I Robertson uncertainty relation for the angular momentum components

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the application of the Robertson uncertainty relation to orbital angular momentum components in quantum mechanics. It highlights the importance of recognizing the triviality problem when the commutator is zero, leading to zero variance and a lack of information about one observable. The participants clarify that while the uncertainty relation typically applies to operators with a common complete set of eigenfunctions, angular momentum components can still exhibit simultaneous eigenstates. An example provided is the spherical harmonic ##Y_{0}^{0}(\theta,\phi)##, which demonstrates that it is possible for the uncertainties in all three angular momentum components to be zero. The conversation emphasizes the nuanced understanding required for applying the Robertson uncertainty relation in this context.
Yan Campo
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
I would like any explanation about Robertson the uncertainty relation for the angular momentum components and compatibility between the components
I'm studying orbital angular momentum in the quantum domain, and I've come up with the Robertson uncertainty relation for the components of orbital angular momentum. Therefore, I read that it is necessary to pay attention to the triviality problem, because in the case where the commutator is zero, the product of the standard deviations is zero, so the variance is also zero. This means that we don't have information about one of the observables and, therefore, we don't know the incompatibility between the two, I think. But, I can't see any kind of problem in using the Robertson uncertainty relation in the orbital angular momentum components. Can anyone explain to me, or give me an example about this? I really want to understand.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am afraid there is no angle operator such that
[\hat{\theta},\hat{L}]=i\hbar
to which we apply Roberson uncertainty relation.
 
Last edited:
Yan, the Robertson uncertainty principle is regarding two operator have a common complete set of eigenfunctions, i.e., in such basis both operators are diagonal. This is usually expressed, for example, as

$$\Delta A\Delta B \geq \frac{1}{2}\left | \int \psi^{*}[A,B]\psi d\tau\right |$$

But, in the case of angular momentum components, it does not mean that some of the eigenfunctions of ##L_{z}## cannot also be simultaneous eigenfunctions of ##L_{x}## and ##L_{y}##. See the case of ##Y_{0}^{0}(\theta,\phi)## spherical harmonic. In such case, it is allowed to have ##\Delta L_{x} = 0##, ##\Delta L_{y} = 0## and ##\Delta L_{z} = 0##.
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...