Density matrix, change of basis, I don't understand the basics

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,928
Reaction score
272

Homework Statement


Hello people,
I am trying to understand a problem statement as well as the density operator, but I still don't get it, desperation is making me posting here.
The problem comes as
problem said:
We would like to describe N non interacting particles of spin one half.
Calculate the density matrix in a basis of eigenfunctions common to ##S_z## and ##S^2## for one spin 1/2 in a state ##|\chi>##, and use the rotation operator to transform that matrix into the basis in which it is diagonal.
The problem then continues with other questions but I'm having troubles with the very first one, for now.

Homework Equations



Diagonalization of the density matrix: ##\hat \rho _{\text{diagonal}} =U^* \rho U## where U is the rotation matrix, it's a unitary operator.

The Attempt at a Solution


First, I do not really know how to form the density matrix. The definition I have is "##\hat \rho = \sum _i p_i \left | \phi _i \right > \left < \phi _i \right |##" where ##p_i## is the probability to find the system in the state ##|\phi _i>##.
I see this as a sum of many operators whose matricial form I am not sure about. So I don't know how to get the matrix representation of the density operator from there.

Another approach is, ##\hat \rho = \begin{bmatrix} \left < \psi _1 \right | \hat \rho \left | \psi _1 \right > && \left < \psi _1 \right | \hat \rho \left | \psi _2 \right > \\ \left < \psi _2 \right | \hat \rho \left | \psi _1 \right > && \left < \psi _2 \right | \hat \rho \left | \psi _2 \right > \end{bmatrix}## but my problem is that I don't know how the density operator acts on psi_1 and psi_2, the eigenfunctions of ##S_z##.
I know that written in the basis that diagonalizes ##S_z## and ##S^2##, ##\psi_1 = \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix}## and ##\psi_2 = \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \end{bmatrix}##. But still, this doesn't get me any further.

Another thoughts: since ## \left | \chi \right >## is arbitrary I can write it as a linear combinations of psi_1 and psi_2 such as ## \left | \chi \right > =\alpha \left | \psi _1 \right > + \beta \left | \psi _2 \right >## where alpha and beta are in principle complex valued.
Maybe I can also think of ## \left | \chi \right >## as a rotation of ## \left | \psi _1 \right >## by arbitrary angles theta and phi if I work in spherical coordinates.
The matrix that rotates from an angle phi and theta can be written under the form ##U=\cos \left ( \frac{\theta}{2} \right ) \hat 1 -i \sin \left ( \frac{\theta}{2} \right ) \hat u \cdot \vec \sigma## where ##\hat u## is the unit vector of the axis of rotation and the sigma is the vector of the Pauli matrices.

But overall I'm still stuck at even going into the right direction to solve the problem.

The answer (for the diagonal matrix) is, if I'm not mistaken, ##\hat \rho _{\text{diagonalized}}=\begin{bmatrix} 1 &&0 \\ 0&&0 \end{bmatrix}##, that is, if I remember well the solution I've seen.

Any tip, help and explanation is appreciated! Thanking you.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you have any additional information about the state ##|\chi\rangle##? Are you to assume that it is a general state? What is the density matrix if the particles are all in this state?
 
Orodruin said:
Do you have any additional information about the state ##|\chi\rangle##? Are you to assume that it is a general state? What is the density matrix if the particles are all in this state?

No, I do not have any more information about that state. As I understand it, it's a general state, a linear combination of ##|\uparrow >## and ##|\downarrow >##.
I don't know the answer to your question about the density matrix. I think the answer will depend upon the chosen basis.
 
Alright, I'm not sure where this problem is really going, but let's write ##\left|\chi\right>=\alpha\left|z_+\right>+\beta\left|z_- \right>## for complex ##\alpha,\beta## such that ##|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2=1##, which is the most general pure state one can write down in a 2 state system.

How would I write down the density matrix in the ##\left|z_+ \right>,\left|z_- \right>## basis?
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Start from the definition of the density matrix and the assumption that the particle is in the state ##|\chi\rangle## with probability 1. What is the density matrix then?

Since you need to express the state in some way, start by assuming that it is a general linear combination of up and down eigenstates.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
The general rule to get the matrix of components of an operator T, with respect to a particular ordered basis ##(e_i)_{i=1}^n## is ##T_{ij}=(Te_j)_i##. The right-hand side is the ith component of the vector ##Te_j##. This is equal to ##\langle e_i,Te_j\rangle##, so in bra-ket notation, we have ##T_{ij}=\langle i|T|j\rangle##, where ##|j\rangle## is the ket notation for the basis vector ##e_j##. See the https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=694922 if you need more information about this.

The problem asks for the density operator of a single particle in the pure state ##|\chi\rangle##. I don't know how to answer that in the form of a hint, so I'll just say it: ##\rho=|\chi\rangle\langle\chi|##.

That matrix near the end of your post #1 is the matrix of components of ##|\uparrow\rangle\langle\uparrow|## with respect to the ordered basis ##(|\uparrow\rangle,|\downarrow\rangle)##. (You should use the formula in the first paragraph of this post to verify this). So it's also the matrix of components of ##|\chi\rangle\langle\chi|## with respect to the ordered basis ##(|\chi\rangle,|\psi\rangle)##, where ##|\psi\rangle## is some unit vector in the orthogonal complement of ##\{|\chi\rangle\}##.

I haven't worked out the solution to this problem, so I don't know what exactly will be useful. But the first thing that comes to mind is that every vector in this space is an eigenstate of an operator of the form ##\vec n\cdot\vec S##, where ##\vec n## is some unit vector in ##\mathbb R^3##. This seems relevant, since you're asked to use a rotation operator.

A rotation around the z axis is probably not going to be sufficient.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Thank you very much guys so far.
Using Fredrik's notation, I do not know how to find the density matrix because it seems to be necessary to know how T acts on ##\left | j \right >##.
Or using the notation in my first post, how ##\hat \rho## acts on ##\left | \psi _i \right >##.
 
fluidistic said:
Thank you very much guys so far.
Using Fredrik's notation, I do not know how to find the density matrix because it seems to be necessary to know how T acts on ##\left | j \right >##.
Or using the notation in my first post, how ##\hat \rho## acts on ##\left | \psi _i \right >##.

Frederik gave you the answer in his post basically, but I can expand on that (in my notation since this is a 2 state problem, I think the ijk indices are overboard here). We have ##\rho=\left|\chi\right>\left<\chi\right|##. Given that ##\left|\chi\right>=\alpha\left|z_+\right>+\beta\left|z_-\right>## what do you think ##\rho## equals in terms of ##\left|z_+\right>,\left|z_-\right>##?
 
fluidistic said:
Thank you very much guys so far.
Using Fredrik's notation, I do not know how to find the density matrix because it seems to be necessary to know how T acts on ##\left | j \right >##.
Or using the notation in my first post, how ##\hat \rho## acts on ##\left | \psi _i \right >##.
The ##|\psi_i\rangle## are just ##|\uparrow\rangle## and ##|\downarrow\rangle##, and ##\rho## is just ##|\chi\rangle\langle\chi|## where ##|\chi\rangle## is a linear combination of those two vectors.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #10
I'm very slow and sloppy with Dirac's notation (our professor never taught it to us).
Here is an attempt of calculating the first entry of the matrix: ##\left < \uparrow \right | \rho \left | \uparrow \right >##.
I do it by parts: ##\rho \left | \uparrow \right > = \left | \chi \right > \left < \chi | \uparrow \right > =\left | \chi \right > (\overline \alpha \left < \uparrow \right | +\overline \beta \left < \downarrow \right | ) \left | \uparrow \right >=\left | \chi \right > \overline \alpha \left < \uparrow | \uparrow \right > = \left | \chi \right > \overline \alpha##.
So that ##\left < \uparrow \right | \rho \left | \uparrow \right > =\left < \uparrow | \chi \right > \overline \alpha =\left < \uparrow \right | (\alpha \left | \uparrow \right > + \beta \left | \downarrow \right > ) \overline \alpha =\overline \alpha ^2 ##.
Is this correct so far?
Edit: Can't be correct I guess... the entry has to be real...
 
  • #11
You can do it that way, but it seems quite convoluted. Your calculation is correct except for the fact that ##\alpha\bar{\alpha}=|\alpha|^2## so you did get a real number at the end. But not all entries in the density matrix have to be real anyways, it is a Hermitean matrix, so it is in fact a complex matrix. An easier way would be to perhaps just write ##\left|\chi\right>\left<\chi\right|=(\alpha\left|z_+\right>+\beta\left|z_-\right>)(\bar{\alpha}\left<z_+\right|+\bar{\beta}\left<z_-\right|)##.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #12
Matterwave said:
You can do it that way, but it seems quite convoluted. Your calculation is correct except for the fact that ##\alpha\bar{\alpha}=|\alpha|^2## so you did get a real number at the end. But not all entries in the density matrix have to be real anyways, it is a Hermitean matrix, so it is in fact a complex matrix. An easier way would be to perhaps just write ##\left|\chi\right>\left<\chi\right|=(\alpha\left|z_+\right>+\beta\left|z_-\right>)(\bar{\alpha}\left<z_+\right|+\bar{\beta}\left<z_-\right|)##.

The problem is that I do not get any alpha. I only get the complex conjugate of it (twice). The diagonal entries must be real I think. The off-diagonal need not be real as you said.
And about the suggestion that's basically what I've used. But by parts.Nevermind, I do get the modulus of alpha squared. I got confused about the convention of the inner product. Thanks I will proceed with the other entries.
 
  • #13
Why do you have a conjugate in the second part of your calculation? I don't see a conjugate there.

Also, my suggestion was to simply foil it out and then you can basically read off the entries of the matrix, without having to go through these calculations.
 
  • #14
I suggest that you do it the way Matterwave proposed even if you want to get it in matrix representation rather than in braket notation. Multiplying the parentheses will allow you to simply read off the matrix elements. The next step is to relate the absolute values of alpha and beta upon which you will get a relation they must fulfill. I am sure you know how to parametrize this relation ...
 
  • #15
I just calculated the matrix rho the hard way: ##[\hat \rho ] =\begin{bmatrix} |\alpha | ^2 && \alpha \overline \beta \\ \overline \alpha \beta && |b| ^2 \end{bmatrix}##.
Orodruin, are you suggesting me to replace ##|\beta |^2## by ##1- |\alpha | ^2##?

Edit: I've just tried your way MatterWave. Indeed much better! I get rho as a sum of operators and I can see that the coefficients are the entries of the matrix.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
You could make that substitution if you wanted, but I don't see how it will really help you. The next part of the problem is to rotate that matrix so it becomes diagonal. To do that though, one should use a little ingenuity instead of brute force. In fact it is much easier to figure out the result of this rotation than the rotation matrix itself.

Frederick already gave you the answer in his post earlier to this question, but, in which basis will the density matrix be diagonal? And what will the density matrix be in such a basis? (Hint: a pure state has what kind of a diagonal density matrix?)
 
  • #17
Matterwave said:
You could make that substitution if you wanted, but I don't see how it will really help you. The next part of the problem is to rotate that matrix so it becomes diagonal. To do that though, one should use a little ingenuity instead of brute force. In fact it is much easier to figure out the result of this rotation than the rotation matrix itself.

Frederick already gave you the answer in his post earlier to this question, but, in which basis will the density matrix be diagonal? And what will the density matrix be in such a basis? (Hint: a pure state has what kind of a diagonal density matrix?)

A pure state has a 1 somewhere in the diagonal, all the other entries are 0.
 
  • #18
Yeah, so you already know the answer. Do you still need to find the rotation matrix? The problem did not specify what exactly you were looking for.
 
  • #19
Yeah I must find the rotation matrix and apply it to diagonalize rho.

I've just found the matrix ##\hat n \cdot \vec S##. It's worth ##\frac{\hbar}{2} \begin{bmatrix} \cos \theta && \sin (\theta) e^{- i \phi} \\ \sin (\theta )e^{i \phi} && - \cos \theta \end{bmatrix}## where I've used the spherical coordinates, theta is the zenith angle and phi is the azimuth one.
 
  • #20
fluidistic said:
I just calculated the matrix rho the hard way: ##[\hat \rho ] =\begin{bmatrix} |\alpha | ^2 && \alpha \overline \beta \\ \overline \alpha \beta && |b| ^2 \end{bmatrix}##.
Orodruin, are you suggesting me to replace ##|\beta |^2## by ##1- |\alpha | ^2##?

Exactly, do you know of two functions of one single parameter that fulfill this relation? To completely parametrize the density matrix you will need this single parameter and the phase of ##\alpha\bar\beta##.

After that, think about how you can remove the phase by multiplying by a unitary matrix on each side. Once that is done you are almost done.
 
  • #21
fluidistic said:
Yeah I must find the rotation matrix and apply it to diagonalize rho.

I've just found the matrix ##\hat n \cdot \vec S##. It's worth ##\begin{bmatrix} \cos \theta && \sin (\theta) e^{- i \phi} \\ \sin (\theta )e^{i \phi} && - \cos \theta \end{bmatrix}## where I've used the spherical coordinates, theta is the zenith angle and phi is the azimuth one.

How are your ##\theta,\phi## related to ##\alpha,\beta##? And how did you come up with this matrix?
 
  • #22
Orodruin said:
Exactly, do you know of two functions of one single parameter that fulfill this relation? To completely parametrize the density matrix you will need this single parameter and the phase of ##\alpha\bar\beta##.

After that, think about how you can remove the phase by multiplying by a unitary matrix on each side. Once that is done you are almost done.
Hmm I'll have to think about it, I'm not sure as of now.

Matterwave said:
How are your ##\theta,\phi## related to ##\alpha,\beta##? And how did you come up with this matrix?

I considered ##\hat n## as an arbitrary unit vector in spherical coordinates. Namely ##(\cos \phi \sin \theta, \sin \theta \sin \phi , \cos \theta )##. I considered ##\vec S=\frac{\hbar}{2} \vec \sigma## where ##\vec \sigma =(\sigma _x, \sigma _y , \sigma _z)##. Then did the dot product and replaced the sigma's by the Pauli matrices.
P.S.:I don't know the relation between theta and phi with alpha and beta.
 
  • #23
fluidistic said:
Hmm I'll have to think about it, I'm not sure as of now.

Hint:
Think about a unit circle.
 
  • #24
I've reread Fredrik's post. Apparently ##\left | \chi \right >## is an eigenstate of ##\hat n \cdot \vec S##. Which means that ##\hat n \cdot \vec S \left | \chi \right > = \pm \frac{\hbar}{2}\left | \chi \right > ##. By writting chi has a linear combination of "up" and "down" states I think I could get the relation between alpha, beta and theta, phi.
 
  • #25
Well, once you relate ##\alpha,\beta## to ##\theta,\phi## then you're done (there will be 1 phase that is left arbitrary however, as an overall phase that could be multiplied to the density matrix).

Alternatively, you can try to think about this physically, and Oro's suggestion will make the calculations a lot easier.

Here's a hint on how to implement Oro's suggestion. Every complex number can be described as a (real) magnitude and a phase: ##\alpha = |\alpha|e^{i\phi},~\beta=|\beta|e^{i\delta}##. Which trig identity does the restriction ##|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2=1## look like?
 
  • #26
Matterwave said:
Well, once you relate ##\alpha,\beta## to ##\theta,\phi## then you're done (there will be 1 phase that is left arbitrary however, as an overall phase that could be multiplied to the density matrix).

Alternatively, you can try to think about this physically, and Oro's suggestion will make the calculations a lot easier.

Here's a hint on how to implement Oro's suggestion. Every complex number can be described as a (real) magnitude and a phase: ##\alpha = |\alpha|e^{i\phi},~\beta=|\beta|e^{i\delta}##. Which trig identity does the restriction ##|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2=1## look like?

I'll do both ways. The last thing of your post looks like a unit circle.

I reach some non sense via the road ##\hat n \cdot \vec S \left | \chi \right > = \pm \frac{\hbar}{2}\left | \chi \right >##. A relation impossible to satisfy.

Edit: I know why, the eingenvalues of S_z are not ##\pm \hbar /2##. The 1/2 shouldn't be there.
 
Last edited:
  • #27
fluidistic said:
I'll do both ways. The last thing of your post looks like a unit circle.

And how do we normally parametrize the unit circle?

The final U will be arbitrary up to two phases. If you have found one U you can always multiply it by a diagonal matrix containing phases only (which means two phases since it is a 2x2 matrix) from the right and the relation will still be fulfilled.
 
  • #28
Orodruin said:
And how do we normally parametrize the unit circle?

The final U will be arbitrary up to two phases. If you have found one U you can always multiply it by a diagonal matrix containing phases only (which means two phases since it is a 2x2 matrix) from the right and the relation will still be fulfilled.
I'd say ##(\cos t , \sin t)##.

I got 2 equations using ##\hat n \cdot \vec S \left | \chi \right > = \hbar \left | \chi \right >##. I reached that ##\alpha (\cos (\theta ) -1 ) + \beta \sin (\theta ) e^{-i\phi } =0## and ##\alpha \sin ( \theta ) e^{i \phi} - \beta (1+ \cos \theta ) =0##.

Edit: I can replace 1- cos theta and 1+ cos theta by sine squared and cosine squared of theta over two. But I'm getting lost.
 
Last edited:
  • #29
Why is the relation impossible to satisfy? ##\hat{n}\cdot\vec{S}## is a trace-less hermitian matrix, and definitely has eigenvalues and eigenvectors. But it seems to me that this is the harder method, since after getting ##\hat{n}\cdot\vec{S}## you still have to get the rotation matrix ##U##. I'm not sure I can at the moment figure out how to do it this way. I would definitely think of it in a more physical way.

What's the equation for the unit circle? How do you parametrize the unit circle?

Frederick told you that the basis in which ##\rho## is diagonal is the basis ##(\chi,\psi)## where we must have ##\left<\psi|\chi\right>=0## (the orthogonal compliment). So what we need is a rotation that rotates ##\left|z_+\right>## to ##\left|\chi\right>## and ##\left|z_-\right>## to ##\left|\psi\right>##. What does ##\left|\psi\right>## look like in the ##\left|z_+\right>,\left|z_-\right>## basis? When you have the parameterization down, ##\left|\psi\right>## will look a lot better.

Remember though that ##\left|\psi\right>## will have an arbitrary phase in it that is not important.

EDIT: I myself am getting a little confused on all the phases floating around lol. I think Oro is right in his count of 2 arbitrary phases total left in the rotation matrix.
 
Last edited:
  • #30
Matterwave said:
EDIT: I myself am getting a little confused on all the phases floating around lol. I think Oro is right in his count of 2 arbitrary phases total left in the rotation matrix.

I am a neutrino phenomenologist, counting physical phases of unitary matrices is part of my job ... :wink:

Since the density matrix contains only one phase, it would be strange if you needed more than that to diagonalize it.
 
  • #31
fluidistic said:
Yeah I must find the rotation matrix and apply it to diagonalize rho.

I've just found the matrix ##\hat n \cdot \vec S##. It's worth ##\frac{\hbar}{2} \begin{bmatrix} \cos \theta && \sin (\theta) e^{- i \phi} \\ \sin (\theta )e^{i \phi} && - \cos \theta \end{bmatrix}## where I've used the spherical coordinates, theta is the zenith angle and phi is the azimuth one.

I just looked at this matrix again, and I'm sorry but you made a really confusing use of the angle θ here. The θ here is not the same as the θ you had in your previous equation for the rotation matrix ##U##. The θ in ##U=\cos(\theta/2)\hat{I}+\sin(\theta/2)\hat{n}\cdot \vec{S}## is the rotation around the unit normal vector. The θ you have in this matrix is the polar angle of the unit normal itself.

A rotation in 3-space requires 3 angles, not 2! I got confused on this point for a minute.

So once you can relate ##\alpha,\beta## which has 3 independent components, since they are 2 complex numbers with 1 constraint, with ##\theta,\phi,\eta##, where ##\eta## will replace one of the ##\theta##'s that you used, you will have the final answer.

Whew! That was confusing!
 
  • #32
Matterwave said:
I just looked at this matrix again, and I'm sorry but you made a really confusing use of the angle θ here. The θ here is not the same as the θ you had in your previous equation for the rotation matrix ##U##. The θ in ##U=\cos(\theta/2)\hat{I}+\sin(\theta/2)\hat{n}\cdot \vec{S}## is the rotation around the unit normal vector. The θ you have in this matrix is the polar angle of the unit normal itself.

A rotation in 3-space requires 3 angles, not 2! I got confused on this point for a minute.

So once you can relate ##\alpha,\beta## which has 3 independent components, since they are 2 complex numbers with 1 constraint, with ##\theta,\phi,\eta##, where ##\eta## will replace one of the ##\theta##'s that you used, you will have the final answer.

Whew! That was confusing!

I am sorry to have caused confusion MatterWave. I am aware that the theta's are different. I never used the formula for U so far, I only wrote it down in the first post as an idea that I could use later. But so far I don't see how it could help me.
Also I did not wrote it down the way you did because it seems you took ##\hat u## as ##\hat n## which is supposed to be the axis of rotation and I would not have thought about rotating around chi.
I am stuck on post 28. 2 equations with 4 unknown. I guess the idea is to express both alpha and beta in terms of both theta and phi. It doesn't look that easy at first glance but I'll try.Edit: I can't seem to express neither alpha nor beta in terms of only theta and phi.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Maybe this information can help a little. Any arbitrary unitary matrix (in suggestive notation!) can be expressed as:

$$U=\begin{bmatrix} \alpha && -\bar{\beta} \\ \beta && \bar{\alpha} \end{bmatrix}$$

With the special unitary matrices satisfying the additional condition that the determinant is 1, or ##|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2=1##.

Notice that this matrix rotates ##\left|z_+\right>## into ##\left|\chi\right>## already... and the left column is orthogonal to the right column...
 
  • #34
Thanks MatterWave, I'll think about it. Meanwhile I think I found a trick to deal with my 2 equations. I can multiply the first one by the complex conjugate of alpha for example. I'm busy right now but I'll get back to it as soon as I can.Edit:If I didn't do any algebra mistake, I reached that ##|\alpha|^2=\frac{\cos (\theta ) +1}{2}## which would mean that ##|\beta |^2=\frac{1-\cos \theta }{2}## and for some values of theta this is negative...
Also I see no dependence on phi whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
  • #35
I'm actually not sure myself how finding the matrix ##\hat{n}\cdot\vec{S}## for which ##\left|\chi\right>## is an eigen-vector is going to get you to your goal, since I'm not sure that it's guaranteed that a rotation ##U## with that matrix is going to get you the right answer. I am especially confused because I don't see how you can get the angle ##\eta## in ##U=\cos(\eta/2)\hat{I}+\sin(\eta/2)\hat{n}\cdot\vec{S}## from this method. Perhaps Frederick can expand on what he meant when he mentioned that.
 
  • #36
I haven't actually solved this problem. All I said was this:

Fredrik said:
I haven't worked out the solution to this problem, so I don't know what exactly will be useful. But the first thing that comes to mind is that every vector in this space is an eigenstate of an operator of the form ##\vec n\cdot\vec S##, where ##\vec n## is some unit vector in ##\mathbb R^3##. This seems relevant, since you're asked to use a rotation operator.
I'll give it a shot and see if I can think of something.
 
  • #37
I've edited my last post, I actually found the modulus squared of alpha in terms of theta, but I am not sure I didn't make any algebra mistake.
 
Last edited:
  • #38
Working with the modulus squared will lose you any phase information. Really the point I was trying to make earlier about the equality ##|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2=1## was I was hoping you would realize that it looks awfully similar to the trigonometric identity ##\sin^2(\theta)+\cos^2(\theta)=1##.
 
  • #39
Matterwave said:
Working with the modulus squared will lose you any phase information. Really the point I was trying to make earlier about the equality ##|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2=1## was I was hoping you would realize that it looks awfully similar to the trigonometric identity ##\sin^2(\theta)+\cos^2(\theta)=1##.

I see but that's basically what I reached then.
Because ##|\alpha | ^2=\frac{1+ \cos \theta }{2}=\cos ^2 \left ( \frac{\theta}{2} \right )## and ##|\beta |^2 =\frac{1-\cos \theta}{2} = \sin ^2 \left ( \frac{\theta}{2} \right )##.
 
  • #40
Yes, but that form is not conducive to writing out ##\alpha,\beta##.
 
  • #41
Matterwave said:
Yes, but that form is not conducive to writing out ##\alpha,\beta##.

hmm right I lose the phase information as you said.
Edit: I'll try to see if I can manage to get alpha and beta in terms of the angles, knowing their modulus squared.
 
  • #42
Make sure you keep track of the different angles that appear in this calculation. For one, the ##\theta## I defined in order to parametrize ##\alpha,\beta## will not necessarily have anything to do with the (2 other ) ##\theta##'s previously defined.

The point I was trying to get at is since you noticed that ##\sin^2(\theta)+\cos^2(\theta)=1## shouldn't I be able to write my ##\alpha,\beta## as ##\alpha=\sin(\theta')e^{i\phi'}## and ##\beta=\cos(\theta')e^{i\eta'}##? If I put this in my standard special unitary matrix form, how is this special unitary matrix decomposed into ##U=\cos(\theta/2)\hat{I}+\sin(\theta/2)\hat{n}\cdot\vec{S}##?
 
  • #43
I found a solution, sort of. But maybe you guys are already past this stage. I haven't been following the thread closely.

Let a,b be the unique complex numbers such that ##|\chi\rangle=a|+\rangle+b|-\rangle##. We have ##\rho=|\chi\rangle\langle\chi|##. Let ##|\phi\rangle## be any unit vector that's orthogonal to ##|\chi\rangle##. We'll be working with the two ordered bases ##B=\big(|+\rangle,|-\rangle\big)## and ##B'=\big(|\chi\rangle,|\phi\rangle\big)##.

It's straightforward to calculate ##[\rho]_B##. That's one of the things the problem asks us to do. I see that you've already done that, so I'll write down the result
$$[\rho]_B=\begin{pmatrix}|a|^2 & ab^*\\ a^*b & |b|^2\end{pmatrix}.$$

Regarding the rest of the problem: We can immediately tell that
$$[\rho]_{B'}=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0\\ 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}.$$ So why don't we just define the rotation operator by ##U|+\rangle=|\chi\rangle## and ##U|-\rangle=|\phi\rangle##, and then use this to determine ##_B## in terms of a and b?

This worked out nicely for me. The only thing that bugs me about this is that the problem statement seems to require you to use the rotation operator to diagonalize ##\rho##. In my approach, we use the assumptions that ##\rho## is diagonal in the B' basis and that the B' basis is obtained by applying U to the elements of B, to find U. So U is the last matrix we find of all the matrices we're interested in. When we find it, there's nothing left to do.
 
  • #44
Fredrik said:
I found a solution, sort of. But maybe you guys are already past this stage. I haven't been following the thread closely.

Let a,b be the unique complex numbers such that ##|\chi\rangle=a|+\rangle+b|-\rangle##. We have ##\rho=|\chi\rangle\langle\chi|##. Let ##|\phi\rangle## be any unit vector that's orthogonal to ##|\chi\rangle##. We'll be working with the two ordered bases ##B=\big(|+\rangle,|-\rangle\big)## and ##B'=\big(|\chi\rangle,|\phi\rangle\big)##.

It's straightforward to calculate ##[\rho]_B##. That's one of the things the problem asks us to do. I see that you've already done that, so I'll write down the result
$$[\rho]_B=\begin{pmatrix}|a|^2 & ab^*\\ a^*b & |b|^2\end{pmatrix}.$$

Regarding the rest of the problem: We can immediately tell that
$$[\rho]_{B'}=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0\\ 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}.$$ So why don't we just define the rotation operator by ##U|+\rangle=|\chi\rangle## and ##U|-\rangle=|\phi\rangle##, and then use this to determine ##_B## in terms of a and b?

This worked out nicely for me. The only thing that bugs me about this is that the problem statement seems to require you to use the rotation operator to diagonalize ##\rho##. In my approach, we use the assumptions that ##\rho## is diagonal in the B' basis and that the B' basis is obtained by applying U to the elements of B, to find U. So U is the last matrix we find of all the matrices we're interested in. When we find it, there's nothing left to do.


Yes...I was trying to guide fluid to this conclusion... I also assumed that what the problem meant by asking him to find the rotation matrix, is that he had to find the correspondence between the ##U## and a rotation in real space given by ##U=\cos(\theta/2)\hat{I}+\sin(\theta/2)\hat{n}\cdot\vec{S}##. So that's just one more step where after you find ##U## you have to decompose it in this way.
 
  • #45
I said earlier that every vector in this space is an eigenvector of ##\vec n\cdot\vec S##, where ##\vec n## is some unit vector in ##\mathbb R^3##. I just took a peek at some notes I made at least 5 years ago. I will give you some of the highlights, but no guarantee that the result is correct.

If we assume that ##|\chi\rangle =a|+\rangle+b|-\rangle## is a normalized eigenstate of ##\vec n\cdot\vec S##, with eigenvalue ##\lambda##, and that ##\vec n## is a unit vector, we can prove the following results:
\begin{align}
\lambda a&=\frac 1 2 (n^*b+n_3a)\\
\lambda b&=\frac 1 2 (na-n_3b)\\
\lambda &=\pm\frac 1 2.
\end{align} The ##n## in the first two equalities is defined by ##n=n_1+in_2##. My starting point was just to write down the eigenvalue equation with ##S_1## and ##S_2## expressed in terms of the raising and lowering operators ##S_\pm=S_1\pm iS_2##.

After deriving the results above, I verified that when those conditions are satisfied, ##|\chi\rangle## is an eigenstate with eigenvalue ##\frac 1 2## or ##-\frac 1 2##. So there are two eigenstates. I denoted them by ##|\vec n+\rangle## and ##|\vec n-\rangle##. The last thing I did was to find that
$$|\vec n\pm\rangle =N\left(|+\rangle+\frac{n_1+in_2}{n_3\pm 1}|-\rangle\right),$$ where N is a normalization constant that I didn't bother to determine.
 
  • #46
Fredrik said:
I said earlier that every vector in this space is an eigenvector of ##\vec n\cdot\vec S##, where ##\vec n## is some unit vector in ##\mathbb R^3##. I just took a peek at some notes I made at least 5 years ago. I will give you some of the highlights, but no guarantee that the result is correct.

If we assume that ##|\chi\rangle =a|+\rangle+b|-\rangle## is a normalized eigenstate of ##\vec n\cdot\vec S##, with eigenvalue ##\lambda##, and that ##\vec n## is a unit vector, we can prove the following results:
\begin{align}
\lambda a&=\frac 1 2 (n^*b+n_3a)\\
\lambda b&=\frac 1 2 (na-n_3b)\\
\lambda &=\pm\frac 1 2.
\end{align} The ##n## in the first two equalities is defined by ##n=n_1+in_2##. My starting point was just to write down the eigenvalue equation with ##S_1## and ##S_2## expressed in terms of the raising and lowering operators ##S_\pm=S_1\pm iS_2##.

After deriving the results above, I verified that when those conditions are satisfied, ##|\chi\rangle## is an eigenstate with eigenvalue ##\frac 1 2## or ##-\frac 1 2##. So there are two eigenstates. I denoted them by ##|\vec n+\rangle## and ##|\vec n-\rangle##. The last thing I did was to find that
$$|\vec n\pm\rangle =N\left(|+\rangle+\frac{n_1+in_2}{n_3\pm 1}|-\rangle\right),$$ where N is a normalization constant that I didn't bother to determine.

But I'm not sure how you go from this solution to finding a unitary rotation matrix ##U## since ##\vec{n}\cdot\vec{S}## is a Hermitian matrix, not a unitary one.

EDIT: After thinking for a minute, I see where you're going with this. You want to at the end rotate the ##z##-axis into ##\vec{n}## with some ##SO(3)## matrix to find "the rotation matrix"?
 
Last edited:
  • #47
I haven't actually worked that part of the problem, and I don't have a perfect understanding of rotation operators, but I'll offer some of my thoughts: If ##e^{i\theta S_z}## is a rotation by ##\theta## around the z axis (am I off by a factor of 2 or something?), then ##e^{i\vec\theta\cdot\vec S}## should be a rotation by ##|\vec\theta|## around the ##\vec\theta## axis. We can write ##\theta=|\vec\theta|##, ##\hat\theta=\vec\theta/\theta## and ##e^{i\vec\theta\cdot\vec S} =e^{i\theta(\hat\theta\cdot\vec S)}##.

So now it's a matter of determining ##\hat\theta## and then ##\theta##. We should be able to express ##\vec n## in terms of a,b. Then we can determine the plane that contains ##\vec 0##, ##\vec n## and ##\vec e_3##. The unit vector ##\hat\theta## should be orthogonal to that plane. ##\theta## is the angle between ##\vec n## and ##\vec e_3##.

This seems like a lot of work, and I doubt that the person who came up with the problem intended us to do something like this.
 
  • #48
Fredrik said:
I haven't actually worked that part of the problem, and I don't have a perfect understanding of rotation operators, but I'll offer some of my thoughts: If ##e^{i\theta S_z}## is a rotation by ##\theta## around the z axis (am I off by a factor of 2 or something?), then ##e^{i\vec\theta\cdot\vec S}## should be a rotation by ##|\vec\theta|## around the ##\vec\theta## axis. We can write ##\theta=|\vec\theta|##, ##\hat\theta=\vec\theta/\theta## and ##e^{i\vec\theta\cdot\vec S} =e^{i\theta(\hat\theta\cdot\vec S)}##.

Actually, you're not missing a factor of 2. The factor of 2 will come when you take ##\vec{S}=\frac{\hbar}{2}\vec{\sigma}##. The method in your post seems too complicated though.

I also noticed that I have been writing the wrong ##U## this whole time...the formula for ##U## in fluid's original post is what I meant...and nobody corrected me even!

...In fact I must apologize, since I have been guiding fluid into a longer way to solve this problem. I never bothered to solve this problem out myself, and now that I have, I found a much simpler way...

Fluid, start with the ##\hat{u}\cdot\vec{\sigma}## part of the equation, which you basically already got in post #19 (forget the factor of ##\hbar/2##). Now find ##U## (by that I mean construct ##U=\cos(\eta/2)\hat{I}-i\sin(\eta/2)\hat{u}\cdot\vec{\sigma}##). Now identify the left column of that final matrix with the column vector for ##\left|\chi\right>## and you're done. Because that left column will take ##\left|z_+\right>##, which in that basis is of course the column vector ##(1,0)##, to the most general spin state constructable, which for our problem is ##\left|\chi\right>##. I verified this since it is equation 14-23 of Baym's lectures on quantum mechanics.

We've been working way too hard to try to find the answer.
 
  • #49
Fredrik said:
Let a,b be the unique complex numbers such that ##|\chi\rangle=a|+\rangle+b|-\rangle##. We have ##\rho=|\chi\rangle\langle\chi|##. Let ##|\phi\rangle## be any unit vector that's orthogonal to ##|\chi\rangle##. We'll be working with the two ordered bases ##B=\big(|+\rangle,|-\rangle\big)## and ##B'=\big(|\chi\rangle,|\phi\rangle\big)##.

It's straightforward to calculate ##[\rho]_B##. That's one of the things the problem asks us to do. I see that you've already done that, so I'll write down the result
$$[\rho]_B=\begin{pmatrix}|a|^2 & ab^*\\ a^*b & |b|^2\end{pmatrix}.$$

Regarding the rest of the problem: We can immediately tell that
$$[\rho]_{B'}=\begin{pmatrix}1 & 0\\ 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}.$$ So why don't we just define the rotation operator by ##U|+\rangle=|\chi\rangle## and ##U|-\rangle=|\phi\rangle##, and then use this to determine ##_B## in terms of a and b?

A few more words about this approach, which I believe is the simplest one. The matrix equalities corresponding to ##U|+\rangle=|\chi\rangle## and ##U|-\rangle=|\phi\rangle## in the B basis are
\begin{align}&_B\begin{pmatrix}1\\ 0\end{pmatrix} =\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b\end{pmatrix}\\
&_B\begin{pmatrix}0\\ 1\end{pmatrix} =\text{ something that's orthogonal to }\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align} This allows us to almost immediately write down ##_B## in terms of a,b. There's no need to figure out what the rotation axis is.

We can use the formula ##\big([\rho]_B\big)_{ij}=\langle e_i,\rho e_j\rangle## and the corresponding one for B' to prove that ##[\rho]_{B'}=[U^*]_B[\rho]_B _B##. We already know that all of these matrices look like, so we won't learn anything new if we perform the matrix multiplication on the right, unless we've made mistakes along the way.
 
  • #50
Fredrik said:
A few more words about this approach, which I believe is the simplest one. The matrix equalities corresponding to ##U|+\rangle=|\chi\rangle## and ##U|-\rangle=|\phi\rangle## in the B basis are
\begin{align}&_B\begin{pmatrix}1\\ 0\end{pmatrix} =\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b\end{pmatrix}\\
&_B\begin{pmatrix}0\\ 1\end{pmatrix} =\text{ something that's orthogonal to }\begin{pmatrix}a \\ b\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align} This allows us to almost immediately write down ##_B## in terms of a,b. There's no need to figure out what the rotation axis is.

We can use the formula ##\big([\rho]_B\big)_{ij}=\langle e_i,\rho e_j\rangle## and the corresponding one for B' to prove that ##[\rho]_{B'}=[U^*]_B[\rho]_B _B##. We already know that all of these matrices look like, so we won't learn anything new if we perform the matrix multiplication on the right, unless we've made mistakes along the way.


But solving it this way just gives you an arbitrary unitary matrix, you get the same exact matrix as how any arbitrary special unitary matrix can be written...which I posted in post #33. I don't see how this actually gives anything new to the problem, so I assumed that the problem was asking how does this unitary matrix correspond to a rotation in 3-space. o.o

Indeed this seems like a weird problem to me since ##\left|\chi\right>## is arbitrary.
 
Back
Top