Symmetric, antisymmetric and parity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sacroiliac
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Parity Symmetric
Sacroiliac
Messages
12
Reaction score
1
Let me see if I can make it clearer.

Problem 5.5 In David Griffiths “Introduction to Quantum Mechanics” says:

Imagine two non interacting particles, each of mass m, in the infinite square well. If one is in the state psin and the other in state psim orthogonal to psin, calculate < (x1 - x2) 2 >, assuming that (a) they are distinguishable particles, (b) they are identical bosons, (c) they are identical fermions.

(a) a2 [1/6 – (1/2pi2)(1/n2 + 1/m2)]

(b) The answer to (a) - (128*a2*m2n2) / (pi4(m2 - n2)4)

But this last term is present only when m,n have opposite parity.

(c) The answer to (a) plus the term added in (b) with the same stipulation as in (b)

What does this mean? It seams to be saying that all three particles would have the same separation unless their states have opposite parity. Is this correct? Bosons and Fermions would have the same separation unless their states have odd parities? I never heard of this before, how does this work?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


In quantum mechanics, particles can be described by their wavefunctions, which contain information about their position, momentum, and other properties. In the case of identical particles, such as the two non-interacting particles in the infinite square well, the wavefunction must also take into account the symmetry of the system.

Symmetry refers to the behavior of the wavefunction under exchange of the two particles. If the wavefunction remains unchanged, it is called symmetric. If the wavefunction changes sign, it is called antisymmetric.

Parity is a specific type of symmetry that refers to the behavior of the wavefunction under reflection. If the wavefunction remains unchanged, it is called even parity. If the wavefunction changes sign, it is called odd parity.

In the problem described, the calculation of < (x1 - x2) 2 > depends on the symmetry of the system. For distinguishable particles, the calculation is straightforward and does not depend on their states. However, for identical particles, the calculation also takes into account the symmetry of their wavefunctions.

In the case of identical bosons, the wavefunction must be symmetric, which leads to the additional term in the calculation. This term only appears when the states of the particles have opposite parity, meaning that they are in odd parity states. Similarly, for identical fermions, the wavefunction must be antisymmetric, which also leads to an additional term in the calculation. This term also only appears when the states of the particles have opposite parity, meaning that they are in even parity states.

In summary, the calculation of < (x1 - x2) 2 > in this problem takes into account the symmetry of the system, which is determined by the types of particles and their states. This can result in different values for the separation of the particles, depending on the symmetry of their wavefunctions. This concept is important in understanding the behavior of identical particles in quantum mechanics.
 
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Back
Top