A little problem with charge operator

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter idontkonw
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charge Operator
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the charge operator Q to the proton wave function, as described in a referenced document. Participants explore the implications of the operator's formulation and its application to specific quantum states, raising questions about the calculations and interpretations involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the charge operator Q and expresses confusion about obtaining a result of zero when applying it to the proton wave function.
  • Another participant asserts that the charge must be consistent across different configurations of quarks, suggesting that the result should be 1 for both configurations mentioned.
  • A participant details their calculation process, indicating that they arrive at -1 due to a prefactor of -2, questioning whether the result should instead be 1.
  • Another participant challenges the method of handling prefactors in the calculations, emphasizing the importance of evaluating each component independently and correcting a mathematical error related to normalization.
  • A later reply reflects on the confusion experienced during the calculations, indicating a realization of a mistake without elaborating on the specifics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct application of the charge operator and the resulting calculations. There is no consensus on the correct outcome of the operator's application, and multiple interpretations of the calculations are present.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential issues with prefactor handling and normalization in their calculations, but these remain unresolved. The discussion highlights the complexity of applying the charge operator in quantum mechanics without reaching a definitive conclusion.

idontkonw
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I have a problem where it's said that the operator Q is likely to be:

Q=\sum^3_{i=1}[\frac{1}{2}B_i + I_{3,i}]

I have to apply this to the proton wave function which is the same as you can see in equation (3.20) here: https://www.google.es/url?sa=t&rct=...mYGwBQ&usg=AFQjCNFeF1HkxpOSTjbWuly9_EJcuTEWeQ

I have only the formula for the first equal. If I apply it because B number is the same for all of them this contribution is 0 and applying the isospin I get also 0 so I have that <p|Q|p>=0 which I assume it's wrong because Q=1. What do I do wrong?

Also, in this formula (3.20) how do they get the second equal? I mean the sum of this terms. I suppose all is about transpose operator but I'm getting quite confused with this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You should get 1 both for "u up u down d up" and for "u up u up d down". They have to be the same (and the same as Q for the whole proton), otherwise the proton would not have a well-defined charge.
 
mmm let me explain how I'm doing this. Let's take the last way of 3.20:


Q(|u\uparrow u\downarrow d\uparrow&gt; -2|u\uparrow u\uparrow d\downarrow&gt;)= \left[ \left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{2}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{2}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} - \frac{1}{2}\right)\right] -2 \left[ \left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{2}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{2}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} - \frac{1}{2}\right)\right](|u\uparrow u\downarrow d\uparrow&gt; -2|u\uparrow u\uparrow d\downarrow&gt;)=1-2=-1

So yes each part is 1 but because of -2 I get -1. Shouldn't be the result 1?
 
You cannot subtract/multiply with prefactors like that.

Your "real" calculation is ##\langle \psi|Q|\psi \rangle##. If you expand this, each summand is evaluated independent of the others, and their prefactors are squared. As result, you get ##\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\cdot 1\right)^2 \cdot 1 + \left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\cdot 2\right)^2 \cdot 1 = 1## where I corrected ##\sqrt{3} \to \sqrt{5}##.

If you know that the proton has a well-defined charge, both components have to have the same charge, so you can ignore all prefactors and evaluate a single component only with the formula in post 1.
 
Oh man, I'm feeling really really genius... I think it's time to stop studying. Enought for today. What a big mistake. All for no writing long expressions...

Thanks a lot!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
867
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K