A proof of operators in exponentials

  • Thread starter Thread starter aop12
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operators Proof
aop12
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Assume C=[A,B]≠0 and [C,A]=[C,B]=0

Show
eAeB=eA+Be\frac{1}{2}[A,B]


Homework Equations


All are given above.


The Attempt at a Solution


I recently did a similar problem (show eABe-A = B + [A,B] + \frac{1}{2}[A,[A,b]]+...) by defining a function exABe-xA and doing a taylor expansion, so I thought this might be done similarly, but I have gotten nowhere with this approach. I would like to figure this out myself, so I am really looking for guidance/hints if anyone has any. It would be much appreciated
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So I think I figured it out, but I would appreciate input on whether it is right or not.
start with:

eAeB = ex

Then, looking for x

x = log(eAeB)
Which can be found using the Baker–Campbell–Hausdorff formula

x = A + B + \frac{1}{2}[A,B]
x = A + B + \frac{1}{2}C

Thus,
eAeB = eA+B + \frac{1}{2}

since C and A, and C and B commute, C and A+B commute,

eA+B + \frac{1}{2}=eA+Be\frac{1}{2}C

thus,
eAeB=eA+Be\frac{1}{2}[A,B]
 
It looks correct (except for the fact that you forgot to type the C in a couple of places), but are you sure you're allowed to use the BCH formula? I would have guessed that the point of the exercise is to prove a special case of it. (I haven't thought about how to do that).
 
I found a solution in a book. They don't use the BCH formula. Instead, their strategy is to prove that the maps
\begin{align}&t\mapsto e^{tA}e^{tB}e^{\frac{t^2}{2}[A,B]}\\
&t\mapsto e^{t(A+B)}
\end{align} satisfy the same differential equation and the same initial condition.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top