Anti-commutation of parity operator

  • Thread starter Thread starter sydfloyd
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator Parity
sydfloyd
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The parity operator is defined as P \psi (x) = \psi (-x). Show that P and p_x anti-commute, that is, \{ P,p_x \} = Pp_x + p_xP = 0.


Homework Equations


P \psi (x) = \psi (-x)
p_x = - i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial x}


The Attempt at a Solution


\{ P,p_x \} \psi(x) = ( Pp_x + p_xP ) \psi(x) = -i \hbar \left[ P \frac{\partial}{\partial x} \psi (x) + \frac{\partial}{\partial x} [ P \psi (x) ]\right] = -i \hbar \left[ \frac{\partial}{\partial (-x)} \psi (-x) + \frac{\partial}{\partial x} \psi (-x) \right] = -i \hbar \left[ - \frac{\partial}{\partial x} \psi (-x) + \frac{\partial}{\partial x} \psi (-x) \right] = 0

Is it valid to say that P \frac{\partial}{\partial x} \psi (x) = \frac{\partial}{\partial (-x)} \psi (-x) ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
for the part where you found (pxP) this one is correct ..

as for your question, I won't say that I am 100% sure that it is valid .. but I would say that I am 80% agree with what you suggested in order to get your answer ..

what I know about the parity operator is that when you apply it on psi(x) you get psi(-x), so whenever you have x you simply change it to -x and vice versa (that would be applied to other things such as velocity and force) ..
 
I'm under the impression that the parity operator transforms x \rightarrow -x.

Let's say that f(x) = \frac{\partial \psi (x) }{\partial x} .

Then P f(x) = f(-x) = \frac{\partial \psi (-x) }{\partial (-x)} = - \frac{\partial \psi (-x) }{\partial x} , right?

I feel that something is wrong here.
 
sydfloyd said:
I'm under the impression that the parity operator transforms x \rightarrow -x.

Let's say that f(x) = \frac{\partial \psi (x) }{\partial x} .

Then P f(x) = f(-x) = \frac{\partial \psi (-x) }{\partial (-x)} = - \frac{\partial \psi (-x) }{\partial x} , right?

I feel that something is wrong here.

I told you I am not 100% sure .. but i still think it is right the way you did ..

hopefully there would be someone else to confirm what I think ..
 
sydfloyd said:
I'm under the impression that the parity operator transforms x \rightarrow -x.

Let's say that f(x) = \frac{\partial \psi (x) }{\partial x} .

Then P f(x) = f(-x) = \frac{\partial \psi (-x) }{\partial (-x)} = - \frac{\partial \psi (-x) }{\partial x} , right?
Right. I don't see anything wrong. Use a trial function of x, like a few terms of a polynomial, that doesn't have definite parity and see how it works.
 
Hello everyone, I’m considering a point charge q that oscillates harmonically about the origin along the z-axis, e.g. $$z_{q}(t)= A\sin(wt)$$ In a strongly simplified / quasi-instantaneous approximation I ignore retardation and take the electric field at the position ##r=(x,y,z)## simply to be the “Coulomb field at the charge’s instantaneous position”: $$E(r,t)=\frac{q}{4\pi\varepsilon_{0}}\frac{r-r_{q}(t)}{||r-r_{q}(t)||^{3}}$$ with $$r_{q}(t)=(0,0,z_{q}(t))$$ (I’m aware this isn’t...
Hi, I had an exam and I completely messed up a problem. Especially one part which was necessary for the rest of the problem. Basically, I have a wormhole metric: $$(ds)^2 = -(dt)^2 + (dr)^2 + (r^2 + b^2)( (d\theta)^2 + sin^2 \theta (d\phi)^2 )$$ Where ##b=1## with an orbit only in the equatorial plane. We also know from the question that the orbit must satisfy this relationship: $$\varepsilon = \frac{1}{2} (\frac{dr}{d\tau})^2 + V_{eff}(r)$$ Ultimately, I was tasked to find the initial...
Back
Top