Invariance of a spin singlet under rotation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the invariance of a spin singlet state under rotation, specifically using rotation operators represented by the matrices \(\mathcal{D_{1y}(\alpha)}\) and \(\mathcal{D_{2y}(\alpha)}\). Participants emphasize the importance of correctly applying tensor products, defined as \(S \otimes T = ST^T\), to manipulate the state vectors. A key conclusion is that the rotation must preserve the norm of the singlet state, indicating that any discrepancies in calculations, such as missing signs, must be addressed to maintain this invariance.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics and spin states
  • Familiarity with tensor products in linear algebra
  • Knowledge of rotation operators in quantum mechanics
  • Experience with unitary operators and their properties
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of rotation operators in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about tensor products and their significance in quantum state manipulation
  • Explore the properties of unitary operators and their role in preserving state norms
  • Investigate the mathematical representation of spin states and superpositions
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, students studying quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of spin states and their transformations.

Silicon-Based
Messages
51
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
Show that a spin singlet state remains the same under a rotation about the ##y##-axis by an angle ##\alpha##
Relevant Equations
##|\text{singlet}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|S_{1z}+\rangle |S_{2z}-\rangle - |S_{1z}-\rangle |S_{2z}+\rangle)##

##\mathcal{D_y(\alpha)} = e^{-i\sigma_y\alpha/2} =\mathsf{1}\cos(\alpha/2) - \sigma_y\sin(\alpha/2)##

##\mathcal{D_{1y}(\alpha)} \otimes \mathcal{D_{2y}(\alpha)} = e^{-i\sigma_{1y}\alpha/2} \otimes e^{-i\sigma_{2y}\alpha/2}##
I have tried doing the obvious thing and multiplied the vectors and matrices, but I don't see a way to rearrange my result to resemble the initial state again:

##(\mathcal{D_{1y}(\alpha)} \otimes \mathcal{D_{2y}(\alpha)} )|\text{singlet}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos(\alpha/2)\\
\sin(\alpha/2)
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
-\sin(\alpha/2)\\
\cos(\alpha/2)
\end{pmatrix} - \begin{pmatrix}
-\sin(\alpha/2)\\
\cos(\alpha/2)
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos(\alpha/2)\\
\sin(\alpha/2)
\end{pmatrix}\right] ##
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Write out the result in terms of the basis vectors and multiply out the tensor products! The equation makes not too much sense to me, because on the left-hand side you have a ket, and on the right-hand side some strange notation of components.
 
As @vanhees71 tells,you should use tensor product defined as:
$$S \otimes T= ST^T$$
Where S and T are vectors. Once you do this,do you recognise the matrix you got and how it affects singlet state?
 
vanhees71 said:
Write out the result in terms of the basis vectors and multiply out the tensor products! The equation makes not too much sense to me, because on the left-hand side you have a ket, and on the right-hand side some strange notation of components.

I'm not sure I understand why I need to do this. Don't the rotation operators act only the corresponding spin states in their Hilbert space, in which case I wouldn't need to find the tensor product? This worked for me when trying to show invariance under rotation about z, unless that was purely coincidental.

I've not done tensor products before having been assigned this problem so I'm pretty sure there should be a different way to do this.

I don't see the issue with the equation, I've written the kets in terms of their components because they are no longer simply spin up or down but a superposition of both.
 
So I've tried factoring out the eigenkets from the superposed kets in my equation, e.g. ##\cos(\alpha/2)|+\rangle + \sin(\alpha/2)|-\rangle##, and found out that most of the terms cancel. I ended up with the expression ##\cos(\alpha)|\text{singlet}\rangle##. Now I'm only unsure how to rationalize the factor of ##\cos(\alpha)##.
 
Then there must be some mistake since the rotation is of course a unitary operator, i.e., the norm of your singlet state cannot change.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Silicon-Based
vanhees71 said:
Then there must be some mistake since the rotation is of course a unitary operator, i.e., the norm of your singlet state cannot change.

That's right; I missed a minus sign which normalized everything.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K