Quantum Mechanics - Unitary Operators and Spin 1/2

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
5 replies · 4K views
Tangent87
Messages
146
Reaction score
0
Hi, I'm doing question 2/II/32D at the top of page 68 here (http://www.maths.cam.ac.uk/undergrad/pastpapers/2005/Part_2/list_II.pdf ). I have done everything except for the last sentence of the question.

This is what I have attempted so far:

[tex]|\chi\rangle=|\uparrow\rangle=\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> 1 \\<br /> 0 \end{array} \right)[/tex]

Then [tex]U|\chi\rangle=\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> cos(\theta /2) \\<br /> 0 \end{array} \right)-(\boldsymbol{n}.\boldsymbol{\sigma})\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> isin(\theta /2) \\<br /> 0 \end{array} \right)[/tex]

Now I need to choose n. If I want the spin up state measured along the direction (sin@,0,cos@) am I correct in thinking I need the eigenvector corresponding to the +1 eigenvalue of this matrix?:

[tex]\sigma_1 sin\theta+\sigma_3 cos\theta=\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> cos\theta & sin\theta \\<br /> sin\theta & -cos\theta \end{array} \right)[/tex]

In which case this the desired state is [tex]U|\chi\rangle=\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> sin\theta \\<br /> 1-cos\theta \end{array} \right)[/tex]

But I don't think it's possible to choose n such that this is the case, so where have I gone wrong? Also do I need to worry about any [tex]\hbar /2[/tex] since [tex]\boldsymbol{S}=\frac{\hbar}{2}\boldsymbol{\sigma}[/tex]?

Thanks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
on Phys.org
Tangent87 said:
Hi, I'm doing question 2/II/32D at the top of page 68 here (http://www.maths.cam.ac.uk/undergrad/pastpapers/2005/Part_2/list_II.pdf ). I have done everything except for the last sentence of the question.

This is what I have attempted so far:

[tex]|\chi\rangle=|\uparrow\rangle=\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> 1 \\<br /> 0 \end{array} \right)[/tex]

Then [tex]U|\chi\rangle=\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> cos(\theta /2) \\<br /> 0 \end{array} \right)-(\boldsymbol{n}.\boldsymbol{\sigma})\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> isin(\theta /2) \\<br /> 0 \end{array} \right)[/tex]

Now I need to choose n. If I want the spin up state measured along the direction (sin@,0,cos@) am I correct in thinking I need the eigenvector corresponding to the +1 eigenvalue of this matrix?:

[tex]\sigma_1 sin\theta+\sigma_3 cos\theta=\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> cos\theta & sin\theta \\<br /> sin\theta & -cos\theta \end{array} \right)[/tex]

In which case this the desired state is [tex]U|\chi\rangle=\left( \begin{array}{c}<br /> sin\theta \\<br /> 1-cos\theta \end{array} \right)[/tex]

But I don't think it's possible to choose n such that this is the case, so where have I gone wrong?
Right idea, wrong matrix. Think about it like this: you are trying to arrange for the component of spin along a particular axis to be [itex]+\hbar/2[/itex], so you need to find the +1 eigenvalue of the matrix that measures spin along that axis. If the axis were the z axis, you'd use [itex]S_z[/itex]. If it were the x axis, you'd use [itex]S_x[/itex]. For an arbitrary axis, though, you don't have a precomputed spin matrix, so you'll need to calculate it by applying a rotation to one of the known spin matrices.

Now, do you know how to use [itex]U[/itex] to implement a rotation? Specifically, remember what the meanings of the vector [itex]\hat{n}[/itex] and the parameter [itex]\theta[/itex] are, in the context of rotations.
Tangent87 said:
Also do I need to worry about any [tex]\hbar /2[/tex] since [tex]\boldsymbol{S}=\frac{\hbar}{2}\boldsymbol{\sigma}[/tex]?
Keep in mind that [itex]\sigma[/itex] is unitless, and just make sure the units are consistent :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
diazona said:
Right idea, wrong matrix. Think about it like this: you are trying to arrange for the component of spin along a particular axis to be [itex]+\hbar/2[/itex], so you need to find the +1 eigenvalue of the matrix that measures spin along that axis. If the axis were the z axis, you'd use [itex]S_z[/itex]. If it were the x axis, you'd use [itex]S_x[/itex]. For an arbitrary axis, though, you don't have a precomputed spin matrix, so you'll need to calculate it by applying a rotation to one of the known spin matrices.

Now, do you know how to use [itex]U[/itex] to implement a rotation? Specifically, remember what the meanings of the vector [itex]\hat{n}[/itex] and the parameter [itex]\theta[/itex] are, in the context of rotations.

Keep in mind that [itex]\sigma[/itex] is unitless, and just make sure the units are consistent :wink:

Can you tell me what I've done wrong in using the matrix [tex]\boldsymbol{m}.\boldsymbol{\sigma}=<br /> \sigma_1 sin\theta+\sigma_3 cos\theta=\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> cos\theta & sin\theta \\<br /> sin\theta & -cos\theta \end{array} \right)[/tex] where m=(sin@,0,cos@) (the direction for the new spin up state). Now we have to choose an n such that [tex]U=exp(-i\boldsymbol{n}.\boldsymbol{\sigma}\theta/2)[/tex] rotates our original spin up state into this new one? As you say, U here is the rotation operator which will rotate the state by an angle theta about n.
 
Actually I think I might have just figured it out. I think I've got the RIGHT matrix, just the WRONG eigenvectors. My spin up eigenvector can be simplified to (cos(@/2),sin(@/2)) and if I choose n to be n=(0,1,0) I think that will work?
 
Tangent87 said:
Can you tell me what I've done wrong in using the matrix [tex]\boldsymbol{m}.\boldsymbol{\sigma}=<br /> \sigma_1 sin\theta+\sigma_3 cos\theta=\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> cos\theta & sin\theta \\<br /> sin\theta & -cos\theta \end{array} \right)[/tex] where m=(sin@,0,cos@) (the direction for the new spin up state). Now we have to choose an n such that [tex]U=exp(-i\boldsymbol{n}.\boldsymbol{\sigma}\theta/2)[/tex] rotates our original spin up state into this new one? As you say, U here is the rotation operator which will rotate the state by an angle theta about n.
Ah, sorry about that. I didn't go all the way to the end of the calculation so I didn't realize that the matrix you have is actually the right one for this case.