Eigenvectors of this Hamiltonian

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the eigenvalues and eigenstates of a Hamiltonian for a system of two spin-1/2 particles in a magnetic field. Participants explore the mathematical formulation of the problem, including the representation of states and operators in tensor product spaces, as well as the implications of perturbation theory.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the existence of eigenstates and eigenvalues for the Hamiltonian, suggesting that the formulation may be incorrect.
  • Another participant proposes using a 4x1 column vector to represent the tensor product state and suggests that the operators should be represented as 4x4 matrices.
  • A different participant clarifies that a general vector in the tensor product space is not simply the product of two individual states but rather a sum of tensor products of basis states.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the most general state for two spin-1/2 particles involves a linear combination of basis states, and suggests operating on this general state with the Hamiltonian to find constraints for eigenstates.
  • A later post introduces a new question regarding the first order correction for a perturbation involving the dot product of two spin operators, seeking validation of the mathematical expression provided.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the formulation of the problem and the representation of states in tensor product spaces. There is no consensus on the correctness of the initial problem statement or the approach to finding eigenstates and eigenvalues.

Contextual Notes

Some participants indicate potential gaps in understanding tensor product states and operators, suggesting that the discussion may depend on specific definitions and mathematical representations that are not fully resolved.

ShayanJ
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
605
I've got a problem which is asking for the eigenvalues and eigenstates of the Hamiltonian [itex]H_0=-B_0(a_1 \sigma_z^{(1)}+a_2 \sigma_z^{(2)})[/itex] for a system consisting of two spin half particles in the magnetic field [itex]\vec{B}=B_0 \hat z[/itex].
But I think the problem is wrong and no eigenstate and eigenvalue exist. Here's my reason:
[itex] -B_0(a_1 \sigma_z^{(1)}+a_2 \sigma_z^{(2)}) \left(\begin{array}{c}x_1\\y_1 \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}x_2\\y_2 \end{array}\right) =\lambda\left(\begin{array}{c}x_1\\y_1 \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}x_2\\y_2\end{array}\right) \Rightarrow -B_0(a_1 \left(\begin{array}{c}x_1\\-y_1 \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}x_2\\y_2 \end{array}\right)+a_2 \left(\begin{array}{c}x_1\\y_1 \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}x_2\\-y_2 \end{array}\right)) =\lambda\left(\begin{array}{c}x_1\\y_1 \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}x_2\\y_2\end{array}\right)[/itex]
But as far as I know, that is impossible. Am I right?
I'm asking this because I'm affraid maybe my knowledge on tensor product states and operators contain some holes because I learned it by reading little things here and there.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The final step doesn't look right. I haven't looked at the details, but I would try representing the tensor product state using a 4X1 column vector as in http://www.matfys.lth.se/education/quantinfo/QIlect1.pdf (p10) or http://www.tau.ac.il/~quantum/Reznik/lecture notes in quantum information.pdf (p32). The operators should be 4X4 matrices, and ##\sigma_z^{(1)}## should be ##\sigma_z^{(1)} \otimes \mathbb{I}^{(2)}##.

Edit: rubi's and stevendaryl's posts are correct. The 4X1 vector should be have unknowns [a b c d]T.
 
Last edited:
The problem with the calculation is that a general vector in the tensor product space isn't ##(\sum_{i=1}^2 a_i e_i)\otimes(\sum_{j=1}^2 b_j e_j)## but rather ##\sum_{i,j=1}^2 c_{ij} e_i\otimes e_j##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
The state [itex]\left( \begin{array}\\ x_1 \\ y_1\end{array} \right) \left( \begin{array}\\ x_2 \\ y_2\end{array} \right)[/itex] is not the most general state for two spin-1/2 particles. The most general state looks something like this:

[itex]\alpha_1 \left( \begin{array}\\ 1 \\ 0\end{array} \right) \left( \begin{array}\\ 1 \\ 0\end{array} \right) + \alpha_2 \left( \begin{array}\\ 1 \\ 0\end{array} \right) \left( \begin{array}\\ 0 \\ 1\end{array} \right) + \alpha_3 \left( \begin{array}\\ 0 \\ 1\end{array} \right) \left( \begin{array}\\ 1 \\ 0\end{array} \right) + \alpha_4 \left( \begin{array}\\ 0 \\ 1\end{array} \right) \left( \begin{array}\\ 0 \\ 1\end{array} \right)[/itex]

Now, operate on this general state with the Hamiltonian to find out what kind of constraints on the [itex]\alpha[/itex]s would make it an eigenstate.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thanks people.
Now another question.
The next part of the problem asks for the first order correction for the perturbation [itex]k \, \vec\sigma^{(1)} \cdot \vec\sigma^{(2)}[/itex]. Is the following correct?
[itex] <br /> \vec\sigma^{(1)} \cdot \vec\sigma^{(2)}=(\sigma_x^{(1)*} \,\,\, \sigma_y^{(1)*} \,\,\, \sigma_z^{(1)*}) \left( \begin{array}{c} \sigma_x^{(2)} \\ \sigma_y^{(2)} \\ \sigma_z^{(2)} \end{array} \right)=\sigma_x^{(1)*}\sigma_x^{(2)}+\sigma_y^{(1)*}\sigma_y^{(2)}+ \sigma _z^{(1)*}\sigma_z^{(2)}<br /> [/itex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K