Dirac Hydrogen Atom: Parity and Odd-Operator

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the properties of odd operators in the context of the Dirac hydrogen atom and their relationship with parity. It is noted that states with definite parity lead to the vanishing of diagonal elements of odd operators, as demonstrated through the relationship involving the parity operator. The reasoning hinges on the mathematical expression where the expectation value of an odd operator in a state of definite parity must equal zero to satisfy the parity transformation properties. The conversation clarifies a common misunderstanding regarding the terminology of "fixed" versus "definite" parity. Overall, the interaction emphasizes the implications of parity on the behavior of quantum operators in the Dirac framework.
ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
Hey I was reading through a text and came across:
"[ Having extracted the Dirac version of Schrodinger's equation of the H atom...] Since the states | j j_z l > have definite parity, the odd-operator \vec{S} \cdot \hat{r} will have vanishing diagonal elements. Also since \big(\vec{S} \cdot \hat{r} \big)^2 =1 then its offdiagonal elements will be \frac{1}{2} e^{\pm i \phi} (we can choose the phase \phi=0)[...]"

I can understand the second statement from the Pauli matrices... However I think that I don't understand the 1st statement as it is... why would the diagonal elements of an odd-operator be zero if parity is definite?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think what they mean as "fixed" is actually "definite".
 
  • Like
Likes ChrisVer
Yup understand that... (a flaw in my translation :biggrin:)...I don't understand why the diagonal elements are zero.
 
If ##A## is an odd operator and ##\pi## is a parity operator, then we have ##\pi^\dagger A \pi = -A##. If furthermore a state ##|\psi\rangle## which has a definite parity sandwhiches the expression ##\pi^\dagger A \pi = -A## from left and right in each side of the equation, you will get ##\langle \psi| A |\psi \rangle = -\langle \psi|A|\psi \rangle## because ##\langle \psi|\pi^\dagger A \pi|\psi \rangle = \langle \psi| A |\psi \rangle##. You see then we must require ##\langle \psi| A |\psi \rangle = 0## so that the previous relation can hold.
 
  • Like
Likes Nugatory, vanhees71, JorisL and 1 other person
I am slowly going through the book 'What Is a Quantum Field Theory?' by Michel Talagrand. I came across the following quote: One does not" prove” the basic principles of Quantum Mechanics. The ultimate test for a model is the agreement of its predictions with experiments. Although it may seem trite, it does fit in with my modelling view of QM. The more I think about it, the more I believe it could be saying something quite profound. For example, precisely what is the justification of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
952
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
936
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K