Question from Dirac's Principles of QM

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy Snyder
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qm
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around an equation from Dirac's Principles of Quantum Mechanics, specifically regarding the limit involving the displacement operator and its implications. Participants are examining the mathematical reasoning behind the equation and its substitutions.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of substituting \( e^{i\gamma} \) with \( 1 + i\gamma \) and question the correctness of the resulting expressions. There is also a discussion about whether a typo exists in the text and the nature of the displacement operator.

Discussion Status

The conversation has evolved with some participants expressing doubts about the original equation and others providing insights into the implications of the displacement operator. One participant claims to have resolved their confusion, indicating a productive direction in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing examination of the assumptions related to the displacement operator and its behavior under limits, as well as the potential for typographical errors in the text being referenced.

Jimmy Snyder
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
22
I have the fourth edition of Dirac's Principles of QM. I have a question concerning the equation in the middle of page 102 (between eqns 64 and 65 in section 25.)
[tex]\lim_{\delta x \rightarrow 0}(De^{i\gamma} - 1)/\delta x = \lim_{\delta x \rightarrow 0}(D - 1 + i \gamma)/\delta x[/tex]
If you make the substitution [itex]e^{i\gamma} \simeq 1 + i \gamma[/itex] then it seems to me you should get
[tex]\lim_{\delta x \rightarrow 0}(De^{i\gamma} - 1)/\delta x = \lim_{\delta x \rightarrow 0}(D - 1 + i \gamma D)/\delta x[/tex]
What am I missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You aren't missing anything. Is it a typo?
 
Dick said:
Is it a typo?
I doubt it. The conclusion he correctly draws from this equation is that the displacement operator is indeterminate by an arbitrary additive pure imaginary number:
[tex]ia_x = \lim_{\delta x \rightarrow 0}i \gamma/\delta x[/tex]
If it were a typo, then the the right hand side would also need to be operated on by D and then would not be a number. Is there some reason that [itex]D(i\gamma) = i \gamma[/itex]?
 
Never mind, I finally figured it out. Thanks for your help. The solution is that
[tex]\lim_{\delta x \rightarrow 0}D = 1[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K