- #1

NewGuy

- 9

- 0

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter NewGuy
- Start date

- #1

NewGuy

- 9

- 0

- #2

xlines

- 96

- 0

I seem to remember of proving something similar. I'll dig up my QM notes and try to clear thing up, unless someone answers by the time I get to my office.

- #3

NewGuy

- 9

- 0

If you would that I would be very grateful :)

- #4

xlines

- 96

- 0

I am sorry, but I will fail you too. What I did is to solve problem 1.3. from Sakurai where it is required to show that determinant of [itex]\pmb{\sigma}\cdot\pmb{n}[/itex] is invariant under operation you quoted. I used 3.2.34, 35, 39 and 44.

Middle result of this solution that may help you is:

[itex]U(\pmb{\sigma}\cdot\vec{a})U^\dagger=\pmb{\sigma}\cdot (\vec{a} cos \phi + 2 \hat{n} (\hat{n} \vec{a}) sin^{2}(\phi /2) - (\hat{n} \times\vec{a}) sin \phi ) [/itex]

Where U is given by 3.2.44. Hope it helps to any amount, I wish you luck with your problem.

Share:

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 347

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 115

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 294

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 763

- Last Post

- Replies
- 14

- Views
- 555

- Last Post

- Replies
- 0

- Views
- 414

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 948

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 369

- Last Post

- Replies
- 29

- Views
- 1K