Matrix elements in the quantum oscillator

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the non-zero matrix elements of the operators ##\hat{x}^3## and ##\hat{x}^4## in the context of a quantum harmonic oscillator. The original poster presents the problem and begins to explore the computation of matrix elements using the position operator expressed in terms of creation and annihilation operators.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the evaluation of matrix elements by applying the operators sequentially to the quantum states. There are attempts to compute specific terms, with some participants questioning the correctness of the factors arising from the application of the operators.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and corrections to each other's reasoning. Some participants express uncertainty about the application of operators and the resulting factors, while others clarify these points, leading to a deeper understanding of the matrix elements involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating through the complexities of operator algebra in quantum mechanics, specifically regarding the action of raising and lowering operators on quantum states. There is an acknowledgment of the potential for confusion due to notation and the order of operations.

andre220
Messages
75
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



For a quantum oscillator find all non-zero matrix elements of the operators ##\hat{x}^3## and ##\hat{x}^4##

Homework Equations



##\hat{x} = \sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega}}\left(a+a^\dagger\right)##

##a^\dagger |n\rangle = \sqrt{n+1}|n+1\rangle##
##a |n\rangle = \sqrt{n}|n-1\rangle##

The Attempt at a Solution


Okay so first it is necessary to compute ## \langle n |\hat{x}^3|n'\rangle## and then from that outcome determine the non-zero elements.

$$x^3 = \left(\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega}\right)^{3/2}(a + a^\dagger)^3 =\left(\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega}\right)^{3/2}(a + a^\dagger)(a _ + a^\dagger)(a + a^\dagger) = $$

$$=\left(\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega}\right)^{3/2}(a a a + a^\dagger a a + a a^\dagger a + a^\dagger a^\dagger a + a a a^\dagger + a^\dagger a a^\dagger + a a^\dagger a^\dagger + a^\dagger a^\dagger a^\dagger) $$

So then we compute

$$\langle n|\hat{x}^3|n' \rangle = $$
$$\left(\frac{\hbar}{2m\omega}\right)^{3/2} \langle n|(a a a + a^\dagger a a + a a^\dagger a + a^\dagger a^\dagger a + a a a^\dagger + a^\dagger a a^\dagger + a a^\dagger a^\dagger + a^\dagger a^\dagger a^\dagger)|n'\rangle$$

And then from here I am having trouble evaluating this, however, I am pretty sure that the majority of the terms above go to zero.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You just have to evaluate the action of the operators on the states sequentially. Let's take the term a a^{\dagger} a for example:
\left\langle n\right| a a^{\dagger} a \left|n&#039;\right \rangle = \left\langle n\right| a a^{\dagger} \sqrt{n&#039;} \left|n&#039; - 1\right \rangle<br /> = \left\langle n\right| a \sqrt{n&#039;} \sqrt{n&#039;} \left|n&#039;\right \rangle<br /> = \left\langle n\right| \sqrt{n&#039;} \sqrt{n&#039;} \sqrt{n&#039;} \left|n&#039;-1\right \rangle<br /> = \left(n&#039;\right)^{3/2} \delta_{n,n&#039;-1}<br />
 
Thanks for your response. Why wouldn't the above be: $$\langle n|aa^\dagger a|n'\rangle = \langle n|aa^\dagger \sqrt{n'}|n'-1\rangle = \langle n|a\sqrt{n'+1}\sqrt{n'}|n'\rangle = \langle n|\sqrt{n'+1}n'|n'-1\rangle = n'\sqrt{n'+1}\delta_{n,n'-1}$$

because you would apply the lowering operator and then the raising and then the lowering, which would give you that factor ##\sqrt{n'+1}## instead of 3 factors of ##\sqrt{n'}##. Or am I misguided in my thinking?
 
I seem to remember that ##a^\dagger a = N## and ##a a^\dagger = N+1## ...
 
Okay so just to make sure that I am going about this right here is what I have for the first four terms:
$$\langle n|a a a|n'\rangle = \langle n|a a \sqrt{n'}|n'-1\rangle = \cdots = (n')^{3/2}\delta_{n,n'-3}$$
$$\langle n|a^\dagger a a|n'\rangle = \langle n|a^\dagger a \sqrt{n'}|n'-1\rangle = \langle n|(n')^{3/2}|n'-2\rangle = (n')^{3/2}\delta_{n,n'-2}$$
$$\langle n|a a^\dagger a|n'\rangle = \langle n|a n'|n'\rangle = (n')^{3/2}\delta_{n,n'-1}$$
$$\langle n|a^\dagger a^\dagger a|n'\rangle = \langle n |a^\dagger n'|n'\rangle = n'\sqrt{n'+1}\delta_{n,n'+1}$$
 
As I said (you can check with your post #1) ##a^\dagger a = N ##, so ##a^\dagger a \, a |n> = a^\dagger a \, \sqrt N\, |n-1> = \sqrt N a^\dagger a \, |n-1> = (N-1)\sqrt N |n-1>##, meaning I get something else for your second term...
And for the coefficient of the third ...
And for the fourth I get the same as you :-)
 
andre220 said:
Thanks for your response. Why wouldn't the above be: $$\langle n|aa^\dagger a|n'\rangle = \langle n|aa^\dagger \sqrt{n'}|n'-1\rangle = \langle n|a\sqrt{n'+1}\sqrt{n'}|n'\rangle = \langle n|\sqrt{n'+1}n'|n'-1\rangle = n'\sqrt{n'+1}\delta_{n,n'-1}$$
because you would apply the lowering operator and then the raising and then the lowering, which would give you that factor ##\sqrt{n'+1}## instead of 3 factors of ##\sqrt{n'}##. Or am I misguided in my thinking?
Because you are applying the raising operator on the state \left|n&#039;-1\right\rangle instead of \left|n&#039;\right\rangle, and so you obtain a factor \sqrt{(n&#039;-1) +1} = \sqrt{n&#039;}.
This also sort of explains why you got the wrong answer for the second term: you need to take note of the state that you are operating on.
 
Okay after about five minutes of staring at it I think it makes sense now. What you are both saying is that $$\langle n|a^\dagger a a|n'\rangle =\underbrace{ \langle n |\sqrt{n'}a^\dagger a |n'-1\rangle}_\textrm{Now we are acting on n-1 state and thus the outcome of the operator will be not just n' but n'-1}$$

It clicked now, the notation was slightly throwing me off, but also I clearly wasn't getting it. Thank you for your help.
 
Nice exercise. In my book (Merzbacher, QM, 1970 :-) ) there is a matrix for x that still looks decent. But for higher powers it will look a bit less nice; still it's a diagonal band matrix.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K