Hamilton operator with moments of inertia : time - independence

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
4 replies · 3K views
Juqon
Messages
31
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The Hamilton-operator is given as [tex]\hat{H}[/tex] and describes the movement of a free rigid object that has the moments of inertia [tex]I_{i}[/tex]
Under what circumstances is
[tex]<\Psi|\hat{L_{1}}|\Psi>[/tex]

time-independent?


Homework Equations


[tex]\hat{H}=\frac{\hat{L_{1}^{2}}}{2I_{1}}+\frac{\hat{L_{2}^{2}}}{2I_{2}}+\frac{\hat{L_{3}^{2}}}{2I_{3}}[/tex]

[tex][\hat{L_{j}},\hat{L_{k}}]=\iota\hbar\epsilon_{jkm}\hat{L_{m}}[/tex]
[tex]<\Psi|\hat{L_{1}}|\Psi>[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


If it wasn't in the brac-kets, I would just try [tex]\frac{dL_{1}}{dt}=0[/tex] Also, I thought maybe I could use another picture to have the time-indepence in it automatically, but I think Schrödinger must be the right one as there the operators are constant.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
HINT: Remember that the time dependence of the expectation value of an operator, O, is related to: [itex]<[O,H]>[/itex].
 
Thanks! I think a found a solution. What do you think about that?
I just need to know whether I can change the indices of the Levi-Civita tensor in a way so that I get a minus in front (other order of the indices) also with operators. If yes, this would not answer the question (see below).

If "otherwise": Is this the end result or can you transform that even more?
[PLAIN]http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/6031/timeindependencemomento.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, you cannot switch the indices on the operators and just change the sign to compensate. That would mean the the angular momentum operators anti-commute, which they don't.

You end result is correct(when you don't switch operator indices), but you missed a sign, I think. Your result should be:

[tex]\frac{[L_2,L_3]_+}{I_2}=\frac{[L_2,L_3]_+}{I_3}[/tex]

([itex][A,B]_+[/itex] means anti-commutator) or when you simplify:

[tex]I_2=I_3[/tex]

Physically, this means you have an "axially symmetric rotator."You really went about this in the "brute-force" method! There's a much simpler way to get to the same result. You know you are looking for the condition when [itex]L_1[/itex] and [itex]H[/itex] commute. Now, you also know that you can choose anyone angular momentum operator to commute with [itex]L^2[/itex]. Thus, if you can write [itex]H[/itex] in terms of only [itex]L^2[/itex] and [itex]L_1[/itex].

You'll see that this is only possible in two cases: When [itex]I_1=I_2=I_3[/itex] and when [itex]I_2=I_3[/itex]