Commutation and Measurement of Observables

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the confusion regarding the commutation of two observables, ##\hat B## and ##\hat C##, and their eigenvectors. The initial claim is that a non-zero commutator indicates the absence of common eigenvectors, but this is challenged by the existence of a shared eigenvector, ##\vec v = (1, 0, 0)##. The conversation emphasizes that while non-commuting observables may not have a complete set of common eigenvectors, they can still share specific eigenvectors. The question of the system's state after measuring ##\hat{C}## with an eigenvalue of -1 is clarified, confirming that it corresponds to the eigenvector associated with that eigenvalue. The discussion highlights the importance of careful analysis in quantum mechanics regarding the relationships between observables and their eigenvectors.
Mr_Allod
Messages
39
Reaction score
16
Homework Statement
Let the Hilbert space be ##\mathcal H = \mathbb C^3##. Consider the two observables:
$$\hat B = \begin{pmatrix}
2 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}$$
$$\hat C = \begin{pmatrix}
-1 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{pmatrix}
$$

a. Do ##\hat B## and ##\hat C## have common eigenvectors?
b. Assume that we have done the measurement characterized by ##\hat C## and we are measuring the value -1. Then we immediately do the measurement characterized by ##\hat B## right after measuring ##\hat C##. What is the expectation value of that measurement?
Relevant Equations
Commutator Relation: ##\left[ \hat B, \hat C\right] = \hat B \hat C - \hat C \hat B##
Expectation value: ##\langle \hat B \rangle = \langle \psi | \hat B \psi \rangle##
Hello there, I am having trouble with part b. of this problem. I've solved part a. by calculating the commutator of the two observables and found it to be non-zero, which should mean that ##\hat B## and ##\hat C## do not have common eigenvectors. Although calculating the eigenvectors for each one actually yields that they do have one in common (##\vec v = (1, 0, 0)##), I chose to interpret the question as asking if they have a common set of eigenvectors, in which case my answer would be that they do not.

Now I don't really know how to approach part b. I feel like I am missing information even though I'm sure this isn't the case and I'm just not seeing something that's right in front of me. I'd appreciate it if someone could explain the concept behind part b. to help me reach a solution, thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the state of the system after the measurement of ##\hat{C}## if the result was -1?
 
DrClaude said:
What is the state of the system after the measurement of ##\hat{C}## if the result was -1?
Would it be the state given by the eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue ##\lambda = -1##?
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
Mr_Allod said:
Would it be the state given by the eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue ##\lambda = -1##?
Correct. Now that you have the state, you can calculate the expectation value of ##\hat{B}##.
 
Mr_Allod said:
Hello there, I am having trouble with part b. of this problem. I've solved part a. by calculating the commutator of the two observables and found it to be non-zero, which should mean that ##\hat B## and ##\hat C## do not have common eigenvectors.
This is not a valid argument!

Example: Due to the angular-momentum commutation relations ##[\hat{J}_x,\hat{J}_y]=\mathrm{i} \hat{J}_z## the two angular momentum components ##\hat{J}_x## and ##\hat{J}_y## don't commute, but they have a common eigenvector, namely the one with ##j=0##, ##j_z=0##. This is a common eigenvector of all three angular-momentum components with the eigenvalue ##0##. Of course there's no common complete orthonormal set of eigenvectors, because the operators don't commute, but there can be special cases of common eigenvectors although two self-adjoint operators don't commute. So you have to check it carefully for any given example!

In your example the two matrices have the obvious common eigenvector ##(1,0,0)^{\text{T}}##!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K