Proving the Commutator w/Taylor Expansion: Rick's Problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter kcirick
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Commutator
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a commutation relation involving the position operator \( x \) and a function \( g(p) \) that can be expressed as a Taylor expansion in terms of the momentum operator \( p \). The original poster, Rick, is attempting to derive the relation \( [x, g(p)] = i\hbar \frac{dg}{dp} \) but is encountering difficulties in the process.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Rick begins by expanding the commutator and applying the Taylor expansion to \( g(p) \), but expresses confusion about reaching the desired form. Other participants suggest proving the relation for specific cases like \( g(p) = p^n \) and applying the commutator term by term. Some participants question the validity of Rick's Taylor expansion approach and offer alternative methods involving polynomial properties and induction.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring various methods to approach the problem, including proving the relation for specific polynomial forms and discussing the implications of the fundamental commutation relations. There is a mix of suggestions and attempts, with no clear consensus yet on the best path forward.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the original poster's approach may not align with standard Taylor expansion definitions, and there are indications of differing levels of rigor required for the proof. Additionally, the discussion includes references to quantization methods and the use of Poisson brackets, suggesting a broader context of quantum mechanics principles at play.

kcirick
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Question:
If g(p) can be Taylor expanded in polynomials, then prove that:

[tex]\left[x, g\left(p\right)\right] = i\hbar \frac{dg}{dp}[/tex]

To start, I multiply the wave function [itex]\Psi[/itex] and expand the commutator:

[tex]\left( xg\left(p\right)-g\left(p\right)x \right)\Psi[/tex]

then expand g(p) using Taylor:

[tex]x\left(g\left(a\right) + g'\left(a\right)\left(p-a\right)\right)\Psi + \left(g\left(a\right) + g'\left(a\right)\left(p-a\right)\right)x\Psi[/tex]

Then I'm stuck... I'm nowhere near getting [itex]i\hbar[/itex] or [itex]\frac{dg}{dp}[/itex]

Any help would be appreciated. Thank you!
-Rick
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Prove that's true for g(p)=p^n. Then write out the taylor series of g and apply the commutator to each term.
 
StatusX said:
Prove that's true for g(p)=p^n. Then write out the taylor series of g and apply the commutator to each term.
That was my previous question... I already proved that

[tex]\left[x, p^{n}\right]=ihnp^{n-1}[/tex]

But I don't see how that is helpful or how I'm going to use that to do my original question.
 
g(a) + g'(a) (p - a) is almost never the Taylor expansion of g(p).
 
[a,b+c]=[a,b]+[a,c]. Use this to show the formula is true for any polynomial. Then take the limit to show it's true of the taylor series (ie, [itex]g(p)=a_0 + a_1 p + a_2 p^2 + ...[/itex]). This part might be a little tricky, and I don't know how rigorous you need to be, but to show two operators are equal, you need to show they agree on every function.
 
Solution

So here's what I have:

Taylor expansion of g(p) can be expressed as the following:
[tex]g\left(p\right) \approx a_{o}+a_{1}p+a_{2}p^{2}+\cdots+a_{n}p^{n}[/tex]
So applying the commutator:
[tex]\left[x, g\left(p\right)] = [x, a_{o}+a_{1}p+a_{2}p^{2}+\cdots+a_{n}p^{n} = \left[x, a_{o}\right]+\left[x, a_{1}p\right]+\left[x, a_{2}p^{2}\right]+\cdots+\left[x, a_{n}p^{n}\right][/tex]
[tex]= 0 + i\hbar a_{1} \frac{dp}{dx} + i\hbar a_{2} \frac{dp^{2}}{dx} + \cdots + i\hbar a_{n} \frac{dp^{n}}{dx}[/tex]
since [itex]\left[x, p^{n}\right] = i\hbar\frac{dp^{n}}{dx}[/itex].

So:
[tex]\left[x, g\left(p\right)\right] = i\hbar\frac{d}{dx}\left(a{o}+a_{1}p+a_{2}p^{2}+\cdots+a_{n}p^{n}\right)=i\hbar\frac{dg\left(p\right)}{dx}[/tex]

I think I did that okay. What do you think?
 
Evaluate the Poisson bracket between the 2 functions and then quantize the result via Dirac's prescription.

Daniel.
 
StatusX said:
Prove that's true for g(p)=p^n. Then write out the taylor series of g and apply the commutator to each term.

I thought I had it, but it turned out that I was getting the wrong answer. Here's what I did:

[tex]\left[x, p^{n}\right]\Psi = \left(xp^{n} - p^{n}x\right)\Psi = x\left(-i\hbar\frac{d}{dx}\right)^{n}\Psi - \left(-i\hbar\right)^{n} \left(\frac{d^{n}x}{dx^{n}}\Psi + x\frac{d^{n}}{dx^{n}}\Psi\right)[/tex]
[tex]= -\left(-i\hbar\right)^{n}\frac{d^{n-1}}{dx^{n-1}}\Psi = i\hbar\left(-i\hbar\frac{d}{dx}\right)^{n-1}\Psi[/tex]

But then I get [itex]i\hbar p^{n-1}[/itex] as an answer, and I should be getting [itex]i\hbar np^{n-1}[/itex] . Where did I go wrong?

Thanks!
 
dextercioby said:
Evaluate the Poisson bracket between the 2 functions and then quantize the result via Dirac's prescription.

Daniel.

This works too, but if you want to do it purely in the framework of QM, I'd recommend trying to do this in the momentum representation, where [tex]x = - i \hbar \partial_x[/tex] and have your trial function sitting up front.

Commutators are invariant under unitary changes of coordinates.
 
  • #10
The idea is to start from the fundamental commutation relation [itex][x,p]=-i\hbar[/itex] and not worry about what p is. Then there is a rule that [A,BC] = [A,B]C + B[A,C], so you can use induction to get [itex][x,p^n]=-i\hbar n p^{n-1}[/itex]. Finally, apply this to the taylor series, and you'll end up with what they want you to prove. But this shows that [itex]x=-i\hbar\partial/\partial p[/itex], and symmetrically, [itex]p=-i\hbar\partial/\partial x[/itex], so from that simple commutation relation you've found what p "is".
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K