Hi(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Short question: What is the generalization of the BAC-CAB rule for operators?

Longer question and context: please read below

I was reading Schiff's book on Quantum Mechanics (3rd Edition) and on page 236, he has defined a generalized Runge-Lunz vector for a central force as

[tex]\vec{M} = \frac{1}{2\mu}(\vec{p} \times \vec{L} - \vec{L} \times \vec{p}) - \frac{k}{r}\vec{r}[/tex]

Here, [itex]\mu[/itex] is the reduced mass, [itex]\vec{p}[/itex] is the momentum operator, [itex]\vec{L}[/itex] is the angular momentum operator and [itex]\vec{r}[/itex] is the position operator. [itex]k[/itex] is a scalar constant.

I was trying to prove the following identities, which are also listed on the same page:

[tex][\vec{M}, H] = 0[/tex]

[tex]\vec{L} \bullet \vec{M} = \vec{M} \bullet \vec{L} = 0[/tex]

[tex]\vec{M}^2 = \frac{2H}{\mu}(\vec{L}^2 + \hbar^2) + k^2[/tex]

In trying to prove the first one, i.e. [itex][\vec{M}, H] = 0[/itex], I come across terms of the form:

[tex](\vec{p} \times \vec{L})\vec{p}^2[/itex]

Now, the term in brackets can be written as

[tex]\vec{p} \times (\vec{r} \times \vec{p})[/tex]

If these were normal vectors, this would be easy:

[tex]\vec{A} \times (\vec{B} \times \vec{C}) = \vec{B}(\vec{A} \bullet \vec{C}) - \vec{C}(\vec{A} \bullet \vec{B})[/tex]

In the case of vectors, due to commutativity of the dot product we could write

[tex]\vec{A} \times (\vec{B} \times \vec{C}) = \vec{B}(\vec{C} \bullet \vec{A}) - \vec{C}(\vec{B} \bullet \vec{A})[/tex]

but this isn't valid if A, B, C are operators. It seems that the only way to find [itex]\vec{p} \times \vec{L}[/itex] is to express them both in cartesian coordinates, take the cross product the "usual" way and simplify everything.

I have two questions:

1. What is the generalization of the vector triple product to triple products of vectors operators?

2. Is there a more efficient way of computing terms like [itex]\vec{p} \times \vec{L}[/itex]?

Thanks in advance.

-Vivek.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# BAC - CAB for operators?

Loading...

Similar Threads for operators | Date |
---|---|

A Inverse momentum operator | Mar 30, 2018 |

A Field quantization and photon number operator | Mar 27, 2018 |

I Operators and vectors in infinite dimensional vector spaces | Mar 2, 2018 |

I How to create the operator of unknown beamsplitter | Feb 27, 2018 |

I Hamiltonian in Schrödinger: necessarily total energy? | Feb 22, 2018 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**