Question about number operator and density operator

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the number operator, defined as \(\hat{N} = \hat{a}^\dagger\hat{a}\), and its application in quantum harmonic oscillators. The confusion arises between the expectation value \(\langle n |\hat{N}|n\rangle = n\) and the average \(\langle n |\hat{N}|n\rangle = \bar{n}\) as presented in statistical mechanics. The density operator is also discussed, with the general form \(\hat{\rho} = \sum_n |n\rangle\langle n|\) contrasting with the specific state representation \(\hat{\rho} = |\varphi\rangle\langle \varphi|\). The key takeaway is the distinction between eigenvalues and averages in quantum mechanics, particularly when dealing with density operators.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics and operators
  • Familiarity with the concepts of eigenvalues and eigenvectors
  • Knowledge of density operators in quantum statistical mechanics
  • Basic grasp of expectation values and their calculation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and properties of the number operator in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the role of density operators in quantum statistical mechanics
  • Explore the concept of expectation values and their significance in quantum measurements
  • Investigate the differences between classical and quantum statistical mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and researchers in statistical mechanics will benefit from this discussion, particularly those focusing on operator theory and density matrices.

KFC
Messages
477
Reaction score
4
In quantum harmonic oscillator, we define the so called number operator as

\hat{N} = \hat{a}^\dagger\hat{a}

Apply \hat{N} to the state with n number of particles, it gives
\hat{N}|n\rangle = n |n\rangle

so

\langle n| \hat{N}|n\rangle = \langle n| n |n\rangle = n

But in other textbook about statistical mechanics, it gives

\langle n |\hat{N}|n\rangle = \bar{n}

Why these two results are not the same? For later one, it seems to consider something related to the statistics, but how?

I still have another question by the trace, in harmonic oscillator, the density operator is given by

<br /> \hat{\rho} = \sum_n |n\rangle\langle n|<br />

But sometimes, for a specific state, says |\varphi\rangle, the density operator just

<br /> \hat{\rho} = |\varphi\rangle\langle \varphi|<br />

why there is no summation? When do we need to consider the summation?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you type this first one in correctly? This doesn't look right.

\langle \hat{N}|n\rangle = \langle n |n\rangle = n

The \hat{N} is an operator, not a vector. So it shouldn't be in a bra. Also \langle n |n\rangle is equal to 1, not n.

What I think it should say is either

\hat{N}|n\rangle =n |n\rangle

or

\langle n |\hat{N}|n\rangle =\langle n |n|n\rangle= n\langle n |n\rangle =n

The second result being exactly consistent with what the statistical mechanics book says (except for the bar over the n).
 
Woozie said:
Did you type this first one in correctly? This doesn't look right.

\langle \hat{N}|n\rangle = \langle n |n\rangle = n

The \hat{N} is an operator, not a vector. So it shouldn't be in a bra. Also \langle n |n\rangle is equal to 1, not n.

What I think it should say is either

\hat{N}|n\rangle =n |n\rangle

or

\langle n |\hat{N}|n\rangle =\langle n |n|n\rangle= n\langle n |n\rangle =n

The second result being exactly what the statistical mechanics book says (except for the bar over the n).


Yes. I just correct that.

But in |n\rangle, how come will it be average?
 
A density operator

\sum_i w_i|\alpha_i\rangle\langle\alpha_i|

can be interpreted in two different ways:

1. It represents an ensemble of identical physical systems, prepared so that a fraction wi of the systems are in state |\alpha_i\rangle.

2. It represents one physical system that is known to be in one of the |\alpha_i\rangle states, but it's unknown which one. (Note that this means that it's not in a superposition of two or more of them). wi is the probability that it's in state |\alpha_i\rangle.

The first of your "density operators" is just the identity operator.
 
KFC said:
\langle n |\hat{N}|n\rangle = \bar{n}
This should probably be

\langle \psi |\hat{N}|\psi\rangle = \bar{n}_\psi

When |\psi\rangle=|n\rangle, the right-hand side is just n.

Note that

\langle \psi |\hat{N}|\psi\rangle = \sum_n\langle \psi |\hat{N}|n\rangle\langle n|\psi\rangle= \sum_n n\langle \psi|n\rangle\langle n|\psi\rangle= \sum_n n|\langle n|\psi\rangle|^2

and that |\langle n|\psi\rangle|^2 is the probability that a measurement will yield result n. So the expression above represents the average value of a large number of measurements on identical systems that are all prepared in state |\psi\rangle.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Fredrik, it helps.
 
KFC said:
Yes. I just correct that.

But in |n\rangle, how come will it be average?

Let's say we want to find the average value of any dynamic variable, which we'll call \omega. Let's suppose we're working in some basis, which we'll call k. Then a general formula for the expectation value (average) is:

\langle k| \hat{\Omega}|k\rangle=\bar{\omega}

So with your formula

\langle n |\hat{N}|n\rangle = \bar{n}

This is the same formula I quoted above, but for the operator \hat{N} in the n basis. Since it's the same formula, it gives the average, \bar{n}

Now, in this particular case, the basis vectors happen to be eigenvectors of the operator. As a result, the eigenvalue, n, happens to be equal to the expectation value, \bar{n}

In this derivation:


\langle n |\hat{N}|n\rangle =\langle n |n|n\rangle= n\langle n |n\rangle =n

note the importance of this particular step:

\langle n |\hat{N}|n\rangle =\langle n |n|n\rangle

The reason we can take this step is because of the fact that:

\hat{N}|n\rangle =n |n\rangle

or in other words, we can take this step because the vector happens to be an eigenvector of the operator. Because of this, the same formula that gives the average value also gives the eigenvalue. In the general case I noted above:

\langle k| \hat{\Omega}|k\rangle=\bar{\omega}

I would not be able to take that same step. So in this case, \omega and \bar{\omega} wouldn't follow from the same formula, so I wouldn't necessarily get \omega=\bar{\omega}
 
In quantum stat. mech. the average of any quantity is defined as \overline{A} = Tr(\rhoA) Where "rho" is the density operator.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K