Angular momentum raising lowering operator

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving the commutation relation [L±, L²] = 0, where L± = Lx ± iLy. Participants analyze the expansion of commutators and the implications of the ± sign in calculations. They confirm that the standard commutation relation [A, B] = AB - BA holds true, and that terms can cancel out when properly manipulated. The confusion arises in proving [L+, L-] = 2ħLz, with one participant struggling to understand the derivation of the last equalities in that proof. Ultimately, the focus is on clarifying the steps necessary to arrive at these important quantum mechanical relations.
v_pino
Messages
156
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Derive [L_\pm , L^2]=0



Homework Equations



L_{\pm}=L_x \pm iL_y


The Attempt at a Solution



[L_\pm , L^2]=[L_x,L_x^2] \pm i[L_y,L_y^2]=[L_x,L_x]L_x + L_x[L_x,L_x] \pm i([L_y,L_y]L_y+L_y[L_y,L_y])

Is this right so far? If so, how do I proceed from this? The books and websites I'll read always just state [L_\pm , L^2]=0 instead of proving it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
L^{2}=L^{2}_{x}+L^{2}_{y}+L^{2}_{z}

Then

[L_{±},L^{2}]=[L_{x}±iL_{y},L^{2}_{x}+L^{2}_{y}]

which is going to give you some cross terms. Using the fact that [L_{i},L_{j}]=ih\epsilon_{ijk}L_{k}, you can move some stuff around and cancel terms to arrive at the final answer. I'm not sure how you got to where you are.
 
I'm having some trouble expanding the commutators due to the +/- sign. Is it still [A,B]=AB-BA?
 
Is it still [A,B]=AB-BA?

This is always true.

After writing the commutation relation, and expanding, the ± just becomes \mp when multiplied by -. If you have two like terms, one of which has the sign ± and the other of which has the sign \mp, they will cancel.
 
Is the following ok?

[L_\pm,L^2]=(L_x \pm iL_y)(L_x^2+L_y^2)-(L_x^2+L_y^2)(L_x \pm iL_y)

[L_\pm,L^2]=L_x^3+L_xL_y^2\pm iL_x^2L_y\pm iL_y^3 -L_x^3 \mp i L_x^2 L_y -L_x L_y^2 \mp iLy^3

= 0
 
I tried to do the same as what I did above to prove [L_+,L_-]=2\hbar L_z but I got zero instead:

[L_+,L_-]=(L_x +iL_y)(L_x-iL_y)-(L_x-iL_y)(L_x+iL_y)=(L_x^2+L_y^2)-(L_x^2+L_y^2)=0

I found the following derivation but I don't understand how the last three equalities were arrived at:

[L_+,L_-]=[L_x+iL_y,L_x-iL_y]=i[L_y,L_x]-i[L_x,L_y]=\hbar (L_z+L_z)=2\hbar L_z
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top