Expectation values of spin operators in changing magnetic field

athrun200
Messages
275
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


attachment.php?attachmentid=54252&stc=1&d=1356455629.jpg



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I have totally no idea how to solve this question. But I find it somehow similar to the Larmor precession problem. Therefore I try to solve my problem by referring to that.
Are there any mistakes if I do it like this?

p.s. since the matrix elements are quite complicated, in order to save time, I use "c" to stand for cosine, "e" to stand for exponential that repeat over and over again.
attachment.php?attachmentid=54253&stc=1&d=1356455634.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IQM.jpg
    IQM.jpg
    44 KB · Views: 1,200
  • IQM2011Q4a.jpg
    IQM2011Q4a.jpg
    25.2 KB · Views: 833
Physics news on Phys.org
It looks like you're taking the spin state of the particle at time t = 0 to be proportional to ##\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\0\end{array}\right)##. That would correspond to spin up along the z-axis. But at t = 0 the spin state is an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian H for a magnetic field in the direction specified by ##\theta## and ##\phi##. In particular, it's the state that corresponds to "spin up" along the ##\theta##, ##\phi## direction (or, positive energy eigenvalue for H).
 
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