Correct understanding of symmetrization requirement?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dracobook
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the symmetrization requirement for wave functions in quantum mechanics, particularly for two-electron states as described in Griffiths' "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics." Participants explore the conditions under which the total wave function must be antisymmetric for fermions and the implications of this requirement on the spatial and spin components of the wave function.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding Griffiths' treatment of the symmetrization requirement, noting that the total wave function for fermions must be antisymmetric, while the position wave function can be either symmetric or antisymmetric depending on the spinor.
  • Another participant confirms that the total wave function for fermions must be antisymmetric when considering the Pauli exclusion principle.
  • It is noted that Griffiths derives the Pauli exclusion principle by showing that antisymmetric positional wave functions lead to cancellation when particle states are identical.
  • A participant explains that the total wave function is obtained by multiplying the positional wave function by the spin wave function.
  • One participant elaborates on the construction of the N-body Hilbert space for indistinguishable particles, emphasizing the need for antisymmetrized tensor products of single-particle states and providing detailed expressions for two-electron wave functions.
  • Another participant references Townsend's quantum mechanics book as a potential resource for further clarification on the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the total wave function for fermions must be antisymmetric, but there is some confusion and debate regarding the specific roles of the spatial and spin components in this requirement. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of Griffiths' text and the implications of the symmetrization requirement.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence on definitions and interpretations of the symmetrization requirement, as well as the potential for confusion arising from Griffiths' presentation of the topic. There are unresolved aspects regarding the mathematical steps involved in deriving the total wave function.

dracobook
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I want to make sure I have the right understanding of the symmetrization requirement...in particular what is discussed in section 5.1 in Griffiths' Introduction to Quantum Mechanics 2nd edition. When we have a two-electron state, the wave function (described by the product both its position wave function and spinor) has to be antisymmetric with exchange of the electron. Since the singlet spinor function is antisymmetric, it must be combined with a symmetric spatial function in order for it to properly describe a fermion (in this case an electron).

I am just really confused because Griffiths seems to derive that just the position wave function is antisymmetric for fermions and symmetric for bosons on pages 203-205.

However, on page 210 he seems to pull out of thin air the fact that the whole wave function has to be antisymmetric for fermions and symmetric for bosons and the position wave function for a fermion can be BOTH symmetric or antisymmetric depending on the corresponding spinor.

Any help with the clarification would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
D
 
Physics news on Phys.org
of course,it should be the total wave function for fermion to be antisymmetric when pauli principle is taken into account.
 
yes. But Griffiths derives Pauli exclusion principle by showing that when the positional wave functions are antisymmetric with exchange, then the wave function cancels when the particle states are the same.
 
you will have to multiply the positional wave function by those spin wave function to obtain the total wave function.
 
For fermions the N-body Hilbert space of indistinguishable particles is constructed by the totally antisymmetrized tensor products of N single-particle states. Let's discuss non-relativistic quantum mechanics, where spin and momentum (or spin and position) are compatible observables.

An electron has spin 1/2, and a nice single-particle basis is given by the position-spin basis, |\vec{x},\sigma \rangle, where \vec{x} \in \mathbb{R}^3 and \sigma \in \{-1/2,+1/2 \}.

Now let's look at the Hilbert space for two electrons. It consists of all superpositions of antisymmetrized single-particle states, i.e.,
|\Psi \rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (|\psi_1 \rangle \otimes |\psi_2 \rangle - |\psi_2 \rangle \otimes |\psi_1 \rangle).
The wave two-particle wave function is given by
\Psi(\vec{x}_1,\sigma_1;\vec{x}_2,\sigma_2) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left [\psi_1(\vec{x}_1,\sigma_1) \psi_2(\vec{x}_2,\sigma_2)-\psi_2(\vec{x}_1,\sigma_1) \psi_1(\vec{x}_2,\sigma_2) \right].
Here
\psi_j(\vec{x},\sigma)=\langle \vec{x},\sigma|\psi_j \rangle
are the single-electron wave functions.

Of course you can also use a basis with good total spin S. For two spin-1/2 particles the total spin can be either 0 or 1. There is only one state with total spin 0:
|\vec{x}_1,\vec{x}_2,S=0,\Sigma=0 \rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (|\vec{x}_1, 1/2 \rangle \otimes |\vec{x}_2,-1/2 \rangle - | \vec{x}_1,-1/2 \rangle \otimes |\vec{x}_2,-1/2 \rangle.
The S=0 part of the above antisymmetrized product state is thus
\Psi(\vec{x}_1,\vec{x}_2,S=0,\Sigma=0)=\frac{1}{2} \left [\psi_1(\vec{x}_1,1/2) \psi_2(\vec{x}_2,-1/2)-\psi_2(\vec{x}_1,1/2) \psi_1(\vec{x}_2,-1/2) - \psi_1(\vec{x}_1,-1/2) \psi_2(\vec{x}_2,1/2)+\psi_2(\vec{x}_1,-1/2) \psi_1(\vec{x}_2,1/2) \right].
It's obviously antisymmetric, when interchanging the single-particle spins and symmetric, when interchanging the single-particle positions. Alltogether it's still totally antisymmetric.

The same you can do for the S=1 basis,
|\vec{x}_1,\vec{x}_2,S=1,\Sigma=1 \rangle=|\vec{x}_1,1/2 \rangle \otimes \vec{x}_2,1/2 \rangle,
|\vec{x}_1,\vec{x}_2,S=1,\Sigma=0 \rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left (|\vec{x}_1,1/2 \rangle \otimes |\vec{x}_2,-1/2 \rangle + |\vec{x}_1,-1/2 \rangle \otimes |\vec{x}_2,1/2 \rangle \right ),
|\vec{x}_1,\vec{x}_2,S=1,\Sigma=-1 \rangle=|\vec{x}_1,-1/2 \rangle \otimes \vec{x}_2,-1/2 \rangle.
The two-particle wave function for all three states is of course symmetric under exchange of the single-particle spins and thus necessarily antisymmetric under exchange of the single-particle positions. In total it's antisymmetric under single-particle-state exchange.

Any other two-body state is given as a superposition of several such antisymmetrized two-particle product states.
 
dracobook, this excerpt from Townsend's excellent QM book should help clarify things.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K