Good Quantum Numbers: Helicity & Invariants

touqra
Messages
284
Reaction score
0
If an operator commutes with the Hamiltonian, then, the eigenvalues are said to be good quantum numbers. For example, the helicity. But then, helicity is not an invariant for a massive particle. I can always go to another Lorentz frame such that the helicity is now reversed. How then, can it be a good quantum number?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
And, if you did that, the eigenvalue of the Hamiltonian, in general, would also be different; but, this doesn't seem to trouble you.

The point of thinking about "good quantum numbers" isn't that they're the same in all frames. The point is that you can measure them without changing the particle's energy.
 
Hi touqra, I am curious where you read that helicity commutes in the quantum Hamiltonian? (Dirac warns us about that.)
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top