Anguluar momentum Commutation Identity

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the commutation relations involving angular momentum operators, specifically focusing on the identity related to the commutation of \( J^2 \) with an operator \( A_i \) that is not invariant under rotation. Participants are tasked with showing a specific commutation relation and exploring the implications of their manipulations.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the breakdown of the commutation relation into components and express uncertainty about the next steps in their calculations. There are mentions of potential sign errors in expressions and attempts to simplify the results using known identities.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the problem with participants providing feedback on each other's expressions. Some have noted corrections regarding factors and signs, while others are considering the implications of their findings on proving a more complex identity. The discussion reflects a collaborative effort to clarify misunderstandings and refine approaches.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem is a bonus question, suggesting it may be more complex than typical homework problems. There is also mention of previous challenging problems, indicating a context of higher difficulty and the potential for intricate manipulations.

decerto
Messages
84
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement



Given that [itex][A_i,J_j]=i\hbar\epsilon_{ijk}Ak[/itex] where A_i is not invariant under rotation

Show that [itex][J^2,Ai]=-2i\hbar\epsilon_{ijk}J_jAk-2\hbar^2A_i[/itex]

Homework Equations


[itex][AB,C]=A[B,C]+[A,C]B[/itex]

[itex][A,B]=-[B,A][/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



[itex][/itex]
[itex][J^2,Ai]=[J_x^2,Ai]+[J_y^2,Ai]+[J_z^2,Ai][/itex]
[itex]=J_x[J_x,Ai]+[J_x,Ai]J_x+J_y[J_y,Ai]+[J_y,Ai]J_y+J_z[J_z,Ai]+[J_z,Ai]J_z[/itex]
[itex]=-J_x\epsilon_{ixk}Ak-\epsilon_{ixk}AkJ_x-J_y\epsilon_{iyk}Ak-\epsilon_{iyk}AkJ_y-J_z\epsilon_{izk}Ak-\epsilon_{izk}AkJ_z[/itex]

Not sure where to go from here
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You left out a factor of ##i\hbar## in getting to your last line.

Note that your final line can be written compactly as ##-\epsilon_{ijk}(J_jA_k + A_kJ_j)##
 
TSny said:
You left out a factor of ##i\hbar## in getting to your last line.

Note that your final line can be written compactly as ##-\epsilon_{ijk}(J_jA_k + A_kJ_j)##

Thanks that looks a lot easier to deal with, I guess I use that ##A_kJ_j= J_jA_k-[A_k,J_j]##?
 
decerto said:
Thanks that looks a lot easier to deal with, I guess I use that ##A_kJ_j= J_jA_k-[A_k,J_j]##?
That's the right idea, but there's a sign error in your expression ##A_kJ_j= J_jA_k-[A_k,J_j]##.
 
TSny said:
That's the right idea, but there's a sign error in your expression ##A_kJ_j= J_jA_k-[A_k,J_j]##.
I have the exact same thing written?
 
Last edited:
decerto said:
I have the exact same thing written?
Yes, I was just rewriting the same expression that you wrote. But the expression is incorrect due to sign errors.
 
TSny said:
Yes, I was just rewriting the same expression that you wrote. But the expression is incorrect due to sign errors.
Ah right sorry, I had the right expression on the page and it worked so I was confused why you were correcting me
 
TSny said:
Yes, I was just rewriting the same expression that you wrote. But the expression is incorrect due to sign errors.
To prove the full identity ##[J^2,[J^2,A]]=2\hbar^2(J^2A+AJ^2)-4\hbar^2(A\cdot J)J## can I just use a nested expression of what I just proved, as in let ##[J^2,Ai]=Ai## in my original identity
 
decerto said:
To prove the full identity ##[J^2,[J^2,A]]=2\hbar^2(J^2A+AJ^2)-4\hbar^2(A\cdot J)J## can I just use a nested expression of what I just proved, as in let ##[J^2,Ai]=Ai## in my original identity

Yes, but of course ##[J^2,Ai] \neq Ai##. I managed to get the result, but only after a couple of pages of tedious index manipulations. I suspect there is a more elegant way to get to the result, but I don't see it.
 
  • #10
TSny said:
Yes, but of course ##[J^2,Ai] \neq Ai##. I managed to get the result, but only after a couple of pages of tedious index manipulations. I suspect there is a more elegant way to get to the result, but I don't see it.
Its a bonus problem, and the last bonus problem was about 6 pages of tedious trigonometric stuff so it wouldn't surprise me if there wasn't, the identity is from dirac but I can't find his original derivation. Thanks for your help though
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
4K