Is Symmetry Required for Determining the Hamiltonian?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aaaa202
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hamiltonian
aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
My book writes a 5-step recipe for detemining the hamiltonian, which I have attached. However I see a problem with arriving at the last result. Doesn't it only follow if the matrix M is a symmetric matrix - i.e. the transpose of it is equal to itself.
 

Attachments

  • hamiltonian.png
    hamiltonian.png
    6 KB · Views: 533
Physics news on Phys.org
I am assuming the tilde above an object implies taking a transpose. If that is the case, then M is indeed a symmetric matrix. One can see this by looking at the Lagrangian. Since the Lagrangian is a number, we can take a transpose of L and we'll get back the same number, i.e. L^T=L, this will rewrite the Lagrangian in terms of M^T. But since these are equal, we must have M^T=M
 
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