Probability of finding a particle in a certain state, using projection

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the method of using projection operators to calculate the probability of finding a particle in a certain quantum state. Participants explore the mathematical formulation of projection operators within the context of quantum mechanics, specifically relating to Hilbert spaces and eigenvalues of operators.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the method involving a projection operator \(\Pi\) defined on a Hilbert space \(H\) and its application to calculate the probability of measuring a specific eigenvalue of an operator \(\hat A\).
  • Another participant explains that the projection operator \(\Pi_{+1}\) yields zero when applied to odd functions and returns even functions unchanged.
  • A participant expresses uncertainty about how to apply the general formula \(\Pi\psi=\sum_j<\phi_j,\psi>\phi_j\) to other problems.
  • One participant indicates they have gained understanding but still finds the definition of \(\Pi\) somewhat odd.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the projection operator and its application, with some indicating clarity while others remain uncertain. No consensus is reached on the overall comprehension of the method.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the need for clearer definitions and examples to fully grasp the application of projection operators in different contexts.

dreamspy
Messages
41
Reaction score
3
I was reading about a certain methood that uses projection to calculate the probability of finding a particle in a certain state. The explanation is not detailed enough for me to get my head around how to use it, but maybe some of you people are familiar with the methood? The methood goes like this:

We have that [tex]\epsilon \subset H[/tex] is a subspace with an orthonormal basis [tex]\{\phi_j\}[/tex] (here H is Hilbert space). We define an operator [tex]\Pi<img src="/styles/physicsforums/xenforo/smilies/arghh.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":H" title="Gah! :H" data-shortname=":H" />\rightarrow \epsilon[/tex] like this:

[tex]\Pi\psi=\sum_j<\phi_j,\psi>\phi_j[/tex]

Let's say that [tex]A[/tex] is a measurable property of a particle, and [tex]\hat A[/tex] is the corresponding operator. Let's make [tex]a[/tex] to be one of the eigenvalues of [tex]\hat A[/tex] and [tex]\epsilon_a[/tex] is the corrisponding eigenspace. That is: [tex]\epsilon_a[/tex] is the subspace in H that is spanned by all eigenfunctions of [tex]\hat A[/tex] with eigenvalue [tex]a[/tex]. If the particle has the wavefunction [tex]\psi_t[/tex] then the probability to measurement of [tex]A[/tex] will give the result [tex]a[/tex] is:

[tex]P(A=a)=\parallel\Pi_a\psi_t\parallel^2[/tex]

Now there is given an example to explain this. We are given wave function

[tex]\Psi=(A+Bx)e^{-x^2/a^2}[/tex]

And the parity operator [tex]\hat p[/tex] which functions like this:

[tex]\hat p \Psi(x) = \Psi(-x)[/tex]

Now it's easy to show that the eigenvalues of the parity operator are [tex]\pm 1[/tex] and the corresponding eigenfunctions are:
all even functions for eigenvalue +1
all odd functions for eigenvalue -1

Now the probability of getting [tex]p = +1[/tex] is given by:

[tex]P(p=+1) = \parallel \hat\Pi_{+1}\Psi\parallel^2 = \parallel Ae^{-x^2/a^2}\parallel^2[/tex]

Now what I don't get is how [tex]\hat \Pi_{+1}\Psi[/tex] was calculated. Anyone care to shed a light on this for me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The projection operator is defined to give zero when applied to an odd function and to give the function back when it is applied to an even function. So

[tex]\Pi_{+1} ( xe^{-x^2/a^2} )= 0[/tex]

and

[tex]\Pi_{+1} ( e^{-x^2/a^2} )= e^{-x^2/a^2}[/tex]
 
But what about the sum:

[tex]\Pi\psi=\sum_j<\phi_j,\psi>\phi_j[/tex]

I'm not sure how I would use this in general with other problems.
 
I think I got it now, but I still find the definition of [tex]\Pi[/tex] a little bit odd.
 
dreamspy said:
I think I got it now, but I still find the definition of [tex]\Pi[/tex] a little bit odd.

I doubt you are the only one.

[tex]\p[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K