Cyclic permutation and operators

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating that the spin operators Sx and Sy do not commute, specifically evaluating the expression SxSy - SySx and expressing the result in terms of Sz. The user seeks clarification on how to show that this relation holds cyclically among the three Pauli spin operators. They mention the commutation relation, which indicates that the difference between the operators results in a multiple of the third operator, highlighting the cyclic nature of these relationships. The user also shares their confusion regarding the cyclic permutation aspect and appreciates any assistance in understanding this concept better. Overall, the conversation revolves around the properties of Pauli spin matrices in quantum mechanics.
MRAH
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi there

I am working through the problems in R.I.G. Hughes book the structure and interpretation of quantum mechanics and have hit a wall in the last part of the following question:

Show that Sx and Sy do not commute, and evaluate SxSy-SySx. Express this difference in terms of Sz, and show that this relation holds cyclically among the three operators.

I guess it has something to do with cyclic permutation. Any way thanks for your time and if you know where I can find the answers to the problems in this book that would help me later I suppose.

S_{}x= 1/2 \left(0 1
10\right) S_{}y= 1/2 \left(0 -i
i 0\right) S_{}z= 1/2 \left(1 0
0 -1\right)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
They are just referring to the short hand notation: [Si,Sj] = SiSj - SjSi = 2i Sk where (i,j,k) can be (x,y,z) or (y,z,x) or (z,x,y), hence the phrase "this relation holds cyclically among the three operators".

S represent the pauli spin matrices.
 
Last edited:
My confusion is with the section in bold type and how exactly to show the relation holding cyclically among the operators. What I was trying to depict below was the Pauli spin matrices.
 
By "show that this relation holds cyclically among the three operators" they mean what I have written in my earlier post. I edited the commutation relation (in boldface) to comply with Pauli spin matrices. Made a few other changes to explain it better. Is that helpful?
 
Yes thanks a lot, I appreciate your help.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
897
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
867
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
35
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K