Dirac Notation: Am I doing this right?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the momentum operator in quantum mechanics, specifically within the context of the harmonic oscillator. The original poster attempts to compute the expectation value of the momentum operator using Dirac notation and a specific wavefunction that is a superposition of two states.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the calculation of the expectation value of the momentum operator and question the assumptions regarding the wavefunction's states. The original poster expresses confusion about their result and its expected value.

Discussion Status

Some participants clarify that the expectation value is not zero due to the superposition of states involved. There is a recognition that the original poster's understanding of the operator's action on different states may need further exploration. Additional insights about the distinction between pure states and superpositions are being discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the expectation value of the momentum operator is zero for pure states but not necessarily for superpositions, prompting further inquiry into the implications of this distinction.

jumbogala
Messages
414
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


Find <P>. P = i√(mhw/2)(a†-a). Note a† and a are the ladder operators. P is the momentum operator of the harmonic oscillator.

|ψ > = (1/sqrt(2))[ |1> - i |2>]

The answer should be zero, can someone check my work?

Homework Equations


a† |n> = sqrt(n+1)|n+1>

a |n> = sqrt(n)|n-1>

The Attempt at a Solution


I think my first step here might be wrong. I assumed that <ψ | = (1/sqrt(2))[ <1| + i <2|].

<P> = <ψ | P | ψ > = (1/sqrt(2))[ <1| + i <2|] i√(mhw/2)(a†-a) (1/sqrt(2))[ |1> - i |2>]

= (1/2)i√(mhw/2)[ <1| + i <2|] * (a†|1> - i*a†|2> - a|1> + i*a|2>]

= (1/2)i√(mhw/2)[ <1| + i <2|] * [sqrt(2)|2> - i*sqrt(3)|3> - sqrt(1)|0> + i*sqrt(2)|1>]

Since <x|y> = 1 when x = y but 0 otherwise, this reduces to

= (1/2)i√(mhw/2)[ <1| + i <2|] * [sqrt(2)|2> - i*sqrt(3)|3> - sqrt(1)|0> + i*sqrt(2)|1>]

=(1/2)i√(mhw/2) (isqrt(2)<1|1> + isqrt(2)<2|2>) = (1/2)i√(mhw/2) ( 2isqrt(2))

= -sqrt(mhw)

But I think the answer is supposed to be zero. What am I doing wrong here?

I already checked for sign mistakes 3 times, and I can't find any.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No matter how I work it out, your result is correct.

The answer is not zero.

What you'r thinking of is [itex]\left\langle n \right| P \left| n \right\rangle[/itex] = 0,

which is a specific case of the general expression

[itex]\left\langle n' \right| P \left| n \right\rangle= i\sqrt{\frac{mhω}{2}}(-\sqrt{n}δ_{n',n-1}+\sqrt{n+1}δ_{n',n+1})[/itex]

Since your wavefunction is a superposition of states, it doesn't turn out to be zero. I can show my work if you like.

I found this in a textbook I have. Quantum Mechanics Concepts and Applications 2nd, Zettili, pg 248.
 
Last edited:
Thank you very much! I am a bit confused though, what are n and n prime? I don't really get how what I have is different from <n | P | n> = 0?

Does this mean it only works for pure states?
 
jumbogala said:
Thank you very much! I am a bit confused though, what are n and n prime? I don't really get how what I have is different from <n | P | n> = 0?

Does this mean it only works for pure states?

n and n prime are two different quantum states.

This means [itex]\left\langle 1 \right| P \left| 1 \right\rangle = 0[/itex] but [itex]\left\langle 2 \right| P \left| 1 \right\rangle[/itex] is not equal to zero.


when I worked it out, it turns out that [itex]\left\langle 1 \right| P \left| 2 \right\rangle = -\left\langle 2 \right| P \left| 1 \right\rangle = -i\sqrt{mhω}[/itex]

Here is a picture of my messy scratchwork. :redface:
http://i.imgur.com/ekIjb.jpg
 
Excellent, that was super helpful! Thanks again :) I understand now.
 
You're welcome! I actually remembered not to forget this rule myself!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K