Proving Scalar Operator: Laplacian in 4 Dimensions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the mathematical definition and proof of the four-dimensional Laplacian as a scalar operator, particularly in the context of angular momentum operators in quantum mechanics. Participants explore the relationship between scalar operators and their commutation with angular momentum components, as well as connections to group theory and tensor operators.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states that an operator T is a scalar operator if it commutes with all components of the angular momentum operator, specifically noting the necessary commutation relations.
  • Another participant provides a general formula for demonstrating that an operator is a scalar operator, suggesting that it suffices to prove the commutation for one component.
  • A participant discusses the connection between tensor operators in quantum mechanics and physical tensors, referencing a book that outlines the relationship between rotation groups and representation spaces.
  • One participant mentions that the zero commutators imply that the scalar is a function of r only, remaining unchanged under rotations, and discusses the triviality of the time component in the 4D-Laplacian.
  • Another participant references a book on angular momentum that details spherical tensors and their relevance to the discussion, suggesting that these concepts are analogous to multipoles in electromagnetism.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present various viewpoints and approaches to proving the scalar nature of the Laplacian, indicating that multiple competing views remain. There is no consensus on a single method or interpretation of the scalar operator definition.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the completeness of their arguments and the relationship between different mathematical representations. The discussion includes references to specific texts that may provide additional context but are not universally accessible to all participants.

mmgbmm
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
According to the definition, an operator T that commutes with all components of the angular momentum operator is a scalar, or rank zero, operator. What is the mathematical definition to that statement?
How can I prove that the four dimensional Laplacian is a scalar operator?

Regards,
:biggrin:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The mathematical statement is that if [tex]\hat{T}[/tex] is an operator such that [tex][\hat{T},\hat{L}_x]=[\hat{T},\hat{L}_y]=[\hat{T},\hat{L}_z]=0[/tex] then [tex]\hat{T}[/tex] is a scalar operator.

So to show that an operator is a scalar operator, you just have to show that those three commutators are zero.

Mike
 
Actually,the general formula reads

[tex]\left[\hat{\vec{J}}\cdot\vec{n},\hat{T}^{(k)}_{q}\right]_{-} =\sum_{q'} T^{(k)}_{q'}\left\langle k,q'\left | \right \hat{\vec{J}}\cdot\vec{n}\left | \right k,q \rangle\right[/tex]

,so it suffices to prove it for the "z" component.

HINT:Use the position representation in which

[tex]\nabla^{2} \sim \delta_{lm}\hat{p}_{l}\hat{p}_{m}[/tex]

Daniel.
 
Last edited:
mmgbmm said:
According to the definition, an operator T that commutes with all components of the angular momentum operator is a scalar, or rank zero, operator. What is the mathematical definition to that statement?
How can I prove that the four dimensional Laplacian is a scalar operator?

I used to wonder often about the relationship bewteen tensor operators in quantum mechanics and tensors for physical 3-dimensional space, where the latter are defined either as multilinear maps, or as "things" that satisfy certain transformation properties.

A short passage on page 118 of the book Group Theory and Physics by S. Sternberg showed me that there is a connection. Elements of the rotation group act both on vectors in physical space and on (state) vectors in the state space of a quantum system. In other words, both of these spaces are representation spaces for representations of the the rotation group.

Tensor operators are (related to) operators on state space that correspond to the standard tensors of physical tensors via an intertwining operator (or morphism) between the representations.

Sternberg is a very nice introduction to the use of group theory in physics from an abstract point of view. I've always meant to write a little blurb that shows the correspdence bewteen the terse, general, and abstract treatment in Sternberg, and more the more concrete expositions found in quantum mechanics books. Unfortunately, I don't have access to Sternberg. I do have a few lines of handwritten notes from page 118. Maybe that will be enough.

With respect to the Laplacian, I was going to mention something about partial derivatives commuting, but I see that while I was writing, dextercioby has already given an equivalent but better suggestion.

Regards,
George
 
The zero commutators demonstrate that the "scalar" is independent of the two standard spherical coordinate angular coordinates. Thus the "scalar" is a function of r only, and does not change under rotations -- and that's what we mean by a scalar -under rotation.

For the 4D-Laplacian, the t part is trivial. The spatial part is, up to a constant, momentum squared, p**2, and this commutes, as it should, with all the angular momentum operators.

Edmunds book on angular momentum goes into spherical tensors, rotations and all that stuff in a very complete fashion. Well worth fighting your way through, sometime down the road. Note that spherical tensors are defined only for rotations, so they are somewhat analogous to multipoles in E&M, less so to the standard tensors of relativity.

Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K