fargoth said:
but i can't obtain J_x values at the same base as J_z
I'm not quite certain what you're saying here. If what you mean is "but i can't obtain J_x values in the J_z basis", then this is not true. You can use any basis you wish to write J_x.
In the J_z basis, the eigenvectors for J_z are particularly simple, namely (0,1) and (1,0) transpose. I seem to recall that with the usual Pauli matrices, the eigenvectors for J_x, in the J_z basis, are (1,i) and (1,-i), but my memory is subject to error. In any case one can certainly choose ones basis completely independently of how one chooses the eigenvectors and eigenvalues.
And you're right that the way operator for spin in the (a,b,c) direction is simply a\sigma_x + b\sigma_y + c\sigma_z.
Sigh. It turns out that there is a much simpler way of doing this that uses (pure) density matrix formalism. In that formalism, the operators and the wave functions are all 2x2 matrices and the student doesn't need to solve eigenvector equations to find the eigenvectors. For example,
\sigma_z (1 \pm \sigma_z) = \pm (1 \pm \sigma_z)
so in the pure density matrix formalism, the eigenvector of S_z = \sigma_z/2 with eigenvalue +1/2 is obviously just 1 + \sigma_z. Thus the eigenvector for the (a\sigma_x + b\sigma_y + c\sigma_z)/2 operator with eigenvalue -1/2 is simply 1 - a\sigma_x - b\sigma_y - c\sigma_z. The disadvantage of working in this formalism is that you lose the ability to add two solutions to a wave equation.
To get back to the usual spinor formalism from pure density matrix formalism, simply right multiply by a constant spinor. For example, if you want to convert the spin -1/2 eigenvector for the S(a,b,c) operator into sigma_z form, the answer is simply:
|(a,b,c)> = (1 - a\sigma_x - b\sigma_y - c\sigma_z) \left( \begin{array}{c}1\\0\end{array}\right)
= \left(\begin{array}{c}1-c\\-a-ib\end{array}\right).
Note that instead of using (1,0) in the above, you could equally well have used (0,1). The resulting vector will be different, but will still be an eigenvector of S_(a,b,c). In fact, it will be:
\left(\begin{array}{c}-a+ib\\1-c\end{array}\right)
but these two vectors are proportional (and therefore correspond to the same state) as (a,b,c) has unit length (try the arithmetic and see).
Also note that if the eigenvector you're looking for is an eigenvector of S_z itself, then one of the two choices, that is, (1,0) or (0,1), will be annihilated by the 2x2 matrix that corresponds to the eigenstate.
Carl