Undergrad Pauli matrices and shared eigenvectors

Click For Summary
S2 and Sz share an eigenspace due to their commutation, but S2 and Sx do not share the same eigenspace despite also commuting. This is because Sx does not commute with Sz, indicating that the eigenspaces are distinct. Commutativity is not transitive; just because two matrices commute with a third does not mean they will commute with each other. Therefore, the eigenvectors of S2 and Sz differ from those of S2 and Sx. The discussion highlights the nuances of eigenvector relationships in quantum mechanics.
Sunny Singh
Messages
19
Reaction score
1
TL;DR
For a spin 1/2 particle, why does Sx, Sy and Sz don't share the complete eigenspace even though all of them commute with S^2
We know that S2 commutes with Sz and so they share their eigenspace. Now since S2 also commutes with Sx, as per my understanding, the eigenvectors of S2 and Sz should also be the eigenvectors of Sx. But since the paulic matrices σx and σy are not diagonlized in the eigenbasis of S2, it is clear that S2 and Sx don't share their eigenspace even though they commute with each other. How is that possible? what am i missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To have common eigenspaces we need that all commute with each other. Every matrix commutes with ##I##, but that doesn't mean all matrices have the same eigenspace. And the ##S_{xyz}## do not commute.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Sunny Singh
Sunny Singh said:
We know that S2 commutes with Sz and so they share their eigenspace.

Yes.

Sunny Singh said:
since S2 also commutes with Sx, as per my understanding, the eigenvectors of S2 and Sz should also be the eigenvectors of Sx.

Your understanding is incorrect. S2 and Sx share an eigenspace, but it's a different eigenspace from the one shared by S2 and Sz. The two eigenspaces must be different because Sx does not commute with Sz.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Sunny Singh
To say it in another way, commutativity is not transitive. ##[A,B] = 0## and ##[B,C]=0## does not imply that ##[A,C]=0##.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
23K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
11K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K