Position operator is it communitative

zimbabwe
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
I was asked to show how the position operator is not communitative in the Shrodinger Wave equation. I thought it was as it is simply mulitplication

[x]=integral from negative to positive infinite over f*(x,t) x f(x,t) dx

Can anyone help shed some light on this. I may have misunderstood the question
\hat{x}=\int^{-\infty}_{+\infty}\Psi^{*}\left(x,t\right) x \Psi\left(x,t\right) dx
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
In momentum space x is not commutative, because there

<br /> \hat{x}=i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial p}<br />

So perhaps your professor is inquiring about the wave function in momentum space?
 
Show (that is my guess based on your information, which is rather few):

x H \neq H x

Integrals do not help for not commuting operators.
 
zimbabwe said:
I was asked to show how the position operator is not communitative in the Shrodinger Wave equation. I thought it was as it is simply mulitplication
A single operator can't be commutative or noncommutative on its own. You always have to talk about a pair of operators that commute or don't commute with each other. So the question we have is, the position operator does not commute with what? That's the extra information we need. (White assumed the missing operator was the Hamiltonian; jdwood83 assumed it was momentum...)
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top