Useful Raising/Lowering Operator Equation, Quick derivation help

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a derivation involving raising and lowering operators in quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on the relationship between these operators and their commutation relations. The original poster seeks clarification on a formula related to the operators and their powers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand a formula used in a reference text, expressing confusion about the application of commutation relations and the handling of indices. Some participants suggest looking into commutator identities and the differentiation-like properties of these operators, while others explore specific calculations involving the operators.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, sharing insights about commutation relations and how they relate to the original poster's query. There is a recognition of previously established relationships from earlier discussions, and some participants are revisiting their understanding of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

The original poster notes that this derivation is part of a larger problem and expresses concern about potentially lacking sufficient context for others to assist effectively. There is also mention of a specific reference that may not provide a complete proof, which adds to the complexity of the discussion.

logic smogic
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Problem

Show that,

[tex]a (a^{ \dagger})^{n} = n (a^{\dagger})^{n-1}+(a^{\dagger})^{n} a[/tex]

Formulae

[tex]a = \sqrt{\frac{m \omega}{2 \hbar}}(x+\frac{\imath p}{m \omega})[/tex]

[tex]a^{\dagger} = \sqrt{\frac{m \omega}{2 \hbar}}(x-\frac{\imath p}{m \omega})[/tex]

[tex][a,a^{\dagger}]= a a^{\dagger}-a^{\dagger}a=1[/tex]

Attempt

This is just one step in a long derivation from another problem. The author (Goswami, pg 147) uses it without proof, but I would like to modify it – and hence I need to understand where he got it from.

I can see how you might pull [tex]a^{\dagger}[/tex]’s out from the first and third term, and try to use the commutation relation, but the n’s don’t seem to work out right.

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The formula you are trying to prove is the same as [a,(a^+)^n]=n*(a^+)^(n-1), right? For any three operators A,B and C we know [A,BC]=[A,B]C+B[A,C]. This looks like the product rule for differentiation with [A, acting like a derivative. You can extend this to any number of operators, [A,BCDEF...]. So what does this say about [A,B^n] when [A,B]=1? BTW I think [a,a^+]=1, not the order you wrote.
 
Ah, I didn't think to look up some commutator identities. And, yes, we proved the differentiation/commutation relationship last homework assignment. Right, I'll try it again. Thanks.
 
So then,

[tex][a^{2}, (a^{\dagger})^{n}] = a [a, (a^{\dagger})^{n}]+[a, (a^{\dagger})^{n}]a= a n (a^{\dagger})^{n-1} + n (a^{\dagger})^{n-1} a[/tex]

Consider,

[tex]|n>=\frac{1}{\sqrt{n!}}(a^{\dagger})^{n}|0>[/tex]

where

[tex]a|0>=0[/tex]

then,

[tex]a^{2}|n>=\frac{1}{\sqrt{n!}}a^{2}( a^{\dagger})^{n}|0>[/tex]
[tex]= \frac{1}{\sqrt{n!}}( a n (a^{\dagger})^{n-1} + n (a^{\dagger})^{n-1} a<br /> )| 0>[/tex]
[tex]= \frac{1}{\sqrt{n!}} a n (a^{\dagger})^{n-1}| 0>[/tex]
[tex]=\frac{1}{\sqrt{n!}} n (n-1) (a^{\dagger})^{n-2}|0>[/tex]
[tex]= \sqrt {n (n-1)} |n-2>[/tex]

I know that I may have not provided enough of a primer in the problem to have anyone check this, but just puttin’ it out there!
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
24
Views
3K