Proof for commutator $[\hat{H},\hat{a}] = - \hbar \omega \hat{a}

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter 71GA
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Commutator Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on proving the commutation relations between the Hamiltonian operator \(\hat{H}\) and the annihilation \(\hat{a}\) and creation \(\hat{a}^\dagger\) operators in quantum mechanics. The established relations are \([\hat{H}, \hat{a}] = -\hbar \omega \hat{a}\) and \([\hat{H}, \hat{a}^\dagger] = \hbar \omega \hat{a}^\dagger\). The user initially struggled with deriving these relations but ultimately confirmed their validity through community guidance. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the commutation relations between position \(\hat{X}\) and momentum \(\hat{P}\) operators as foundational to this proof.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics, specifically operator algebra.
  • Familiarity with Hamiltonian mechanics and the role of the Hamiltonian operator \(\hat{H}\).
  • Knowledge of annihilation \(\hat{a}\) and creation \(\hat{a}^\dagger\) operators.
  • Comprehension of the commutation relations between position \(\hat{X}\) and momentum \(\hat{P}\) operators.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the eigenstates of the quantum harmonic oscillator using the commutation relations.
  • Learn about the implications of the commutation relations in quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of quantum states.
  • Explore the mathematical techniques for calculating operator commutators, including the Leibniz product rule.
  • Investigate the role of the Hamiltonian in quantum systems and its relation to energy eigenvalues.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for quantum mechanics students, physicists, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of quantum theory, particularly those focusing on operator algebra and the quantum harmonic oscillator.

71GA
Messages
208
Reaction score
0
I know how to derive below equations found on wikipedia and have done it myselt:

\begin{align}
\hat{H} &= \hbar \omega \left(\hat{a}^\dagger\hat{a} + \frac{1}{2}\right)\\
\hat{H} &= \hbar \omega \left(\hat{a}\hat{a}^\dagger - \frac{1}{2}\right)\\
\end{align}

where ##\hat{a}=\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left(\hat{P} - i \hat{X}\right)## is a annihilation operator and ##\hat{a}^\dagger=\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left(\hat{P} + i \hat{X}\right)## a creation operator. Let me write also that:

\begin{align}
\hat{P}&= \frac{1}{p_0}\hat{p} = -\frac{i\hbar}{\sqrt{\hbar m \omega}} \frac{d}{dx}\\
\hat{X}&=\frac{1}{x_0} \hat{x}=\sqrt{\frac{m\omega}{\hbar}}x
\end{align}

In order to continue i need a proof that operators ##\hat{a}## and ##\hat{a}^\dagger## give a following commutator with hamiltonian ##\hat{H}##:

\begin{align}
\left[\hat{H},\hat{a} \right] &= -\hbar\omega \, \hat{a}\\
\left[\hat{H},\hat{a}^\dagger \right] &= +\hbar\omega \, \hat{a}^\dagger
\end{align}

These statements can be found on wikipedia as well as here, but nowhere it is proven that the above relations for commutator really hold. I tried to derive ##\left[\hat{H},\hat{a} \right]## and my result was:

$$
\left[\hat{H},\hat{a} \right] \psi = -i \sqrt{\frac{\omega \hbar^3}{4m}}\psi
$$

You should know that this this is 3rd commutator that i have ever calculated so it probably is wrong, but here is a photo of my attempt on paper. I would appreciate if anyone has any link to a proof of the commutator relations (one will do) or could post a proof here.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I presume you know the commutation relations between P and X? If so, write them down here.
From that, you can work the commutator ##[a, a^\dagger]##.
From that, you can work out your ##[H,a]##, etc. (Hint: apply the Leibniz product rule.)
 
strangerep said:
I presume you know the commutation relations between P and X? If so, write them down here.

\begin{align}
\left[\hat{X}, \hat{P}\right] = \left[\tfrac{1}{x_0}\hat{x},\tfrac{1}{p_0}\hat{p}\right]=\tfrac{1}{x_0p_0} \big[\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\ \underbrace{\hat{x},\hat{p}}_{i\hbar \text{... calculated below}} \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \big]= \frac{1}{x_0 p_0} \hbar i = \sqrt{\frac{m \omega }{\hbar \hbar m \omega}} \hbar i = i
\end{align}

\begin{align}
\left[ \hat{x}, \hat{p} \right] \psi &= \hat{x}\hat{p} \psi - \hat{p} \hat{x} \psi = - x\,i \hbar \frac{d \psi}{d x} - \left(- i\hbar \frac{d}{dx} \left(x \psi \right)\right) = - x\, i \hbar \frac{d \psi}{dx} + i \hbar \underbrace{\frac{d}{dx}\left( x \psi \right)}_{\text{product rule}} =\\
&= - x\, i \hbar \frac{d \psi }{d x} + i\hbar\left( \frac{d x}{d x} \psi + x \frac{d \psi}{d x} \right) = -x\,i\hbar \frac{d \psi}{dx} + i \hbar \psi + x\, i \hbar \frac{d \psi}{dx} = i \hbar \psi
\end{align}

strangerep said:
From that, you can work the commutator ##[a, a^\dagger]##.
I don't quite know how to start this.

strangerep said:
From that, you can work out your ##[H,a]##, etc. (Hint: apply the Leibniz product rule.)
Lets leave this for later and work out ##[a, a^\dagger]## first.
 
71GA said:
I don't quite know how to start this.

Use that the commutator bracket is linear. So ##[\alpha A + \beta B, C] = \alpha [A,C] + \beta [B,C]## and the same thing in the other variable.
 
You are good to go, note
<br /> a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{P}-i\hat{X})<br />
and
<br /> a^{\dagger} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{P}+i\hat{X})<br />
now
<br /> [a,a^{\dagger}] = \frac{1}{2}\left[ (\hat{P}-i\hat{X}),(\hat{P}+i\hat{X}) \right]<br />
and bust it out using what you just showed us.
 
jfy4 said:
You are good to go, note
<br /> a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{P}-i\hat{X})<br />
and
<br /> a^{\dagger} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{P}+i\hat{X})<br />
now
<br /> [a,a^{\dagger}] = \frac{1}{2}\left[ (\hat{P}-i\hat{X}),(\hat{P}+i\hat{X}) \right]<br />
and bust it out using what you just showed us.

I think i wrote this wrong as it is:

<br /> a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{X}-i\hat{P})<br />
and
<br /> a^{\dagger} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{X}+i\hat{P})<br />
 
Thank you all. I just solved this and it feels great. Now that i know following commutators:

\begin{align}
[\hat{H}, \hat{a}] &= -\hbar \omega \hat{a}\\
[\hat{H}, \hat{a}^\dagger] &= \hbar \omega \hat{a}^\dagger\\
\end{align}

On the Wikipedia it is said that these commutators can be used to find eigenstates of Quant. harm. oscilator, but explanation is a bit too fast there. Anyway i strive to be able to derive the equation $W_n = \hbar \omega \left(n + \tfrac{1}{2}\right)$ in full, but first i need to clear why theese two relations hold:

\begin{align}
\hat{H}\hat{a} \psi_n &= (W_n - \hbar \omega) \hat{a} \psi_n\\
\hat{H}\hat{a}^\dagger \psi_n &= (W_n + \hbar \omega) \hat{a}^\dagger \psi_n
\end{align}

I can't see any commutators in above relations, so how do the commutators i just calculated help us to get and solve these two relations? And i am sorry for asking so basic questions but i am a selftaught and a real freshman to commutators algebra.
 
71GA said:
On the Wikipedia it is said that these commutators can be used to find eigenstates of Quant. harm. oscilator, but explanation is a bit too fast there. Anyway i strive to be able to derive the equation ##W_n = \hbar \omega \left(n + \tfrac{1}{2}\right)## in full, but first i need to clear why theese two relations hold:

\begin{align}
\hat{H}\hat{a} \psi_n &= (W_n - \hbar \omega) \hat{a} \psi_n\\
\hat{H}\hat{a}^\dagger \psi_n &= (W_n + \hbar \omega) \hat{a}^\dagger \psi_n
\end{align}

I can't see any commutators in above relations, so how do the commutators i just calculated help us to get and solve these two relations? And i am sorry for asking so basic questions but i am a selftaught and a real freshman to commutators algebra.
Let's stick to the notation used in that Wikipedia page. I.e., let's change your ##W_n## to ##E_n##.
As explained on the Wiki page, we have
$$
H \psi_n ~=~ E_n \psi_n ~.
$$
So to evaluate ##H a \psi_n##, use the ##[H,a]## formula to swap the order of ##H## and ##a##, and then use the equation above.

BTW, are you self-learning from a textbook? If so, which one? (If not, you probably need to invest in one...) Questions at this level should more properly be posted in the homework forums.
 
homework problem. move to other thread.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
837
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K