I Position representation of angular momentum operator

Kashmir
Messages
466
Reaction score
74
One of the component of angular momentum operator is ##\hat{L}_{x}=\hat{y} \hat{P}_{z}-\hat{z} \hat{P}_{y}##

I want it's position representation.

My attempt :

I'll find the representation of the first term ##\hat{y} \hat{P}_{z}##. The total representation is the sum of two terms.

The action of ##\hat{y} \hat{P}_{z}## on a ket is :##\left(1 \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{p}_{z}\right) \iiint\left|x^{\prime}, y^{\prime}, z^{\prime}\right\rangle \cdot \psi\left(x^{\prime}, y^{\prime}, z^{\prime}\right) \cdot d x^{\prime} d y^{\prime} d z'##

The position representation is found by acting a bra on it, thus :
##\left\langle x| \otimes\left\langle y|\otimes\langle z|)\left(1 \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{p_{z}}\right) \iiint \mid x^{\prime} y \hat{z}\right\rangle \psi\left(x' y', z^{\prime}\right) d x' dy'dz'\right.##

Which gives ##\int\left\langle x \mid x^{\prime}\right\rangle y^{\prime}\left\langle y \mid y^{\prime}\right\rangle\left\langle z\left|\hat{p}_{z}\right| z^{\prime}\right\rangle \psi\left(x^{\prime}, y^{\prime},z'\right) d x' d y' z^{\prime}## Which is

##y \int\left\langle z\left|\hat{p}_{z}\right| z\right\rangle \psi(x y z) d z=-i \hbar y \frac{\partial}{\partial z} \psi(x ,y ,z)## .

Can anyone please tell Is this correct?
Thank you
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
looks good, although the notation is a bit misleading. What you have is
$$\hat{\vec{P}} \psi(\vec{x})=-\mathrm{i} \hbar \vec{\nabla}, \quad \hat{\vec{X}} \psi(\vec{x})=\vec{x} \psi(\vec{x}).$$
From the definition of angular momentum
$$\hat{\vec{L}}=\hat{\vec{X}} \times \hat{\vec{P}}$$
you immediately get
$$\hat{\vec{L}} \psi(\vec{x})=-\mathrm{i} \hbar \vec{x} \times \vec{\nabla} \psi(\vec{x}).$$
Your expression with the Kronecker products is not correct and also unnecessarily complicated to write correctly.
 
vanhees71 said:
Your expression with the Kronecker products is not correct
Which one?
 
##\hat{y} \hat{p}_z## is not what you wrote but when formally working in the Hilbert-space ##\mathcal{H}=\mathcal{H}_x \otimes \mathcal{H}_y \otimes \mathcal{H}_z## it's
$$(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{1})(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{1} \otimes \hat{p}_z).$$
It's understandable that in the literature nobody uses this notation, because it's unnecessarily clumsy.

[Forget this posting]. Of course, indeed
$$(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{1})(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{1} \otimes \hat{p}_z)=\hat{1} \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{p}_y.$$
 
vanhees71 said:
##\hat{y} \hat{p}_z## is not what you wrote but when formally working in the Hilbert-space ##\mathcal{H}=\mathcal{H}_x \otimes \mathcal{H}_y \otimes \mathcal{H}_z## it's
$$(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{1})(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{1} \otimes \hat{p}_z).$$
It's understandable that in the literature nobody uses this notation, because it's unnecessarily clumsy.
But ##(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{1})(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{1} \otimes \hat{p}_z) =\left(1 \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{p}_{z}\right)##
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Kashmir said:
But ##(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{1})(\hat{1} \otimes \hat{1} \otimes \hat{p}_z) =\left(1 \otimes \hat{y} \otimes \hat{p}_{z}\right)##
Yes, sorry. You are right.
 
vanhees71 said:
Yes, sorry. You are right.
Please don't say sorry. You've taught me so much since I've been here on PF :)
 
vanhees71 said:
What you have is
$$\hat{\vec{P}} \psi(\vec{x})=-\mathrm{i} \hbar \vec{\nabla}, \quad \hat{\vec{X}} \psi(\vec{x})=\vec{x} \psi(\vec{x}).$$
From the definition of angular momentum
$$\hat{\vec{L}}=\hat{\vec{X}} \times \hat{\vec{P}}$$
you immediately get
$$\hat{\vec{L}} \psi(\vec{x})=-\mathrm{i} \hbar \vec{x} \times \vec{\nabla} \psi(\vec{x}).$$
I know the individual position representations of position and momentum operators.
In the angular momentum case, we've both of those operators in the form ##y p_z## etc .

So how does it directly follow, without proving it the way I've done, what the position representation will be?

Doesn't the proof of position representation follow from the bra ket notation?
 
Yes, sure, but when you've proven how ##\hat{\vec{X}}## and ##\hat{\vec{P}}## act on wave functions, you also have proven how ##\hat{Y} \hat{P}_z## act. It's just the composition of operators, i.e., you first apply ##\hat{P}_z## and then ##\hat{Y}## to the result.
 
  • Like
Likes Kashmir
  • #10
vanhees71 said:
Yes, sure, but when you've proven how ##\hat{\vec{X}}## and ##\hat{\vec{P}}## act on wave functions, you also have proven how ##\hat{Y} \hat{P}_z## act. It's just the composition of operators, i.e., you first apply ##\hat{P}_z## and then ##\hat{Y}## to the result.
In the abstract notation, ##\hat{Y} \hat{P}_z## simply means applying
##\hat{P}_z## and then ##\hat{Y}##.

What it does to the original wavefunction is not so direct because the final wavefunction is given as :
##\left\langle x\left|y \hat{p}_{z}\right| \psi\right\rangle##. From this it's not clear why the final wavefunction will be initial wavefunction acted by the position representation of each operator consecutively.
 
  • #11
Kashmir said:
In the abstract notation, ##\hat{Y} \hat{P}_z## simply means applying
##\hat{P}_z## and then ##\hat{Y}##.

What it does to the original wavefunction is not so direct because the final wavefunction is given as :
##\left\langle x\left|y \hat{p}_{z}\right| \psi\right\rangle##. From this it's not clear why the final wavefunction will be initial wavefunction acted by the position representation of each operator consecutively.
If anyone has same doubt please see this :https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...-of-product-of-operators.1013673/post-6615586
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Back
Top