Do (Lz)op and (L^2)op Commute?

  • Thread starter Thread starter metgt4
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the commutation relations of angular momentum operators in quantum mechanics, specifically examining whether the operators (L^2)op and (Lz)op commute. The original poster is attempting to utilize known commutation relations to demonstrate this property, referencing a specific equation involving (Lx)op and (Ly)op.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of commutation relations to manipulate operators, with suggestions to express (L^2)op in terms of its components and analyze their commutation with (Lz)op. There is an emphasis on moving operators through one another using the definition of commutators.

Discussion Status

Several participants have provided hints and suggestions for approaching the problem, focusing on the algebraic manipulation of operators rather than specific representations. The conversation reflects a collaborative effort to clarify the use of commutation relations, though no consensus on a definitive method has been reached.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses difficulty in applying the hints provided by their professor and is seeking further clarification on the manipulation of operators. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity involved in working with commutation relations without specific representations.

metgt4
Messages
34
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



It has been shown that the operators (Lx)op and (Ly)op do not commute but satisfy the following equation:

(Lx)op(Ly)op - (Ly)op(Lx)op = i(hbar)(Lz)op

(a) Use this relation and the two similar equations obtained by cycling the coordinate labels to show that (L2)op(Lz)op = (Lz)op(L2)op, that is, these two operators commute. [Hint: You do not need to introduce the differential formulas for the operators. Use the fact that (AB)C = A(BC) where A, B, and C are operators]


The question continues, but this is the part I am having trouble with.

I already attempted a solution (scan is attached), and my prof gave me the following hint:

"Hi Andrew - one suggestion: instead of writing every operator as a commutator,
consider instead moving operators from right to left using commutation relations.
For example, on the LHS you have X^2*Z=X(XZ) = X *(ZX) + stuff (using a commutator
relation), which in turn is equal to (XZ)*X = Z*X^2 + more stuff (using a commutator
relation). But then you have something that's on the RHS, ie Z*X^2."

My problem here is that I have not been able to find a commutator relation that allows me to move the components of the equation around like that, nor have I been able to work a relation out myself.

I'd like to work out as much of this problem as I can, so hints would be preferred!

Thanks in advance for your help!


Andrew



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think your professor is trying to say something like this:

If we have [x,y p_x] = y[x,p_x] because y commutes can just be factored out.
 
You're looking to see that [L^2,L_z]=0 right? And since you know that L^2=L_x^2+L_y^2+L_z^2, you can say

<br /> [L_x^2+L_y^2+L_z^2,L_z]=something<br />

This should be a good push in the right direction.
 
Normally you have that [A,B]=-[B,A] unless A and B commute, which case [A,B]=[B,A]=0. So if you need to prove that [L^2,L_z]=[L_z,L^2], you just need to show that

<br /> [L_x^2+L_y^2+L_z^2,L_z]=something<br />

and

<br /> [L_z,L_x^2+L_y^2+L_z^2]=something<br />

where both something's are the same thing, zero.

EDIT: That's weird...I got an email saying you responded already, by it's not here after I posted this...hmmm...a glitch in the Matrix??
 
Must have been a glitch. I was in class/the library for the last few hours! Thanks for the help there though, I'll keep working on it and hopefully won't run into any more trouble!
 
I decided to go back and plug in the actual values of each operator. My work is in attached. Is my physics/math correct, or did I oversimplify things?
 

Attachments

  • scan0006.jpg
    scan0006.jpg
    9.3 KB · Views: 452
Your professor is trying to explain to you a useful manipulation. All you do is take the definition of a commutator

[a,b] = ab - ba

and rearrange it to read

ab = ba + [a,b]

Now you have a means of getting one operator to "move through" another, and you can work with just the commutator algebra, rather than having to use any particular representation of the operators. For example:

a^2b = aab = aba + a[a,b] = ba^2 + [a,b]a + a[a,b]

Using this idea, you should be able to solve your problem using only the commutation relations alone; you don't need the representation in terms of differential operators.
 
Ben Niehoff said:
Your professor is trying to explain to you a useful manipulation. All you do is take the definition of a commutator

[a,b] = ab - ba

and rearrange it to read

ab = ba + [a,b]

Now you have a means of getting one operator to "move through" another, and you can work with just the commutator algebra, rather than having to use any particular representation of the operators. For example:

a^2b = aab = aba + a[a,b] = ba^2 + [a,b]a + a[a,b]

Using this idea, you should be able to solve your problem using only the commutation relations alone; you don't need the representation in terms of differential operators.
Yes, that's exactly what I was about to say myself.
 
Ben Niehoff said:
Your professor is trying to explain to you a useful manipulation. All you do is take the definition of a commutator

[a,b] = ab - ba

and rearrange it to read

ab = ba + [a,b]

Now you have a means of getting one operator to "move through" another, and you can work with just the commutator algebra, rather than having to use any particular representation of the operators. For example:

a^2b = aab = aba + a[a,b] = ba^2 + [a,b]a + a[a,b]

Using this idea, you should be able to solve your problem using only the commutation relations alone; you don't need the representation in terms of differential operators.

That seems a strange way of going about it. I would have just used the fact that [AB,C]=[A,C]B+A[B,C] and come up with

<br /> [L_x^2+L_y^2+L_z^2,L_z]=[L_x^2,L_z]+[L_y^2,L_z]+[L_z^2,L_z]=[L_x,L_z]L_x+L_x[L_x,L_z]+[L_y,L_z]L_y+L_y[L_y,L_z]=onward<br />

and likewise for the other part.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K