I am reading the first chapter of Sakurai's Modern QM and from pages 30 and 32 respectively, I understand that(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

(i) If [A,B]=0, then they share the same set of eigenstates.

(ii) Conversely, if two operators have the same eigenstates, then they commute.

But we know that [itex][L^2,L_z]=0[/itex], [itex][L^2,L_x]=0[/itex] and [itex][L_z,L_x]\neq 0[/itex].

From the first equality, and (i) I gather that L² and L_z have the same eigenkets. From (i) and the second equality, I get that L² and L_x have the same eigenkets. So L_z and L_x have the same eigenkets. Hence, by (ii), they commute, which contradicts [itex][L_z,L_x]\neq 0[/itex].

Where did I go wrong??

**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!

# Commutation relations trouble (basic)

Loading...

Similar Threads for Commutation relations trouble | Date |
---|---|

Commutation relation | Jan 18, 2018 |

I Complex scalar field commutation relations | Aug 9, 2017 |

I Angular momentum operator commutation relation | May 10, 2017 |

A Maxwell field commutation relations | Nov 2, 2016 |

A Complex scalar field - commutation relations | Sep 18, 2016 |

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