How to Find the Expectation Value of an Operator with a Constant Commutator?

Domnu
Messages
176
Reaction score
0
Problem
Consider an operator \hat{A} whose commutator with the Hamiltonian \hat{H} is the constant c... ie [\hat{H}, \hat{A}] = c. Find \langle A \rangle at t > 0, given that the system is in a normalized eigenstate of \hat{A} at t=0,corresponding to the eigenvalue a.<br /> <br /> <b>Attempt Solution</b><br /> We know that<br /> <br /> \frac{\partial \langle A \rangle}{dt} = \langle \frac{i}{\hbar} [\hat{H}, \hat{A}] + \frac{\partial \hat{A}}{\partial t} \rangle = \langle \frac{i c}{\hbar} + 0 \rangle = \frac{i c}{\hbar}.<br /> <br /> Is this correct? (I'm just confirming that d\hat{A}/dt = 0 since we're in an eigenstate of \hat{A}). But this means that the expected value of A is complex... clearly, \hat{A} is not Hermitian then, right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
None of this is very clear. What's the exact problem? ic/hbar may be real if c is complex. It's certainly true that the expectation values of a hermitian operator are real. That I'll give you, clearly.
 
Hmm... I couldn't edit my previous post, so here's the new problem... (slight LaTeX error in previous post):

Problem
Consider an operator \hat{A} whose commutator with the Hamiltonian \hat{H} is the constant c... ie [\hat{H}, \hat{A}] = c. Find \langle A \rangle at t > 0, given that the system is in a normalized eigenstate of \hat{A} at t=0, corresponding to the eigenvalue a.

This is the correct problem. Notation-wise, we have that \langle A \rangle denotes the expected value of the operator \hat{A} operating upon some wavefunction \psi... here, we know that for our wavefunction, [\hat{H}, \hat{A}] = c.
 
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