- #1
syang9
- 61
- 0
[SOLVED] commutation of observables
Prove: If the observables (operators) Q1 and Q2 are both constant of the motion for some Hamiltonian H, then the commutator [Q1, Q2] is also a constant of the motion.
okay, first question.. am i being asked to prove that [[Q1, Q2], H] = 0? If so, then consider the following.. if not.. well, that sucks.
Given that they are 'constant of the motion', that means they commute with the Hamiltonian, right..? So that gives us
[tex]
\[[H,Q_1 ] = 0\]
\[[H,Q_2 ] = 0\]
[/tex]
Then maybe I can say..
[tex]
\[HQ_1 - Q_1 H = HQ_2 - Q_2 H\]
[/tex]
I can multiply through the left side by Q2 to get
[tex]
\[Q_2 HQ_1 - Q_2 Q_1 H = 0\]
[/tex]
Since Q2 is an observable, it's a hermitan operator, which allows me to move Q2 to the other side in that first term, like this..
[tex]
\[HQ_1 Q_2 - Q_2 Q_1 H = 0\]
[/tex]
which is equivalent to saying
[tex]
\[[H,Q_1 Q_2 ] = 0\]
[/tex]
Going back to what I was asked to prove (hopefully), which was:
[tex]
\[[[Q_1 Q_2 - Q_2 Q_1 ],H] = 0\]
[/tex]
Expanding that out, we have
[tex]
\[Q_1 Q_2 H - Q_2 Q_1 H - HQ_1 Q_2 + HQ_2 Q_1 = 0\]
[/tex]
but I've already proved that [H, Q1Q2] = 0, so we can rewrite this as:
[tex]
\[
({Q_1 Q_2 H - HQ_1 Q_2 }) - ({Q_2 Q_1 H - HQ_2 Q_1 }) = 0
\]
[/tex]
which we know is equivalent to
[tex]
\[[H,Q_1 Q_2 ] - [H,Q_1 Q_2 ] = 0\]
[/tex]
Since [H, Q1Q2] = 0, both sides are equal to zero, and the proof is... complete? Have I done anything wrong?
Homework Statement
Prove: If the observables (operators) Q1 and Q2 are both constant of the motion for some Hamiltonian H, then the commutator [Q1, Q2] is also a constant of the motion.
okay, first question.. am i being asked to prove that [[Q1, Q2], H] = 0? If so, then consider the following.. if not.. well, that sucks.
Given that they are 'constant of the motion', that means they commute with the Hamiltonian, right..? So that gives us
[tex]
\[[H,Q_1 ] = 0\]
\[[H,Q_2 ] = 0\]
[/tex]
Then maybe I can say..
[tex]
\[HQ_1 - Q_1 H = HQ_2 - Q_2 H\]
[/tex]
I can multiply through the left side by Q2 to get
[tex]
\[Q_2 HQ_1 - Q_2 Q_1 H = 0\]
[/tex]
Since Q2 is an observable, it's a hermitan operator, which allows me to move Q2 to the other side in that first term, like this..
[tex]
\[HQ_1 Q_2 - Q_2 Q_1 H = 0\]
[/tex]
which is equivalent to saying
[tex]
\[[H,Q_1 Q_2 ] = 0\]
[/tex]
Going back to what I was asked to prove (hopefully), which was:
[tex]
\[[[Q_1 Q_2 - Q_2 Q_1 ],H] = 0\]
[/tex]
Expanding that out, we have
[tex]
\[Q_1 Q_2 H - Q_2 Q_1 H - HQ_1 Q_2 + HQ_2 Q_1 = 0\]
[/tex]
but I've already proved that [H, Q1Q2] = 0, so we can rewrite this as:
[tex]
\[
({Q_1 Q_2 H - HQ_1 Q_2 }) - ({Q_2 Q_1 H - HQ_2 Q_1 }) = 0
\]
[/tex]
which we know is equivalent to
[tex]
\[[H,Q_1 Q_2 ] - [H,Q_1 Q_2 ] = 0\]
[/tex]
Since [H, Q1Q2] = 0, both sides are equal to zero, and the proof is... complete? Have I done anything wrong?
Last edited: