Eigenvalues of commuting observables (angular momentum)

gitano
Messages
11
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Is z|lm\rangle an eigenstate of L^{2}? If so, find the eigenvalue.

Homework Equations


L_{z}|lm\rangle = \hbar m|lm\rangle
L^{2}|lm\rangle = \hbar^{2} l(l+1)|lm\rangle

The Attempt at a Solution


So since L_{z} and L^{2} are commuting observables, they have are simultaneously diagonalizable and hence share the same eigenkets. Now, since z and L_{z} commute z|lm\rangle is an eigenstate of L_{z} and hence of L^{2}. Now I am just having some issues calculating the eigenvalue.

I have derived that [x_{i},L_{j}] = i\hbar \epsilon_{ijk}x_{k} and that
[x_{i},L^{2}_{j}] = i\hbar\epsilon_{ijk}(x_{k}L_{j}+L_{j}x_{k}).

Now L^{2}z|lm\rangle = ([L^2,z]+zL^{2})|lm\rangle.
So it remains to calculate [L^2,z] = [L^{2}_{x}+L^{2}_{y},z]
I have proceeded using the relations I derived above, but I can't seem to get this commutator to give me some constant times z, which is what I need to extract an eigenvalue from the whole thing.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
By the way, how do you get the equations to be inline with the text?
 
Sorry guys I changed the problem to correctly read: Is z|lm> an eigenstate of L^2, not of L_z.
 
I was just thinking, since z|lm\rangle is an eigenstate of L_{z} and has the same eigenvalue as |lm\rangle, does this degeneracy mean that z|lm\rangle is also an eigenstate of L^{2} with the same eigenvalue as |lm\rangle, namely \hbar^{2}l(l+1)?

In general, if an observable has degenerate eigenstates and commutes with another observable, does this mean that these degenerate eigenstates have eigenvalues with respect to the commuting operator which are equal as well (i.e. are the degenerate eigenstates of the original observable also degenerate eigenstates of the commuting observable)?
 
After more consideration, I'm beginning to think that z|lm\rangle is not an eigenstate of L^{2}. Even though [L_{z},L^{2}] = 0 and share |lm\rangle as eigenstates, since they are not a complete set of commuting observables, all the eigenstates of one are not necessarily eigenstates of the other. Therefore, I don't think it is necessary that z|lm\rangle, being a degenerate eigenstate of L_{z} is an eigenstate of L^{2}. This seems to be corroborated by the fact that when you work out the commutator [z,L^{2}], you can't get back z times some constant.

Also, there might be some argument one can use based on the rotational properties, i.e. that the operator z changes the value of l and thus cannot be an eigenstate of L^{2}, but I don't know if this is true or not.

Am I correct in this reasoning?
 
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