Solving General QM Problem: Finding Commuting Operators

  • Thread starter Thread starter vincebs
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    General Qm
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a quantum mechanics problem involving two particles, each described by their respective Hamiltonians, H_1 and H_2. The total Hamiltonian, H, includes a potential term that accounts for the interaction between the particles based on their relative positions. Participants are tasked with finding operators that commute with these Hamiltonians and exploring the implications of these operators in the context of angular momentum and conservation laws.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster expresses uncertainty about how to approach the problem and considers trivial examples of commuting operators. Participants discuss the potential use of angular momentum as a non-trivial example for the first two parts of the problem and question the conservation of total angular momentum for the third part.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, with some suggesting specific operators and exploring their implications. There is a productive exchange regarding the definitions and properties of angular momentum in relation to the Hamiltonians, although no consensus has been reached on the final approach for part three.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the lack of additional information about the system, which limits assumptions about the specific physical scenario, such as whether it resembles a helium atom. The discussion also hints at the potential relevance of classical mechanics concepts, like Hamilton's equations, in understanding the quantum problem.

vincebs
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
Hmm well this question isn't general except in the sense that I have no idea about how to solve it and hence have no idea what physics it involves!

Two particles

particle one obeys H_1 = (p_1)^2/(2m_1) + V1(r_1)
particle two obeys H_2 = (p_2)^2/(2m_2) + V2(r_2)

The system obeys H = H_1 + H_2 + V(|r1 - r2|)

(the latter is the relative distance between the two particles' positions)
r_1 and r_2 are scalars, r1 and r2 are the respective vectors

1.) Find an operator that commutes with H_1 and state its equation of motion
2.) Find an operator that commutes with H_2 and state its equation of motion
3.) Find an operator that commutes with H (and prove that it does)

How do I go about doing this? I can only think of trivial examples, like H_2 commutes with H_1 and vice-versa, and nothing for H.

There is no other information given, so I can't assume this is the helium atom or something.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
vincebs said:
Hmm well this question isn't general except in the sense that I have no idea about how to solve it and hence have no idea what physics it involves!

Two particles

particle one obeys H_1 = (p_1)^2/(2m_1) + V1(r_1)
particle two obeys H_2 = (p_2)^2/(2m_2) + V2(r_2)

The system obeys H = H_1 + H_2 + V(|r1 - r2|)

(the latter is the relative distance between the two particles' positions)
r_1 and r_2 are scalars, r1 and r2 are the respective vectors

1.) Find an operator that commutes with H_1 and state its equation of motion
2.) Find an operator that commutes with H_2 and state its equation of motion
3.) Find an operator that commutes with H (and prove that it does)

How do I go about doing this? I can only think of trivial examples, like H_2 commutes with H_1 and vice-versa, and nothing for H.

There is no other information given, so I can't assume this is the helium atom or something.

One non-trivial example of operator satisfying condition 1.) is angular momentum
[itex]\mathbf{L}_1 = [\mathbf{r}_1 \times \mathbf{p}_1][/itex]. This may give you a clue on how to approach questions 2.) and 3.).

Eugene.
 
Thanks! Ugh! In fact I had considered angular momentum but I thought that its form was particular to the hydrogen atom. But I guess since there is no phi-dependence on the potential it should work fine. So L1 and L2 work for 1.) and 2.), but how about #3? Will the total angular momentum be conserved? If so, how is it defined? Is it just L = L1 + L2? I tried writing out the Hamiltonians in terms of reduced mass but that didn't seem to do anything.

Is there any classical mechanics reasoning I can use? e.g. with Hamilton's equations?
 
Last edited:
vincebs said:
but how about #3? Will the total angular momentum be conserved? If so, how is it defined? Is it just L = L1 + L2?

Yes, I think L = L1+L2 should work. You can try to calculate [L,H]=0 explicitly. There is, however, a nicer approach. Try to prove the following equivalent condition

[tex]H = \exp(\frac{i}{\hbar} (\mathbf{L} \cdot \vec{\phi})) H \exp(-\frac{i}{\hbar} (\mathbf{L} \cdot \vec{\phi}))[/tex]

by noticing that for any vector operator [itex]\mathbf{a}[/itex]

[tex]\exp(\frac{i}{\hbar} (\mathbf{L} \cdot \vec{\phi})) \mathbf{a} \exp(-\frac{i}{\hbar} (\mathbf{L} \cdot \vec{\phi}))[/tex]

is the result of rotation of this vector around axis [itex]\vec{\phi}[/itex].

Eugene.
 

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
38
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K