin{aligned} U_P(t,t_0) \lvert\psi_P(t_0)\rangle &= R^\dagger(t)U_S(t,t_0) R(t_0)R^\dagger(t_0) \lvert\psi_S(t_0)\rangle \\ &= R^\dagger(t) \lvert\psi_S(t)\rangle \\ &= \lvert\psi_P(t)\rangle. \end{aligned}

Show that Tr⁡(ρPAP)=Tr⁡(ρSAS)\operatorname{Tr}(\rho_PA_P)=\operatorname{Tr}(\rho_SA_S).

Solution

Substitute the transformed operators:

Tr⁡(ρPAP)=Tr⁡(R†ρSRR†ASR)=Tr⁡(R†ρSASR)=Tr⁡(ρSASRR†)=Tr⁡(ρSAS).\begin{aligned} \operatorname{Tr}(\rho_PA_P) &= \operatorname{Tr} \left( R^\dagger\rho_SR R^\dagger A_SR \right) \\ &= \operatorname{Tr} \left( R^\dagger\rho_SA_SR \right) \\ &= \operatorname{Tr} \left( \rho_SA_SRR^\dagger \right) \\ &= \operatorname{Tr}(\rho_SA_S). \end{aligned}

The third line uses cyclicity of the trace.

4. Translate directly from interaction to Heisenberg

Section titled “4. Translate directly from interaction to Heisenberg”

Derive AH=UI†AIUIA_H=U_I^\dagger A_IU_I from U=U0UIU=U_0U_I.

Solution

By definition,

AH=U†ASUA_H = U^\dagger A_SU

and

AI=U0†ASU0.A_I = U_0^\dagger A_SU_0.

Using U=U0UIU=U_0U_I gives

AH=UI†U0†ASU0UI=UI†AIUI.\begin{aligned} A_H &= U_I^\dagger U_0^\dagger A_S U_0U_I \\ &= U_I^\dagger A_IU_I. \end{aligned}

A source defines ∣ψP⟩=R∣ψS⟩\lvert\psi_P\rangle=R\lvert\psi_S\rangle but writes AP=R†ASRA_P=R^\dagger A_SR. Explain the failure.

Solution

With the stated state convention, the transformed bra is ⟨ψP∣=⟨ψS∣R†\langle\psi_P\rvert=\langle\psi_S\rvert R^\dagger. Expectation invariance requires

AP=RASR†,A_P = RA_SR^\dagger,

because then

⟨ψP∣AP∣ψP⟩=⟨ψS∣AS∣ψS⟩.\langle\psi_P\rvert A_P\lvert\psi_P\rangle = \langle\psi_S\rvert A_S\lvert\psi_S\rangle.

Using R†ASRR^\dagger A_SR with the same state definition generally inserts extra powers of RR and fails this test.