How Does an Extra Factor of i Affect Quantum Probability Calculations?

davon806
Messages
147
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


b.jpg

I am not sure about (c) and (d). Firstly, I calculated the eigenvector of A :
|v_1> = ( |2 > - |1> )/ √(2) ,eigenvalue -2
|v_2> = ( |2> + |1>) / √(2) , eigenvalue 2

For (c), basically it follows from part (b) where the probability of a_1 is given by the formula | <v_1 | ψ > |^2 , and similarly for a_2 ( using v_2)

However, I don't see any reason that an extra factor of i will change the value of those probabilities ? ( I've calculated a_1 and a_2 which are both 1/2, in (b) )

For(d), I would like to use the formula ψ(t) = e^(-iEt/h) ψ(0). However, the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian was not provided. Given the fact that we only have |1> , |2> , |v_1> and |v_2> : How can I use this formula?

Homework Equations


In the general case, the Hamiltonian of the system can be written as a 2 × 2 matrix, where the elements of the matrix are given by: H_ij = < i | H | j > . So for example, <2 | A | 1 > = A_21 = 2. Actually A is not the Hamiltonian so I am not even sure whether it is applicable to part (a). Nevertheless I use this in (a). If I was wrong please correct me !

The Attempt at a Solution


Incorporated in question
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
davon806 said:

Homework Statement


Firstly, I calculated the eigenvector of A :
|v_1> = ( |2 > - |1> )/ √(2) ,eigenvalue -2
|v_2> = ( |2> + |1>) / √(2) , eigenvalue 2
OK

For (c), basically it follows from part (b) where the probability of a_1 is given by the formula | <v_1 | ψ > |^2 , and similarly for a_2 ( using v_2) However, I don't see any reason that an extra factor of i will change the value of those probabilities ? ( I've calculated a_1 and a_2 which are both 1/2, in (b) )
The factor of ##i## does make a difference. Did you try calculating the probabilities for this case?

For(d), I would like to use the formula ψ(t) = e^(-iEt/h) ψ(0). However, the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian was not provided.
Actually, the eigenstates of H are essentially given. Note that the form of the matrix given for H is for the original basis {|1>, |2>}. What do you get for H|1>?
Actually A is not the Hamiltonian so I am not even sure whether it is applicable to part (a). Nevertheless I use this in (a). If I was wrong please correct me !
You are OK here.
 
  • Like
Likes davon806
TSny said:
OK

The factor of ##i## does make a difference. Did you try calculating the probabilities for this case?

Actually, the eigenstates of H are essentially given. Note that the form of the matrix given for H is for the original basis {|1>, |2>}. What do you get for H|1>?
You are OK here.

Hi TSny ,

For (b), firstly I rewrite | ψ > = (1/2√2) ( |v_2> - |v_1> + i√3 |v_1> + i√3 |v_2>)
then I calculated P_a1 = | < v_1 | Ψ > | ^2 = (1/8) | -1 + √3 i |^2 = (1/8) *4 = 1/2 .

Hence we can calculate Φ in a similar way : | Φ > = (1/2√2) ( |v_2> - |v_1> + √3 |v_1> + √3 |v_2>) , so
new P_a1 = | < v_1 | Φ > | ^2 = (1/8) (-1 + √3 )^2 = (1/8) *(2+2√3 ) = (1+√3 )/ 4 > old P_a1?

What is the physical reason behind this? (As asked in (c))

For(d), write |1> = (x y) . H |1> = (E1 0 E2 0) ( x y) = (E1x E2y) ≠ λ|1> ?
 
davon806 said:
For (b), firstly I rewrite | ψ > = (1/2√2) ( |v_2> - |v_1> + i√3 |v_1> + i√3 |v_2>)
then I calculated P_a1 = | < v_1 | Ψ > | ^2 = (1/8) | -1 + √3 i |^2 = (1/8) *4 = 1/2 .
OK

Hence we can calculate Φ in a similar way : | Φ > = (1/2√2) ( |v_2> - |v_1> + √3 |v_1> + √3 |v_2>) , so
new P_a1 = | < v_1 | Φ > | ^2 = (1/8) (-1 + √3 )^2 = (1/8) *(2+2√3 ) = (1+√3 )/ 4 > old P_a1?
OK, except you didn't quite calculate (-1 + √3 )^2 correctly.

What is the physical reason behind this? (As asked in (c))
I don't think I can give you a decent physical reason. But it's important to understand that when you expand a state in terms of basis vectors, the relative phases of the coefficients of the expansion are very important. Changing the relative phase changes the state. So, the state (1/√2)( |1> + |2> ) is a different state than (1/√2)( |1> + i |2> ), even though the magnitudes of the coefficients are the same in each state.

For example, if |1> represents the spin state of a spin 1/2 particle where the spin is definitely "up along the z-direction" and if |2> represents the state of the particle where the spin is definitely "down along the z-direction", then (1/√2)( |1> + |2> ) is the state where the spin is definitely along the +x direction while (1/√2)( |1> + i |2> ) is the state where the spin is definitely along the +y direction. So, the presence of the i makes a big difference.

For(d),
write |1> = (x y) . H |1> = (E1 0 E2 0) ( x y) = (E1x E2y) ≠ λ|1> ?
You are working with matrices that are written with respect to the basis vectors |1> and |2>. So, the column vector that represents |1> would be (1 0)T.
 
  • Like
Likes davon806
del
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top