Determining the commutation relation of operators - Einstein summation notation

jmcelve
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Determining the commutation relation of operators -- Einstein summation notation

Homework Statement



Determine the commutator [L_i, C_j].

Homework Equations



L_i = \epsilon_{ijk}r_j p_k
C_i = \epsilon_{ijk}A_j B_k
[L_i, A_j] = i \hbar \epsilon_{ijk} A_k
[L_i, B_j] = i \hbar \epsilon_{ijk} B_k

The Attempt at a Solution



To be clear, the goal of this procedure is to become familiar with Einstein summation notation. That said, I've broken open C_j = \epsilon_{jmn}A_m B_n and expanded the commutator accordingly. My problem is opening up L_i in a meaningful way that gives me a nice identity with four deltas. Will I have to expand two epsilons with 6 different indices into deltas, or is there any way to get the epsilons to share an index that will give me the result (which I know to be [L_i, C_j] = i \hbar \epsilon_{ijk}C_k)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Well, since the two free indices i and j are expressedly independent you can't set i=j (it's more interesting to calculate the commutator for two specific terms than the sum anyway). And the other four indices are already contracted, so you can't contract them with either i or j. You will just have to use all six indices.
 


Hypersphere said:
Well, since the two free indices i and j are expressedly independent you can't set i=j (it's more interesting to calculate the commutator for two specific terms than the sum anyway). And the other four indices are already contracted, so you can't contract them with either i or j. You will just have to use all six indices.

That's super ugly. We really only talked about expanding epsilons in terms of deltas when there were four differing indices, not six. Is there a method to do this problem that requires using only four indices?
 


jmcelve said:
That's super ugly. We really only talked about expanding epsilons in terms of deltas when there were four differing indices, not six. Is there a method to do this problem that requires using only four indices?

It's not pretty, I agree, but then again the Levi-Civita symbol is what you use to hide the ugly things. It's possible to group the terms somewhat, but you can't remove degrees of freedom unless you now that one or more of the vector components happen to be zero... Just be happy that you don't work in four dimensions.
 


Hypersphere said:
Just be happy that you don't work in four dimensions.

Noted. Thanks for the help.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top