Expanding the Commutator of 3 Operators A, B, and C - Quantum/Math Question

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

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around expanding the commutator of three operators A, B, and C, specifically [A, BC], in terms of the individual commutators [A, B], [A, C], and [B, C]. Participants are exploring the implications of this expansion and the nature of the operators involved.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the difficulty of expressing the commutator solely in terms of the two-operator commutators. There are questions about whether it is necessary to eliminate the operators entirely and what that implies for the structure of the expression.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with some participants expressing confusion about the requirements of the problem. There is a recognition that the expression may not be reducible to a simpler form involving only two operators, and some guidance has been offered regarding the nature of the expansion.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem may involve assumptions or constraints that are not fully clear, leading to differing interpretations of the task. There is mention of potential confusion among students regarding the subject matter.

cosmic_tears
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Quantum/math question :)

Homework Statement


I need to expand the commutator of the 3 operators A,B,C: [A,BC] in terms of [A,B], [A,C], [B,C].

Homework Equations


[A,B] is defined to be AB - BA
also, [A,BC] = B[A,C] +[A,B]C.
There are some other identities but none that I see relevant.



The Attempt at a Solution



Tried lots of opening and additing/substructing of elements using the above formulas but I could never get rid of "operators". Is the a way to write "B" and "C" in terms of the above?
I'm working on this for over an hour! :(

Thank you very much!
Tomer.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you sure you're supposed to get rid of the operators? I don't think it's possible to express it otherwise. That would require reducing a sum of 3 operators to a sum of 2 operators.
 
Thanks for responding.

The question is:
Let A;B;C; be operators
1. Expand [A;BC] in terms of [A;B]; [A;C]; [B;C]

If you can understand anything different from the exact question you're most welcomed to explain to me :)
What do you mean by "That wuold require reducing a sum of 3 operators to a sum of 2"?
Why is that a consequence?
 
well an expansion of [A,BC] is ABC-BCA which is a sum of 3 operators in a row. I don't see how you could express that in the form aAB + bBA +cAC +dCA + eBC + fCB (where a...f are constants) which is the form it would need to take if you wanted it expressed solely in terms of [A,B], [A,C] and [B,C]
 
I still don't understand the "paradox" here, nor do I see how the sum you wrote (with the consts a...f) is a sun of two operators... what I see is 6 operators.

Ah well... I thank you for trying anyway!
 
Your answer will involve a sum of the products of the original operators with the two-operator commutators, as in:

X*[Y,Z] or [X,Y]*Z

Where X, Y, and Z are each one of A, B, and C. (I wrote it this way to avoid giving the answer away :)
 
But I need an expression consisting only of [A,B], [A,C] and [B,C]
I already know that [A,BC] = B[A,C] + [A,B]C...
 
But clearly that's not possible. For example, let

A=p_{x}, B=x, C=y

Then

[A,BC] = [p_{x},x]*y = -i \hbar *y

and

[A,B] = -i\hbar, [A,C] = [B,C] = 0

There just isn't any way to do it. I think they mean to write it as an expression where the commutators involve only two of A, B, and C, like the one you gave above.
 
*sigh*... I'm really going to hate them if you're right... :)
I'll send a mail to my tutor, all the student are too confused with this subject I guess none have noticed yet.

Thank you very much!
I'll post here if it turns out otherwise...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K