HiLets say I have a Hamiltonian which is invariant in e.g. the

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Niles
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hamiltonian Invariant
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the implications of a Hamiltonian that is invariant under spin indices, specifically whether this invariance indicates that spin is a conserved quantity. Participants explore connections to conservation laws, symmetries, and specific operators related to spin.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that invariance in the Hamiltonian regarding spin indices may imply conservation of spin, questioning how this can be demonstrated.
  • One participant references Noether's theorem, suggesting that while it applies to continuous symmetries in the Lagrangian, it is uncertain whether a similar principle exists for the Hamiltonian.
  • Another participant argues that if an operator measuring spin, such as the Sz operator, commutes with the Hamiltonian, then spin is conserved, particularly for spin-1/2 particles where S^2 and S_z are conserved.
  • One participant notes that the Hamiltonian of a quantum field is required to be a Poincaré scalar, indicating it does not carry spinor indices, and asserts that spin is generally not conserved, but helicity or polarization may be conserved instead.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether invariance in the Hamiltonian implies conservation of spin, with some supporting the idea and others challenging it. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the relationship between Hamiltonian invariance and spin conservation.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the relationship between symmetries and conservation laws in the context of Hamiltonian mechanics versus Lagrangian mechanics.

Niles
Messages
1,834
Reaction score
0
Hi

Lets say I have a Hamiltonian which is invariant in e.g. the spin indices. Does this imply that spin is a conserved quantity? If yes, is there an easy way of seeing this?


Niles.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Noether's theorem says that for a group of continuous symmetries in the Lagrangian, there is a related conserved quantity. I'm not sure if there's an analog for this for the Hamiltonian...
 


Yes consider an operator that "measures" the spin of the particle. The Sz operator for example. If this operator commutes with the Hamiltonian then it is a conserved quantity. Specifically in terms of the spin indices, for a spin-1/2 particle, then S^2 is conserved as s=1/2 and S_z is conserved as m=1/2 or m = -1/2.
 


Whoops...I completely forgot about that lol. Sorry.
 


The Hamiltonian of a quantum field is 'ab initio' required to be a Poincare' scalar, in particular a Lorentz scalar. Thus it carries no spinor indices whatsoever.

In general, the spin is not conserved, but the helicity of the massive particle or the polarization of the masseless particle is.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K