Quantum Physics, find the commutator

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the commutator of the x- and y-components of the angular momentum operator in quantum physics. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the application of the del operator in this context, particularly when calculating the commutator.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the manipulation of the angular momentum operator and the role of the del operator. Questions arise about the correct application of the operator and the implications of the product rule in differentiation.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, providing insights and corrections to each other's reasoning. There is a recognition of the need to apply the product rule correctly when differentiating, which leads to a more accurate formulation of the commutator.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on maintaining the original form of the angular momentum operator and the importance of understanding how the del operator interacts with functions. The discussion reflects a learning process where assumptions and definitions are being scrutinized.

Antti
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
This should be easy, since I'm sure I've misunderstood something here. The task is to find the commutator of the x- and y-components of the angular momentum operator. This operator is, according to physics handbook:

[tex]-i \hbar \bold r \times \nabla[/tex]

I rewrote this as:

[tex]i \hbar \nabla \times \bold r[/tex]

However there's a common rule for the del operator saying

[tex]\nabla \times \bold r = 0[/tex]

This doesn't make sense, what am I missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Antti,

When you do the manipulations, you have to keep track of what the del operator is acting on. Let's say it is acting on a some general function [itex]f[/itex], then:

[tex] \hat L f = -i\hbar \vec r\times \vec\nabla f = i \hbar \left(\vec \nabla f\right) \times \vec r[/tex]

The important things is that the del operator is not operating on [itex]\vec r[/itex], but is operating on whatever the angular momentum operator is operating on.
 
Thanks for your reply!

When i calculate the components i get

[tex] \hat L f = -i\hbar \vec r\times \vec\nabla f = i \hbar \left(\vec \nabla f\right) \times \vec r[/tex]

[tex] \left(\vec \nabla f\right) \times \vec r = \hat x ( f_y' z - f_z' y ) - \hat y ( f_x' z - f_z' x ) + \hat z ( f_x' y - f_y' x )[/tex]

And the x- and y-components of the angular mommentum operator are:

[tex] \hat L_x f = i \hbar ( f_y' z - f_z' y )[/tex]
[tex]\hat L_y f = - i \hbar ( f_x' z - f_z' x ) = i \hbar ( f_z' x - f_x' z )[/tex]

Am I right so far?
 
Those components look right to me.

I would suggest that you still consider the angular momentum operator to be your original form:

[tex] \hat L = -i\hbar \vec r\times \vec \nabla [/tex]

and operating on something:

[tex] \hat L f= -i\hbar \vec r\times \vec \nabla f[/tex]

In my last post I was just showing that if you do move it around you don't get [itex]\vec\nabla\times \vec r=0[/itex]. It makes no difference for the components of this problem; but that way it matches the definition of angular momentum:

[tex] \hat L = \hat r\times \hat p[/tex]

The specific form you are using (with the del operator for the momentum) is in a position space representation.
 
Ok, the answer I'm expecting is the following. It's from a solution to an exam:

[tex][\hat L_x, \hat L_y] = i \hbar \hat L_z[/tex]

You'll have to excuse me but I still write the components in this form out of pure LaTex-laziness :)

[tex] \hat L_x f = i \hbar ( f_y' z - f_z' y )[/tex]
[tex]\hat L_y f = - i \hbar ( f_x' z - f_z' x ) = i \hbar ( f_z' x - f_x' z )[/tex]

So my commutator is:

[tex][\hat L_x, \hat L_y] = \hat L_x \hat L_y f - \hat L_y \hat L_x f[/tex]

[tex]\hat L_x \hat L_y f = \hat L_x i \hbar ( f_z' x - f_x' z ) = i \hbar \ ( \ \ z (i \hbar ( f_z' x - f_x' z ))_y' - y(i \hbar ( f_z' x - f_x' z ))_z' \ \ )[/tex]
[tex]= (i \hbar)^{2} (xz \frac{d}{dy}\frac{d}{dz} f - z^{2} \frac{d}{dy} \frac{d}{dx} f - yx \frac{d^{2}}{dz^{2}} f + yz \frac{d}{dz} \frac{d}{dx} f)[/tex]

[tex]\hat L_y \hat L_x f = \hat L_y i \hbar ( f_y' z - f_z' y ) = i \hbar \ ( \ \ x (i \hbar ( f_y' z - f_z' y ))_z' - z(i \hbar ( f_y' z - f_z' y ))_x' \ \ )[/tex]
[tex]= (i \hbar)^{2} (xz \frac{d}{dz}\frac{d}{dy} f - yx \frac{d^{2}}{dz^{2}} f - z^{2} \frac{d}{dx} \frac{d}{dy} f + yz \frac{d}{dx} \frac{d}{dz} f)[/tex]

But these components are now equal so their difference is zero. This was not the answer I expected. I must still be doing something wrong.
 
Well, I'm all for laziness. However, here I think your notation is leading you down the wrong path. You've done just about everything right, but you are making one math error.

Let me write the operators: [itex]\hat L_x[/itex] acting on some function g is:

[tex] \hat L_x g= -i\hbar\left[ y \frac{\partial}{\partial z} g - z \frac{\partial}{\partial y} g\right][/tex]

and the [itex]\hat L_y[/itex] operating on some function f is:

[tex] \hat L_y f= -i\hbar\left[ z \frac{\partial}{\partial x} f - x \frac{\partial}{\partial z} f\right][/tex]

Now if you want [tex]\hat L_x \hat L_y f[/tex], you just plug the entire form of [itex]\hat L_y f[/itex] (the last equation) into the spot for g in the [itex]L_x[/itex] equation above. What's important is that the derivative [tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial z}[/tex] that occurs in the x component acts on the entire quantity [tex](\hat L_y f)[/tex], not just f. So you'll get five terms for [tex]\hat L_x \hat L_y f[/tex]. What do you get?
 
I see. I had forgot to use the product rule when differentiating. As you say I got an extra term for both of the "chained" (?) operators. The other terms cancel out as before. I am posting the correct solution too so this thread is complete.

[tex]\hat L_x \hat L_y f = (i \hbar)^{2} (xz \frac{d}{dy}\frac{d}{dz} f - z^{2} \frac{d}{dy} \frac{d}{dx} f - yx \frac{d^{2}}{dz^{2}} f + yz \frac{d}{dz} \frac{d}{dx} f + y \frac{d}{dx} f)[/tex]

[tex]\hat L_y \hat L_x f = (i \hbar)^{2} (xz \frac{d}{dz}\frac{d}{dy} f - z^{2} \frac{d}{dx} \frac{d}{dy} f - yx \frac{d^{2}}{dz^{2}} f + yz \frac{d}{dx} \frac{d}{dz} f - x \frac{d}{dy} f)[/tex]

[tex][\hat L_x, \hat L_y] = \hat L_x \hat L_y f - \hat L_y \hat L_x f = (i \hbar)^{2} (y \frac{d}{dx} f) - (i \hbar)^{2} (x \frac{d}{dy} f) = i \hbar \ ( \ \ i \hbar ( y \frac{d}{dx} f - x \frac{d}{dy} f ) \ \ )[/tex]

Recall from my earlier post that

[tex] \left(\vec \nabla f\right) \times \vec r = \hat x ( f_y' z - f_z' y ) - \hat y ( f_x' z - f_z' x ) + \hat z ( f_x' y - f_y' x )[/tex]

Thus

[tex]\hat L_z f = i \hbar ( y \frac{d}{dx} f - x \frac{d}{dy} f )[/tex]

This is what I have in the end of the third line above. So

[tex][\hat L_x, \hat L_y] = i \hbar \hat L_z[/tex]

Which is what I wanted :)
Thanks for the help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K