A $S^+$ and $S^{-}$ operators formula

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter LagrangeEuler
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Operators
LagrangeEuler
Messages
711
Reaction score
22
For ##\hat{S}^+## and ##\hat{S}^{-}## operators for any given spin ##S## relation
\hat{S}^+|S,m \rangle=\sqrt{S(S+1)-m(m+1)}\hbar|S,m+1 \rangle
\hat{S}^-|S,m \rangle=\sqrt{S(S+1)-m(m-1)}\hbar|S,m-1 \rangle
Can someone please explain how we get those factors ##\sqrt{S(S+1)-m(m+1)}\hbar## and ##\sqrt{S(S+1)-m(m-1)}\hbar##?
In ##|S,m \rangle## ##S## denotes spin, and ##m## spin projection.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I thought someone would already have answered this. For people who like algebra, it's one of those fun things to derive in quantum mechanics.

Let me list some facts about these operators
  1. ##S^{+} = S_x + i S_y##
  2. ##S^{-} = S_x - i S_y##
  3. ##S^2 = S_x^2 + S_y^2 + S_z^2##
  4. ##S_x S_y - S_y S_x = i S_z##
  5. ##S_z S^{+} = S^{+} (S_z + 1)##
  6. ##S_z S^{-} = S^{-} (S_z - 1)##
  7. ##S^{-} S^{+} = S^2 - S_z(S_z + 1)##
  8. ##(S^{+})^\dagger = S^{-}##
(The last 4 are provable from the first 4).

So if we let ##|m\rangle## be the state with ##S_z |m \rangle = m | m \rangle##,
then ##S_z S^- |m\rangle = S^- (S_z - 1) |m\rangle = S^- (m - 1) |m\rangle = (m-1) S^- |m\rangle##. So ##S^-|m\rangle## is an eigenstate of ##S_z## with eigenvalue ##m-1##. That means (assuming nondegeneracy of eigenvalues---I'm going to skip the argument for why this is the case, because I'm not sure why) that ##S^- |m\rangle## must be a multiple of ##|m-1\rangle##. So let's let ##\alpha_m## be the multiplier:

##S^- |m\rangle = \alpha_m |m-1\rangle##

Analogously, we can show that ##S^+ |m\rangle## has to be an eigenstate of ##S_z## with eigenvalue ##m+1##. So

##S^+ |m\rangle = \beta_m |m+1\rangle##

where ##\beta_m## is some unknown multiplier. We can relate ##\alpha_m## and ##\beta_m## by considering

##\langle m| S^- S^+ |m \rangle##

By our assumptions about ##S^+## and ##S^{-}##, we get:

##\langle m| S^- S^+ |m \rangle = \langle m| (S^+ \beta_m |m+1\rangle) = \langle m |\alpha_{m+1} \beta_m |m\rangle = \alpha_{m+1} \beta_m##. But we also know that ##\langle m| S^- S^+ |m \rangle = (S^+ |m\rangle)^\dagger (S^+ |m\rangle) = \langle m | \beta_m^* \beta_m |m \rangle##. So this proves that

##\beta_m^* = \alpha_{m+1}##

Now on the one hand:

##S^- S^+ |m\rangle = S^- \beta_m |m+1\rangle = \alpha_{m+1} \beta_m |m\rangle = |\beta_m|^2 |m \rangle##

On the other hand, by equation 7 above,

##S^- S^+ |m\rangle = (S^2 - S_z(S_z+1)) |m\rangle = (S^2 - m(m+1)) |m\rangle##

So we conclude that ##\beta_m = \sqrt{S^2 - m(m+1)}##.

But what are the eigenvalues of ##S^2##? Well, since ##S^2## must be greater than or equal to ##S_z^2##, we know that we can't keep raising the value of ##S_z## forever. But since ##S^+ |m\rangle = \beta_m |m+1\rangle##, the only way to prevent raising ##m## indefinitely is if for some maximal value of ##m##,

##S^+ |m_{\text{max}}\rangle = 0##

That implies that ##\beta_{m_{\text{max}}} = 0##.

So since we know an expression for ##\beta_m##,

##\sqrt{S^2 - m_{\text{max}}(m_{\text{max}}+1)} = 0##

That implies that ##S^2 = m_{\text{max}}(m_{\text{max}}+1)##

Rewriting ##m_{\text{max}} \equiv s## gives:
##S^2 =s (s+1)##

and ##\beta_m = \sqrt{s(s+1) - m(m+1)}##
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes vanhees71, LagrangeEuler, PeroK and 2 others
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
I am not sure if this falls under classical physics or quantum physics or somewhere else (so feel free to put it in the right section), but is there any micro state of the universe one can think of which if evolved under the current laws of nature, inevitably results in outcomes such as a table levitating? That example is just a random one I decided to choose but I'm really asking about any event that would seem like a "miracle" to the ordinary person (i.e. any event that doesn't seem to...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
483
Replies
1
Views
572
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
29
Views
2K
Replies
31
Views
2K
Back
Top