Hamiltonian (electron in an electro-m field)

  • Thread starter Thread starter AhmirMalik
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field Hamiltonian
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
To solve this, I first used the units to work out that a= m* a/m, i.e. t=z/λ. This would allow you to determine the time duration within an interval section by section and then add this to the previous ones to obtain the age of the respective layer. However, this would require a constant thickness per year for each interval. However, since this is most likely not the case, my next consideration was that the age must be the integral of a 1/λ(z) function, which I cannot model.
Back
Top