Commutators and Their Properties in Quantum Mechanics

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter vertices
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Commutator Commute
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of commutators in quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on the expressions involving operators defined in terms of position and momentum. Participants explore the implications of these definitions on the commutation relations, particularly in the context of an exam question.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that the commutator [A_k , (A^{+}_{i}+A_i)(A^{+}_{j}-A_j)] equals zero based on the assumption that [\hat{x}_{j}, \hat{p}_{i}] = 0, suggesting that the ordering of operators does not affect the result.
  • Another participant questions the validity of this conclusion when i equals j, indicating that the situation may become more complex.
  • Further discussion highlights that the specific question asks for the commutator [A_k , \hat{L}_{ij}], which may require considering cases where i equals j, despite initial assumptions about distinct indices leading to a zero commutator.
  • One participant clarifies that if i equals j, then \hat{L}_{ii} results in zero, implying that the commutator [A^{+}_{j}, \hat{L}_{ij}] would also be zero in this case.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the case where i equals j should be considered, with some asserting that it complicates the analysis while others maintain that it is necessary for a complete understanding of the problem. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these cases on the commutator results.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that the analysis may become complicated if any of the indices are the same, and there are unresolved questions about the implications of these cases on the commutation relations.

vertices
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
If we define:

[tex]A_{j}=\omega \hat{x}_{j}+i \hat{p}_{j}[/tex]

and

[tex]A^{+}_{j}=\omega \hat{x}_{j}-i \hat{p}_{j}[/tex]

Would it be true to say:

[tex][A_k , (A^{+}_{i}+A_i)(A^{+}_{j}-A_j)]=0[/tex]

My reasoning is that, because

[tex][\hat{x}_{j}, \hat{p}_{i}]=0[/tex]

the the ordering of the contents of commutation bracket shouldn't matter (as [tex]\hat{x}_{j} \hat{p}_{i}=\hat{p}_{i}\hat{x}_{j}[/tex]), so we simply get that:

[tex][A_k , (A^{+}_{i}+A_i)(A^{+}_{j}-A_j)]=A_{k}(A^{+}_{i}+A_i)(A^{+}_{j}-A_j)-(A^{+}_{i}+A_i)(A^{+}_{j}-A_j)A_{k}= A_{k}(A^{+}_{i}+A_i)(A^{+}_{j}-A_j)-A_{k}(A^{+}_{i}+A_i)(A^{+}_{j}-A_j)=0[/tex]

This seems obvious to me, but it would make a 10 mark exam question too easy! Would be grateful if someone could confirm whether this is right or not.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What about the case where i=j?
 
Hurkyl said:
What about the case where i=j?

The question, specifically, is to find:

[tex][A_k , \hat{L}_{ij}]=[A_k, (A^{+}_{i}+A_i)(A^{+}_{j}-A_j)][/tex]

So I am not sure we need to consider the case where i=j.

Ofcourse it would get *really* messy if any of the subscripts are the same. But if i,j and k are not the same, the commutator would be zero, right?
 
vertices said:
The question, specifically, is to find:

[tex][A_k , \hat{L}_{ij}]=[A_k, (A^{+}_{i}+A_i)(A^{+}_{j}-A_j)][/tex]

So I am not sure we need to consider the case where i=j.
Sounds like you do. You said the question specifically asks you to find that commutator -- not to find that commutator in the special case where i,j,k are all distinct!

Ofcourse it would get *really* messy if any of the subscripts are the same.
It might not be as bad as you think.

But if i,j and k are not the same, the commutator would be zero, right?
Yes.
 
Hurkyl said:
Sounds like you do. You said the question specifically asks you to find that commutator -- not to find that commutator in the special case where i,j,k are all distinct!It might not be as bad as you think.Yes.

Well

[tex]\hat L_{ij}:=\hat{x}_{i}\hat{p}_{j} - \hat{x}_{j}\hat{p}_{i}[/tex]

So if i=j

[tex]\hat L_{ii}:=\hat{x}_{i}\hat{p}_{i} - \hat{x}_{i}\hat{p}_{i}=0[/tex]

So the commutator:

[tex] [A^{+}_{j},\hat L_{ij}][/tex]

would also be zero in this case as well

:)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K