Matrix representation for (S1+S2)^2 operator

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a user's difficulty in deriving the correct matrix representation for the operator (S1+S2)^2. They have attempted two equivalent methods, including one from Sakurai and another using Pauli matrices, but are encountering unexpected eigenvalues. The user suspects a fundamental error in their procedure but is unable to identify it. They are seeking assistance in understanding the correct matrix form or guidance on their derivation process. The conversation highlights the challenges faced in quantum mechanics calculations and the importance of accurate matrix representation.
martina
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I've derived the matrix using two different, but equivalent methods (the one described in the above link-Sakurai and by calculating the direct products of Pauli matrices) and it came out the same, yet its eigenvalues are not what I know they must be, so there must be something fundamentally wrong in my procedure, but I just can't detect it. If you happen to know how the matrix looks like without a detailed derivation, I'd be grateful for that too, cause I'm really stuck here :frown:
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top