Commutation relations between P and L

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the computation of the commutation relations between the momentum operator ##\underline{\hat{P}}## and the angular momentum operator ##\underline{\hat{L}}##. The user attempts to derive the relation ##[\hat{P_j}, \hat{L_i}]## using the properties of operators and the Levi-Civita symbol, ultimately concluding that the expression is zero. However, they realize that the use of the index j twice in the commutator leads to an error in their reasoning. The correct approach involves relabeling indices to maintain the integrity of the vector behavior of momentum components under rotations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics operators, specifically momentum and angular momentum operators.
  • Familiarity with commutation relations and their significance in quantum mechanics.
  • Knowledge of the Levi-Civita symbol and its properties in tensor calculus.
  • Ability to manipulate indices in mathematical expressions, particularly in the context of quantum operators.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the Levi-Civita symbol in detail to avoid common pitfalls in tensor calculations.
  • Learn about the physical significance of commutation relations in quantum mechanics.
  • Explore the derivation of angular momentum operators and their commutation relations in quantum mechanics.
  • Investigate the role of index notation in simplifying complex operator expressions.
USEFUL FOR

Students of quantum mechanics, physicists working with angular momentum and momentum operators, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of quantum theory.

CAF123
Gold Member
Messages
2,918
Reaction score
87

Homework Statement


Compute the commutation relations of the momentum operator ##\underline{\hat{P}}## and the angular momentum operator ##\underline{\hat{L}}##

Homework Equations


$$\hat{L_i} = -i\hbar \epsilon_{ijk} x_j \frac{\partial}{\partial_k} = \epsilon_{ijk}x_j \hat{P_k}$$

The Attempt at a Solution


$$[\hat{P_j}, \hat{L_i}] = [\hat{P_j}, \epsilon_{ijk} x_j \hat{P_k}] = [\hat{P_j}, \epsilon_{ijk} \hat{X_j}]\hat{P_k} + \epsilon_{ijk} \hat{X_j}[\hat{P_j}, \hat{P_k}],$$ where I used the relation ##[A,BC] = [A,B]C + B[A,C]## with A,B and C operators. The latter term is zero, and so this reduces to ##[\hat{P_j}, \epsilon_{ijk} \hat{X_j}]\hat{P_k}## which I think is the same as ##-i\hbar \epsilon_{ijk} \delta_{ij} \hat{P_k}##

I then said ##\delta_{ij}## is only nonzero (=1) when ##i=j##. But if ##i=j## then the tensor ##\epsilon_{ijk} = 0## hence my conclusion was that the expression is zero always.
I checked the answer online, and it appears this is not always the case. So where is my error?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This cannot work from the very beginning, because you used the index j twice in your commutator, once as a free index at the momentum component and once when summing over the Levi-Civita-symbol. Relabel the free index, and you'll find out that the momentum components behave under rotations as a vector as it must be!
 
Thanks vanhees71, I got it. A similar question is to compute ##[\hat{L_i}, \hat{L_j}]## This can be rewritten as $$[\epsilon_{ipq} \hat{X_p} \hat{P_q}, \epsilon_{jrs} \hat{X_r}\hat{P_s}]$$Now using the relation [A,BC] in the previous post and then subsequently [AB,C] = A[B,C] + [A,C]B, I obtain after some cancellation of terms $$-\epsilon_{ipq} \epsilon_{jrs} \hat{X_p}i\hbar \delta_{rq} \hat{P_s} + \epsilon_{jrs}\epsilon_{ipq} \hat{X_r} i\hbar \delta_{ps}
\hat{P_q}$$Now the first term is non zero only when r=q and the second term only non zero when p=s. So relabel the indices in the Levi-Civita tensors to give the equivalent$$-\epsilon_{ipr} \epsilon_{jrs} \hat{X_p} i\hbar \hat{P_s} + \epsilon_{jrp}\epsilon_{ipq} \hat{X_r} i\hbar\hat{P_q}$$ Rewrite in the following way: $$-\epsilon_{rip} \epsilon_{rsj} \hat{X_p} i\hbar \hat{P_s} + \epsilon_{pjr}\epsilon_{pqi} \hat{X_r} i\hbar\hat{P_q}$$

Using the identity ##\epsilon_{ikl} \epsilon_{imn} = \delta_{km} \delta_{ln} - \delta_{kn}\delta_{lm}## I have that my expression is equal to: $$-\delta_{is} \delta_{pj} \hat{X_p}i \hbar \hat{P_s} + \delta_{ij} \delta_{ps} \hat{X_p} i\hbar \hat{P_s} + \delta_{jq}\delta_{ri} \hat{X_r} i \hbar \hat{P_q} - \delta_{ji} \delta_{rq} \hat{X_r} i\hbar \hat{P_q}$$
First term nonzero when i=s and p=j, and similar analysis for the other terms. I end up with zero and this is not correct. Can you see where I went wrong?
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
747
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K