http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/qm/lectures/node53.html(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

So I was reading this and I don't understand how he goes from 658 to 661 using the completeness relation. In 661 if you use the completeness relaton can you get rid of the I n,l''>s by doing the outer product and ignoring the inner product first? I mean if you get rid of I n,l''>s you get <n,l'I H_1 In,l1>which equals lamba etc.

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

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Degenerate Perturbation Theory

Loading...

Similar Threads - Degenerate Perturbation Theory | Date |
---|---|

I Degenerate Perturbation Theory | Sep 28, 2016 |

A Degenerate perturbation theory -- Sakurai | Apr 13, 2016 |

Wigner-Eckart theorem in Stark effect | Dec 28, 2014 |

Conmutative Hermitian operator in degenerate perturbation theory | Jul 2, 2014 |

Sakurai Degenerate Perturbation Theory: projection operators | May 4, 2014 |

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