Calculating eigenstates of an operator

barefeet
Messages
58
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


Consider a two-dimensional space spanned by two orthonormal state vectors \mid \alpha \rangle and \mid \beta \rangle. An operator is expressed in terms of these vectors as
A = \mid \alpha \rangle \langle \alpha \mid + \lambda \mid \beta \rangle \langle \alpha \mid + \lambda^* \mid \alpha \rangle \langle \beta \mid + \mu \mid \beta \rangle \langle \beta \mid

Determine the eigenstates of A for the case where (i) \lambda = 1, \mu = \pm 1, (ii) \lambda = i, \mu = \pm 1. Do this problem also by expressing A as a 2 X 2 matrix with eigenstates as the column vectors.

Homework Equations


Just linear algebra rules.

The Attempt at a Solution


I started with \lambda = 1, \mu = 1. Then A is:
A = \mid \alpha \rangle \langle \alpha \mid + \mid \beta \rangle \langle \alpha \mid + \mid \alpha \rangle \langle \beta \mid + \mid \beta \rangle \langle \beta \mid

A \mid \alpha \rangle = \mid \alpha \rangle \langle \alpha \mid \alpha \rangle + \mid \beta \rangle \langle \alpha \mid \alpha \rangle + \mid \alpha \rangle \langle \beta \mid \alpha \rangle + \mid \beta \rangle \langle \beta \mid \alpha \rangle = \mid \alpha \rangle + \mid \beta \rangle

A \mid \beta \rangle = \mid \alpha \rangle \langle \alpha \mid \beta \rangle + \mid \beta \rangle \langle \alpha \mid \beta \rangle + \mid \alpha \rangle \langle \beta \mid \beta \rangle + \mid \beta \rangle \langle \beta \mid \beta \rangle = \mid \alpha \rangle + \mid \beta \rangle

The eigenstate is \mid a_n \rangle with eigenvalue a_n. Then the following holds:
A \mid a_n \rangle = a_n \mid a_n \rangle

The eigenstate \mid a_n \rangle can be expressed in the basis vectors \mid \alpha \rangle and \mid \beta \rangle:

\mid a_n \rangle = c_1 \mid \alpha \rangle + c_2 \mid \beta \rangle

Then the earlier equation becomes:
A \mid a_n \rangle = A( c_1 \mid \alpha \rangle + c_2 \mid \beta \rangle ) = a_n (c_1 \mid \alpha \rangle + c_2 \mid \beta \rangle

But this is also:
A( c_1 \mid \alpha \rangle + c_2 \mid \beta \rangle ) = c_1 A \mid \alpha \rangle + c_2 A \mid \beta \rangle = c_1 (\mid \alpha \rangle + \mid \beta \rangle) + c_2 (\mid \alpha \rangle + \mid \beta \rangle) \\ = (c_1 + c_2) \mid \alpha \rangle + (c_1 + c_2) \mid \beta \rangle

This gives the equations :
a_n c_1 = c_1 + c_2
a_n c_2 = c_1 + c_2

The only solution is if c_1 = c_2 = 0. Obviously I am doing something wrong but I can't see it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
barefeet said:
This gives the equations :
a_n c_1 = c_1 + c_2
a_n c_2 = c_1 + c_2
The only solution is if c_1 = c_2 = 0. Obviously I am doing something wrong but I can't see it.
Are you sure that's the only solution?
 
I see, but I still get one non trivial solution out of it.
If one is 0, then both are 0. So they are either both nonzero or both 0. If they are nonzero, I can write:
a_n = \frac{c_1 + c_2}{c_1} = \frac{c_1 + c_2}{c_2}
If c_1 + c_2 =0 then a_n =0 or the c's are 0. If c_1 + c_2 is nonzero, then I can divide by it and gives me c_1 = c_2 with a_n = 2 Unnormalized I can take as eigenstate \mid \alpha \rangle + \mid \beta \rangle.
Now I can't find the other eigenstate. \mid \alpha \rangle - \mid \beta \rangle is orthogonal to this eigenstate but letting A operate on it gives me 0. Or does this just mean that it is an eigenstate with eigenvalue 0?
 
barefeet said:
Or does this just mean that it is an eigenstate with eigenvalue 0?
That's it.

Another approach is to subtract the two equations:
##a_nc_1 = c_1+c_2##
##a_nc_2 = c_1+c_2##
 
Thanks again
 
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