Undergrad Identity involving exponential of operators

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on deriving equation (22) from the paper linked by the user, which involves the identity of operators in quantum mechanics. The key formula presented is $$(\partial_x - \mathrm{i} e/\hbar By)\psi (\vec{x}) = \exp(\mathrm{i} e B x y/\hbar) \partial_x \left [\exp(-\mathrm{i} e B x y/\hbar) \psi(\vec{x}) \right].$$ This identity is established through the iterative application of the operator, demonstrating that for any natural number k, $$(\partial_x - \mathrm{i} e/\hbar By)^k\psi (\vec{x})$$ can be expressed in terms of the exponential operator. The conclusion confirms that the commutation relation ##[\partial _x, y] = 0## plays a crucial role in this derivation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics operators
  • Familiarity with the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff (BCH) formula
  • Knowledge of operator exponentiation in quantum mechanics
  • Proficiency in LaTeX for mathematical expressions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula in detail
  • Explore operator exponentiation techniques in quantum mechanics
  • Review commutation relations and their implications in quantum systems
  • Analyze additional examples of operator identities in quantum mechanics literature
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students specializing in quantum mechanics, particularly those interested in operator theory and mathematical derivations in quantum field theory.

thatboi
Messages
130
Reaction score
20
Hey all,
I saw a formula in this paper: (https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0011069.pdf), specifically equation (22):
1680505109627.png

and wanted to know if anyone knew how to derive it. It doesn't seem like a simple application of BCH to me.
Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Please use LaTeX to type formulae. It's much easier to read!

The trick is that
$$(\partial_x - \mathrm{i} e/\hbar By)\psi (\vec{x}) = \exp(\mathrm{i} e B x y/\hbar) \partial_x \left [\exp(-\mathrm{i} e B x y/\hbar) \psi(\vec{x}) \right]$$
for all ##\psi(\vec{x})## (in the domain of the operators applied ;-)).

By iteration it's further easy to see that for ##k \in \mathbb{N}##
$$(\partial_x - \mathrm{i} e/\hbar By)^k\psi (\vec{x}) = \exp(\mathrm{i} e B x y/\hbar) \partial_x^k \left [\exp(-\mathrm{i} e B x y/\hbar) \psi(\vec{x}) \right].$$
Plugging this into the series defining the operator exponential you get Eq. (22) of the paper.
 
  • Like
Likes thatboi, topsquark and gentzen
Or, leaving out a lot of details: ##[\partial _x, y] = 0##.

-Dan
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
919
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K