Quantum harmonic oscillator, uncertainty relation

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the quantum harmonic oscillator, focusing on the properties of annihilation and creation operators, their expectation values, and the uncertainty relation involving position and momentum. Participants are exploring the implications of these operators in the context of coherent states.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the expectation values of various operators and their implications for the uncertainty relation. Questions arise regarding the correct expression of the eigenvalue equation in bra notation and the calculations leading to the uncertainty relation being zero.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the correct notation and calculations, while others are questioning the assumptions made in the calculations. There is a recognition of potential errors in the expectation values, particularly concerning the use of commutation relations.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working within the constraints of the problem statement, which includes specific operators and their relationships. The discussion reflects uncertainty regarding the calculations and the implications of the results on the uncertainty relation.

phys-student
Messages
32
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Consider a particle with mass m oscillates in a simple harmonic potential with frequency ω. The position, x, and momentum operator, p, of the particle can be expressed in terms of the annihilation and creation operator (a and a respectively):
x = (ħ/2mω)^0.5 * (a + a)
p = i(ħmω/2)^0.5 * (a - a)
The annihilation and creation operators satisfy the following commutation relations:
[a,a] = 1
The eigenvalue equation of a is found as:
a|α> = α|α>
Where |α> is a coherent state
a) Find the expectation value <a> in coherent state |α>
b) Find the expectation values of <aa>, <aa>, and <aa>
c) Calculate the uncertainty relation (<(x-<x>)2><(p-<p>)2>)0.5

Homework Equations


Relevant equations given above

The Attempt at a Solution


I've worked through most of the problem and only noticed that I may have done something wrong when I got to part c, where the expression that I get for <x> causes the expectation value <(x-<x>)2> to be equal to 0, which also means the uncertainty relation is equal to 0. I think the error may be when I wrote the eigenvalue equation for a in bra notation like this:
<α|a = <α|α*
Is this the correct way of expressing the eigenvalue equation given in the question in bra notation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
phys-student said:
<α|a† = <α|α*
Is this the correct way of expressing the eigenvalue equation given in the question in bra notation?
That's correct. But I don't know where you went wrong unless you provide your calculation.
 
If that is correct then the expectation values are as follows; <a>=α*, <a> = α, <aa> = α2, <aa> = α*2, and <aa> = <aa> = αα*.

This means that the expectation value <x> is: <x> = (ħ/2mω)0.5(<a> + <a>) = (ħ/2mω)0.5(α* + α)

So the expression (x-<x>)2 = x2 - 2x(ħ/2mω)0.5(α* + α) + (ħ/2mω)(α* + α)2

So the expectation value from the uncertainty relation is: <(x-<x>)2> = <x2> - 2*(ħ/2mω)0.5(α*+α)<x> + (ħ/2mω)(α* + α)2

The expectation value <x2> is:
<x2> = (ħ/2mω)(<aa> + <aa> + <aa> + <aa>) = (ħ/2mω)(α* + α)2

If you sub the expression for <x> and <x2> back into the expression for <(x-<x>)2> it ends up reducing to 0
 
phys-student said:
<aa†> = <a†a> = αα*.
That's where you go wrong. Your ##\langle a^\dagger a \rangle## is correct, but your ##\langle aa^\dagger \rangle## is not. To calculate the latter, you could have used the commutation between the annihilation and raising operators and ##\langle a^\dagger a \rangle##.
 
Okay so you are saying that <aa> = αα* is correct, then using the commutation relation:

[a,a] = aa - aa = 1, therefore: aa = 1 + aa

So then the expectation value of aa is: <aa> = 1 + <aa> = 1 + αα*

Is that correct?
 
phys-student said:
Is that correct?
Yes.
 
Okay thanks
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K