Peculiar feature of a commutator, can anyone explain?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the non-Hermitian nature of the operator L_3 in quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of functions with finite norms over finite intervals. D. Judge's work highlights that the assumption of Hermiticity in evaluating matrix elements is flawed. Additionally, Liboff's "Introductory Quantum Mechanics" references inconsistencies with the commutator, suggesting that angle variables like sin(φ) and cos(φ) are more consistent. The importance of careful handling of infinite-dimensional matrices and conditional convergence is also emphasized.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, specifically Hermitian operators.
  • Familiarity with matrix mechanics and infinite-dimensional matrices.
  • Knowledge of conditional convergence in mathematical analysis.
  • Basic grasp of angle variables in quantum mechanics, particularly sin(φ) and cos(φ).
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of non-Hermitian operators in quantum mechanics.
  • Study the concept of conditional convergence in the context of infinite-dimensional spaces.
  • Explore the significance of angle variables in quantum mechanics, focusing on sin(φ) and cos(φ).
  • Read D. Judge's paper in Nuovo Cimento for deeper insights into the topic.
USEFUL FOR

Quantum mechanics students, physicists dealing with operator theory, and researchers interested in the mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics.

haitao23
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/4922/14662031eo8.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
You've happened upon a very tricky issue indeed! I've got a couple of papers to point you to.

It has been pointed out by D. Judge1 that [itex]L_3[/itex] is not Hermetian on a space of functions that have finite norm on a finite interval. Since [itex]\phi\in(0,2\pi )[/itex], that is exactly what we are dealing with here. Since you tacitly used the Hermiticity of [itex]L_3[/itex] to evaluate those matrix elements, there is a flaw in your argument.

I didn't think of this myself, it is mentioned as a footnote in Problem 9.15 in Liboff's Introductory Quantum Mechanics. In that problem he brings up another inconsistency issue with this commutator (maybe I'll post it if you're sufficiently interested and and I'm feeling sufficiently ambitious). He mentions that W. Louisell1 has pointed out that "more consistent angle variables are [itex]\sin(\phi)[/itex] and [itex]\cos(\phi)[/itex]."

1D. Judge, Nuovo Cimento 31, 332 (1964)
2W. Louisell, Phys. Lett. 7, 60 (1993)

Hope that helps,

Tom
 
You are taking traces of products of infinite dimensional matrices. When you do this, you must be careful about conditional convergence. If you are not using the coordinate represntation, then what do you mean by [itex]\phi[/itex]? You must first express [itex]\phi[/itex] in the [itex]l,m[/itex] basis, and then you will see that your "coordinate independent" conclusion is not so obvious.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K