Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around time-independent perturbation theory, specifically addressing a proof related to the linear combination of states in quantum mechanics as presented in Griffiths' textbook. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the compatibility of orthogonality and linear combinations of certain eigenstates.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of orthogonality in quantum states and question the assumptions regarding the linear independence of eigenstates. There is a focus on understanding how distinct eigenvectors relate to spanning a space in the context of second-order degeneracy.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights that clarify misunderstandings about the relationships between the states involved. The conversation indicates a productive exploration of the concepts, with participants actively questioning and verifying their interpretations.

Contextual Notes

The original poster notes a potential contradiction in the proof they are studying, which has led to a deeper examination of the definitions and properties of the states involved. There is an emphasis on the need for linear independence to establish spanning in the context of the problem.

AT_saavedra
Messages
3
Reaction score
5
Homework Statement
Please refer to the attached file.
I am trying to make sense of the last part of the "good" states proof.
Relevant Equations
Please refer to the attached file.
(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 Ψ_{a}^{0} and Ψ_{b}^{0} but right before that the proof just showed that they are orthogonal states. Just from the very basics of linear algebra these two statements seem incompatible to me.

I know there must be some error in my interpretation since the contradiction is too clear not to have been caught by the third version of the book, but despite reviewing the chapter once again, as well as my linear algebra book, I am still completely stuck. If someone could help me get out of this hole I have made for myself, I would deeply appreciate it.
 

Attachments

  • Theorem-Proof.webp
    Theorem-Proof.webp
    38 KB · Views: 20
  • Theorem-Proof.webp
    Theorem-Proof.webp
    38 KB · Views: 12
Physics news on Phys.org
If ##\gamma = \mu##, then you don’t necessarily have ##\langle \psi_a^0 , \psi_\gamma (0) \rangle = 0##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: AT_saavedra
Thank you for your answer. I now see what I was misinterpreting. If I could ask a quick follow-up question, am I correct in assuming that ##\psi_\gamma(0)## is a linear combination of ##\psi_a^0## and ##\psi_b^0## because ##\psi_a^0## and ##\psi_b^0## are two distinct eigenvectors with distinct eigenvalues so they must span the space? (since the theorem is dealing with 2nd order degeneracy)
 
To show that ##\psi_a^0## and ##\psi_b^0## span the space, we must prove they are linearly independent. Suppose

\begin{align*}
\kappa \psi_a^0 + \zeta \psi_b^0 = 0.
\end{align*}

Applying ##A## gives

\begin{align*}
\kappa \mu \psi_a^0 + \zeta \nu \psi_b^0 = 0.
\end{align*}

Subtracting ##\mu (\kappa \psi_a^0 + \zeta \psi_b^0) = 0## from this yields

\begin{align*}
\zeta (\nu - \mu) \psi_b^0 = 0.
\end{align*}

Since ##\mu \ne \nu##, it follows that ##\zeta = 0##, and hence ##\kappa = 0##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: AT_saavedra
julian said:
To show that ##\psi_a^0## and ##\psi_b^0## span the space, we must prove they are linearly independent. Suppose

\begin{align*}
\kappa \psi_a^0 + \zeta \psi_b^0 = 0.
\end{align*}

Applying ##A## gives

\begin{align*}
\kappa \mu \psi_a^0 + \zeta \nu \psi_b^0 = 0.
\end{align*}

Subtracting ##\mu (\kappa \psi_a^0 + \zeta \psi_b^0) = 0## from this yields

\begin{align*}
\zeta (\nu - \mu) \psi_b^0 = 0.
\end{align*}

Since ##\mu \ne \nu##, it follows that ##\zeta = 0##, and hence ##\kappa = 0##.
Thank you very much, your answer was very thorough
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWGD and berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K