Bill Foster said:
I find out what is [tex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}[/tex]
I get the following:
[tex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}=\left(S_x\hat{\textbf{x}}+S_y\hat{\textbf{y}}+S_z\hat{\textbf{z}}\right)\cdot\left(\sin{\theta}cos{\phi}\hat{\textbf{x}}+\sin{\theta}\sin{\phi}\hat{\textbf{y}}+\cos{\theta}\hat{\textbf{z}}\right)=S_x\cos{\phi}+S_y\sin{\phi}[/tex]
[tex]S_x=\frac{\hbar}{2}\left(|+\rangle\langle -| + |-\rangle\langle +|\right)[/tex]
[tex]S_y=\frac{i\hbar}{2}\left(|-\rangle\langle +|-|+\rangle\langle -|\right)[/tex]
So
[tex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}=\frac{\hbar}{2}\left(|+\rangle\langle -| + |-\rangle\langle +|\right)\cos{\phi}+\frac{i\hbar}{2}\left(|-\rangle\langle +|-|+\rangle\langle -|\right)\sin{\phi}[/tex]
[tex]=\frac{\hbar}{2}\left(|+\rangle\langle -| + |-\rangle\langle +|\right)\cos{\phi}-i\left(|+\rangle\langle -|-|-\rangle\langle +|\right)\sin{\phi}[/tex]
My copy of Sakurai has [itex]\mathbf{\hat{n}}[/itex] lying in the [itex]xz[/itex]-plane, making an angle [itex]\gamma[/itex] with the positive [itex]z[/itex]-axis
[tex]\implies\mathbf{\hat{n}}=\sin\gamma\mathbf{\hat{x}}+\cos\gamma\mathbf{\hat{z}}[/tex]
Since the system is in an eigenstate of [tex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}[/tex] with eigenvalue of [itex]\frac{\hbar}{2}[/itex] it has to satisfy this equation:
[tex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};+\rangle=\frac{\hbar}{2}|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};+\rangle[/tex]
I understand everything up to here. I want to know why it has to satisfy that last equation. I know the definition of the eigenvalue. I want to know why [tex]|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};+\rangle[/tex] is the eigenvector.
Or to put it another way, why isn't [tex]|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};-\rangle[/tex] the eigenvector? Or why isn't [tex]|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}\rangle[/tex] the eigenvector?
[itex]|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};+\rangle[/itex] is
defined as the eigenstate of [itex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}[/itex], with corresponding eigenvalue of [itex]\frac{\hbar}{2}[/itex] (In
its eigenbasis!), and [itex]|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};-\rangle[/itex] is defined as the eigenstate of [itex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}[/itex], with corresponding eigenvalue of [itex]-\frac{\hbar}{2}[/itex]
So, if the system is known to be in an eigenstate of [itex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}[/itex] with corresponding eigenvalue [itex]\frac{\hbar}{2}[/itex], then it must be in the state [itex]|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};+\rangle[/itex]. (If it were instead known to be in an eigenstate of [itex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}[/itex] with corresponding eigenvalue [itex]-\frac{\hbar}{2}[/itex], then it would be in the state [itex]|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};-\rangle[/itex])
Also, writing [itex]|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}\rangle[/itex] makes absolutely no sense. As I said earlier, [itex]\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}[/itex] is an operator, not a state; so writing it inside a Ket like this makes no sense.
Bill Foster said:
Also, if we skip to the end of the problem, put another way, the probability of getting [itex]\frac{\hbar}{2}[/itex] when [tex]S_x[/tex] is measured is given by
[tex]|\langle S_x;+|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};+\rangle|^2[/tex]
Why is it that instead of this:
[tex]|\langle S_x|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}}\rangle|^2[/tex]
?
Well, the initial state of the system is [itex]|\psi_i\rangle=|\textbf{S}\cdot\hat{\textbf{n}};+\rangle[/itex]. If [itex]S_x[/itex] is measured, and the result is [itex]\frac{\hbar}{2}[/itex], what will the final state[itex]|\psi_f\rangle[/itex] of the system be? What is the probability of this outcome? (If you can't immediately answer these question, you need to re-read section 1.4 of Sakurai!)