Do ladder operators give integer multiples of ћ?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of ladder operators in quantum mechanics, specifically regarding whether the results obtained from applying these operators yield physical eigenvalues that are integer multiples of ħ. The scope includes theoretical considerations of spin states and the properties of operators in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant applies the raising operator to the spin state |2,-1> and questions whether the resulting value, which involves a non-integer multiple of ħ, corresponds to a physical eigenvalue.
  • Another participant suggests that the relevant operator for determining physical eigenvalues is not the raising operator S+, but rather the Hamiltonian operator combined with a constant.
  • There is a discussion about the definition of eigenvalues and whether non-integer multiples of ħ should be disregarded in this context.
  • One participant emphasizes that values should not be ignored simply based on personal preference, suggesting a broader interpretation of eigenvalues.
  • A later reply discusses the matrix representation of ladder operators, noting that they have specific properties that affect their eigenvalues.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether non-integer multiples of ħ can be considered physical eigenvalues, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the definitions of eigenvalues and the characteristics of operators, but there are unresolved assumptions regarding the physical significance of the results obtained from ladder operators.

baouba
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Say I apply a raising operator to the spin state |2,-1>, then by using the the equation

S+|s,ms> = ћ*sqrt(s(s+1) - ms(ms+1))|s,ms+1>

I get,

S+|2,-1> = sqrt(6)ћ|2,0>

Does this correspond to a physical eigenvalue or should I disregard it and only take states with integer multiples of ћ as eigenvalues? It makes sense that non-integer multiples of ћ wouldn't correspond to physical eigenvalues, but then again, ladder operators don't really correspond to observable quantities so should it even matter?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Compare with the definition of an eigenvalue.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
Simon Bridge said:
Compare with the definition of an eigenvalue.

"Any number such that a given matrix minus that number times the identity matrix has a zero determinant."

I don't see how this answers the question. should non-integer multiples of ћ be omitted or not?
 
@baouba The linear operator whose eigenvalues are of interest here is not the raising operator S+. I imagine it is H+C where H is the Hamiltonian operator and C is a constant, and that operator certainly does correspond to a real-world quantity. You can see from your formulas in the OP that |2,-1> is not an eigenstate of S+. But it may be an eigenstate of H+C.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Simon Bridge
baouba said:
"Any number such that a given matrix minus that number times the identity matrix has a zero determinant."
Well, is that the situation you have here? What does it mean to be a physical eigenvalue?

A|a> = a|a> satisfies the definition, does B|x> = a|y> satisfy the definition?
If |x> were an eigenvector of operator B, wouldn't operation by B leave it unchanged?

However - short answer: you should not just ignore a value just because you don't like it.
 
Think about the matrix form of the ladder operators. They're all sparse upper or lower triangular matrices with all zeros on the main diagonal, so the only eigenvalue of the ladder operators is 0. The eigenvectors are the top and bottom rungs.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K