Proving [A,B]=0 for Simultaneous Eigenkets of A and B

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill Foster
  • Start date Start date
Bill Foster
Messages
334
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let A and B be observables. Suppose the simultaneous eigenkets of A and B \left{|a_n,b_n\rangle\right} form a complete orthonormal set of base kets. Can we always conclude that [A,B]=0 ? If “yes”, prove it. If “no”, give a counterexample.

The Attempt at a Solution



One solution is given as follows:

\sum_m |a_m,b_m\rangle\langle a_m,b_m|=1
\sum_n |a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|=1

\left[A,B\right]=AB-BA
=\sum_m |a_m,b_m\rangle\langle a_m,b_m|\left(AB-BA\right)\sum_n |a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|
=\sum_n\sum_m |a_m,b_m\rangle\langle a_m,b_m|\left(AB-BA\right)|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|
=\sum_n\sum_m |a_m,b_m\rangle\langle a_m,b_m|\left(AB|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|-BA|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|\right)
=\sum_n\sum_m |a_m,b_m\rangle\langle a_m,b_m|\left(a_n b_n|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|-b_n a_n|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|\right)
=0

My question is this: how is it known that the following is true?

AB|a_n,b_n\rangle = a_n b_n|a_n,b_n\rangle
BA|a_n,b_n\rangle = b_n a_n|a_n,b_n\rangle

And since it is true, why can the following be an equally valid solution?

\left[A,B\right]=\left(AB-BA\right)\sum_n |a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|
=\sum_n\left(AB-BA\right)|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|
=\sum_n\left(AB|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|-BA|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|\right)
=\sum_n\left(a_n b_n|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|-b_n a_n|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|\right)
=0
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
By definition |a_n,b_n\rangle are eigenkets of A and B with eigenvalues an and bn:

A|a_n,b_n\rangle = a_n|a_n,b_n\rangle
B|a_n,b_n\rangle = b_n|a_n,b_n\rangle

Using the previous equations and linearity of A and B you have:

BA|a_n,b_n\rangle = Ba_n|a_n,b_n\rangle = a_nB|a_n,b_n\rangle = a_nb_n|a_n,b_n\rangle
AB|a_n,b_n\rangle = Ab_n|a_n,b_n\rangle = b_nA|a_n,b_n\rangle = b_na_n|a_n,b_n\rangle
 
Bill Foster said:
And since it is true, why can the following be an equally valid solution?

\left[A,B\right]=\left(AB-BA\right)\sum_n |a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|
=\sum_n\left(AB-BA\right)|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|
=\sum_n\left(AB|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|-BA|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|\right)
=\sum_n\left(a_n b_n|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|-b_n a_n|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|\right)
=0

If a_n and b_n are both numbers, can't we say (inserting this between the last two lines above)

[A,B]=\sum_n\left(a_n b_n-b_na_n\right)|a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|

that is, factor out |a_n,b_n\rangle\langle a_n,b_n|? Then from this, since they are numbers, a_nb_n-b_na_n=a_nb_n-a_nb_n=0
 
Yep. Looks like this one is done, too.

Danke.
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
59
Views
10K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top