Proving an eigenfunction (EF) from Lx as combination of EF of Lz

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the eigenfunction of the angular momentum operator Lx can be expressed as a combination of eigenfunctions from the operator Lz, specifically focusing on the same quantum number l but different magnetic quantum numbers m. The original poster presents the eigenfunction Yx and attempts to demonstrate its relationship with the eigenfunctions of Lz.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the representation of the eigenfunction Yx in terms of spherical harmonics and question the validity of the expressions used. There is a focus on the definitions of eigenfunctions related to Lz and L2, with some participants suggesting the use of specific forms of spherical harmonics.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing clarifications and corrections regarding the definitions of eigenfunctions. Some guidance has been offered about the use of spherical harmonics, and there is an acknowledgment of the need for further exploration of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of a potential lack of resources, such as a list of spherical harmonics, which may be affecting the understanding of the problem. Participants are also questioning specific mathematical relationships and definitions within the context of angular momentum operators.

sunrah
Messages
191
Reaction score
22

Homework Statement


Show that the eigenfunction of Lx can be written as a combination of eigenfunctions from Lz with the same l but different m. Using the eigenfunction
[itex]Y_{x} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(Y^{-1}_{1} - Y^{1}_{1})[/itex] as the eigenfunction of Lx

Homework Equations



[itex]Y^{m}_{l} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi}}e^{im\varphi}[/itex] eigenfunction of Lz
[itex]L_{z}Y^{m}_{l}= l Y^{m}_{l}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution


[itex]Y_{x} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(Y^{-1}_{1} - Y^{1}_{1}) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi}}(e^{-i\varphi} - e^{i\varphi})[/itex]

[itex]\widehat{L}_{x} = i \frac{h}{2\pi}(sin\theta \frac{d}{d\varphi} + cot\theta cos\varphi\frac{d}{d\varphi})[/itex]

[itex]\widehat{L}_{x}Y_{x} = i \frac{h}{2\pi}cot\theta cos\varphi\frac{d}{d\varphi}\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi}}(e^{-i\varphi} - e^{i\varphi})[/itex]

[itex]\widehat{L}_{x}Y_{x} = \frac{h}{2\pi}cot\theta cos\varphi\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi}}(e^{-i\varphi} + e^{i\varphi}) ≠ lY_{x}[/itex]

can't see where I'm going wrong
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sunrah said:

Homework Statement


Show that the eigenfunction of Lx can be written as a combination of eigenfunctions from Lz with the same l but different m. Using the eigenfunction
[itex]Y_{x} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(Y^{-1}_{1} - Y^{1}_{1})[/itex] as the eigenfunction of Lx

Homework Equations



[itex]Y^{m}_{l} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi}}e^{im\varphi}[/itex] eigenfunction of Lz
The line above is your problem. ##e^{i m \varphi}## is an eigenfunction of Lz, but the spherical harmonic ##Y^m_l## is an eigenfunction of both Lz and L2.

[itex]L_{z}Y^{m}_{l}= l Y^{m}_{l}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution


[itex]Y_{x} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(Y^{-1}_{1} - Y^{1}_{1}) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi}}(e^{-i\varphi} - e^{i\varphi})[/itex]

[itex]\widehat{L}_{x} = i \frac{h}{2\pi}(sin\theta \frac{d}{d\varphi} + cot\theta cos\varphi\frac{d}{d\varphi})[/itex]

[itex]\widehat{L}_{x}Y_{x} = i \frac{h}{2\pi}cot\theta cos\varphi\frac{d}{d\varphi}\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi}}(e^{-i\varphi} - e^{i\varphi})[/itex]

[itex]\widehat{L}_{x}Y_{x} = \frac{h}{2\pi}cot\theta cos\varphi\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi}}(e^{-i\varphi} + e^{i\varphi}) ≠ lY_{x}[/itex]

can't see where I'm going wrong
 
vela said:
The line above is your problem. ##e^{i m \varphi}## is an eigenfunction of Lz, but the spherical harmonic ##Y^m_l## is an eigenfunction of both Lz and L2.

Hi, should I be using

[itex]Y^{m}_{l} \propto P^{m}_{l}(cos\theta)e^{i m \varphi}[/itex] ?
 
Yes.
 
vela said:
Yes.

just to confirm is

[itex]P^{-1}_{1}(cos\theta) = cos\theta[/itex]

thanks!
 
No, that's not correct. Don't you have a list of spherical harmonics in your textbook? If not, just google it.
 
thank you no I wasn't aware of spherical harmonics, but i am now!
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K