Hamiltonian (electron in an electro-m field)

  • Thread starter Thread starter AhmirMalik
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field Hamiltonian
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on transforming the Hamiltonian of an electron in an electromagnetic field from one form to another. The initial Hamiltonian is expressed in terms of momentum and vector potential, while the goal is to rewrite it using the spin operator and its interaction with the magnetic field. Participants explore the mathematical identities and manipulations needed to achieve this transformation, particularly involving the cross product of momentum and vector potential. The conversation highlights the importance of considering the wavefunction in these calculations and applying vector calculus identities. The discussion concludes with a confirmation of the correct approach to simplify the terms involving the curl of the vector potential.
AhmirMalik
Messages
7
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Given H=\frac{1}{2m}\left[ \vec{P}-q\vec{A}\right] ^{2}+qU+\frac{q\hbar }{2m}\vec{\sigma}.\vec{B} ..(1)
show that it can be written in this form;
H=\frac{1}{2m}\left\{ \vec{\sigma}.\left[ \vec{P}-q\vec{A}\right] \right\}^{2}+qU ...(2)

Homework Equations


[/B]
In my case, I am going to use only;

\left( \vec{\sigma}.\vec{R}\right) ^{2}=\vec{R^2}+i\vec{\sigma}.\left( \vec{R}\times \vec{R}\right) ...(3)

The Attempt at a Solution


Writing equation (1) in this form;
H=\frac{1}{2m}\left[\left[ \vec{P}-q\vec{A}\right]^{2}-i\vec{\sigma}(iq\hbar\vec{B})\right]+qU

using the equation (3) and identifying terms;

\vec{R}=\vec{P}-q\vec{A}

then, to replace \left[\left[ \vec{P}-q\vec{A}\right]^{2}-i\vec{\sigma}(iq\hbar\vec{B})\right] by \left\{ \vec{\sigma}.\left[ \vec{P}-q\vec{A}\right] \right\}^{2}

the following must satisfy;

\left( \vec{R}\times\vec{R}\right)=iq\hbar\vec{B}

to do that, I write RxR like;
\left[ \vec{P}-q\vec{A}\left( \vec{R},t\right) \right] \times \left[ \vec{P}-q\vec{A}\left( \vec{R},t\right) \right] =\vec{P}\times \vec{P}+q^{2}\vec{A} \times \vec{A}-\vec{P}\times q\vec{A} -q\vec{A}\times \vec{P}

the first two term (PxP and AxA) on the right hand are equal to 0. But I don't know what to do with the rest;
\vec{P}\times q\vec{A} -q\vec{A}\times \vec{P}
 
Physics news on Phys.org
AhmirMalik said:
the first two term (PxP and AxA) on the right hand are equal to 0. But I don't know what to do with the rest;
\vec{P}\times q\vec{A} -q\vec{A}\times \vec{P}
Remember that ##\mathbf{p} = -i\hbar\nabla## and that in the actual Schroedinger equation, the Hamiltonian will be multiplied by the wavefunction. Thus, instead of only \vec{P}\times q\vec{A} -q\vec{A}\times \vec{P}, you should consider (\vec{P}\times q\vec{A} -q\vec{A}\times \vec{P})\psi where ##\psi## is an arbitrary wavefunction.
 
Thank you for replying.

Actually, I knew that. And that's where I'm stucked. Could you please develop a bit more?
 
Consider the first term which is proportional to ##\mathbf{p}\times (\mathbf{A}\psi) = i\hbar\nabla \times (\mathbf{A}\psi)##, At this point, you can use the identity involving the curl of a product between a scalar function and a vector like the one in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curl_(mathematics).
 
Ok, thank you !
 
Last edited:
AhmirMalik said:
Can I do the following? ;

-q\vec{A}\times\vec{P}\psi=i\hbar q\vec{A}\times\vec{\nabla}\psi=-i\hbar q \vec{\nabla}\psi\times\vec{A} and then the whole term;

-\vec{P}\times q\vec{A}\psi-q\vec{A}\times\vec{P}\psi=i\hbar q[\vec{\nabla}\psi\times\vec{A}+\psi\vec{\nabla}\times\vec{A}]-i\hbar q \vec{\nabla}\psi\times\vec{A}=i\hbar q\psi\vec{\nabla}\times\vec{A}=i\hbar q\psi\vec{B}
Yes, that's indeed how you should proceed.
 
  • Like
Likes Greg Bernhardt and AhmirMalik
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top