Quantum and Commutation - Help me start

Bravus
Messages
22
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



http://www.bravus.com/question.jpg

Homework Equations



See below

The Attempt at a Solution



Below are my scribbles toward a solution. The point is that the two expressions are different *unless* either the operators A and B or the operators B and C commute.

Not really looking for someone to solve it completely, but this is one of those questions I'm just looking at blankly to figure out how to start... yeah, I suspect I'm not smart... ;-)

http://www.bravus.com/scribbles.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi! In my opinion it is easier to proceed in the following way: consider the case in which A and B commute (the other case is analogous); in this case there exists a common set of eigenstates; this induce in the formula you want to prove a lot fo deltas (eigenstates corresponding to different eigenvalues are orthogonal); this equation can now be easily verified.

Francesco
 
Thanks, Francesco. That kinda makes sense to me. But I'm a little unclear.

The fact that A and B commute means there *exist* simultaneous eigenkets, |ab> of both A and B.

I don't think that means, though, that |a> and |b> are *necessarily* all simultaneous eigenkets.

And they would need to be, for the solution you propose to work, yes?
 
You are welcome; in any case, the correct statement is: let A and B be commuting operators with nondegenerate eigenvalues; then, if |a\rangle is an eigenstate of A, |a\rangle is also an eigenstate of B; moreover, if |a\rangle and |a'\rangle are two eigenstates of A corresponding to different eigenvalues, then they are eigenstates of B corresponding to different eigenvalues.
I hope I have been clear.
Francesco
 
Thanks, yes, excellent!
 
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...
Back
Top