Sakurai 1.17 - Operators and Complete Eigenkets

Domnu
Messages
176
Reaction score
0
I'm pretty sure this is correct, but could someone verify for rigor?

Problem
Two observables A_1 and A_2, which do not involve time explicitly, are known not to commute, yet we also know that A_1 and A_2 both commute with the Hamiltonian. Prove that the energy eigenstates are, in general, degenerate. Are there exceptions?

The attempt at a solution
Since [H,A_1]=0, we know that there are complete eigenkets that A_1 and H share. The same is true for A_2. Now, generally, two observables that do not commute do not share eigenkets. Thus, we know that there exist two distinct eigenstates such that H|a\ket = e|a\ket; particularly, each |a\ket can be brought from the eigenkets of A_1,A_2.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
come on 25 views and no post? :(
 
Impatience is not a virtue. Can't A1 and A2 commute on a subspace without commuting on the whole space?
 
Heh, it was more of a bump since it was already on the second page :) Yes, they can, but the question asks "generally," and "generally" this doesn't happen, right?
 
Ok, considered as a teasing bump. But the question asks, are there exceptions? I.e. could there be energy eigenstates that aren't degenerate? At least that's how I read it.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top