Quantum angular momentum proportionality constant

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of angular momentum in quantum physics, specifically the application of raising and lowering operators and the implications of their action on angular momentum eigenstates.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand the proportionality between the action of the raising/lowering operators and the resulting states. They express confusion about how this proportionality is derived despite grasping the commutation relations.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide insights regarding the normalization of states and the implications of using normalized eigenvectors in quantum mechanics. There is acknowledgment of the original poster's realization of their misunderstanding, indicating a productive direction in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of normalization in quantum mechanics and its relation to the probabilistic interpretation of quantum states. The discussion hints at the challenges of understanding these concepts, especially under fatigue.

bartrocs
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Hi, not a homework problem as such, but I am studying introductory quantum physics and having some trouble understanding how applying the rising or lowering operator for angular momentum implies:

L+/-|l,m> ∝ |l, m+/-1>
Basically, my question is the same as the first part (Q1) as described in the following link.
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2552515

Regarding the answer to that post, I can get to the two expressions quite easily by using the commutation relations, but even after reading it multiple times, I don't understand how the proportionality is implied. I know this is probably trivial and I'm probably just missing some obvious fact due to the time being 1.30am. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because the state ##L_{+/-} |l,m\rangle## is not necessarily normalized, while all ##|l,m\rangle## must be normalized.
 
blue_leaf77, thanks. It was one of those lack of sleep things. I just woke up and realized this. Also, mathematically speaking, there is an infinite amount of choices for our eigenvector based on a given eigenstate and scale factor. We must obviously use the one that fits our operator, ie it must be normalised.
 
bartrocs said:
We must obviously use the one that fits our operator, ie it must be normalised.
The vectors (including eigenvectors of an operator) in QM are agreed to be normalized because of the probabilistic interpretation assigned to the inner product between any two vectors. The probability of finding a given state to be in that same state must be equal to the maximum allowed value for a probability, which is unity.
 
okay thanks I understand my mistake and (hopefully) will not make it again :smile:
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K