Sakurai Problem 1.9: Eigenvalues of Hamiltonian

  • Thread starter Thread starter Daverz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sakurai
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the Hamiltonian defined as H = a(|1⟩⟨1| - |2⟩⟨2| + |1⟩⟨2| + |2⟩⟨1|), which yields eigenvalues of ±a√2. A participant questions the validity of negative eigenvalues for a Hamiltonian, suggesting that a positive sign in front of |2⟩⟨2| would yield more conventional eigenvalues of 0 and 2a. The conversation highlights that in non-relativistic quantum mechanics, the choice of zero energy is arbitrary, and emphasizes the importance of having a lower bound on the energy spectrum to prevent infinite energy release.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hamiltonians in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with eigenvalues and eigenstates
  • Knowledge of non-relativistic quantum mechanics principles
  • Concept of energy spectra and their lower bounds
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Hamiltonians in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about eigenvalue problems in quantum systems
  • Explore the concept of energy zero points in various quantum systems
  • Investigate the implications of bound and scattering states in quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Quantum mechanics students, physicists, and researchers interested in the properties of Hamiltonians and energy spectra in quantum systems.

Daverz
Messages
1,003
Reaction score
80
Of Modern Quantum Mechanics. This starts with a Hamiltonian

<br /> H = a(|1\rangle\langle 1| - |2\rangle\langle 2| + |1\rangle\langle 2| + |2\rangle\langle 1|)<br />

This has eigenvalues \pm a\sqrt{2}. Shouldn't a Hamiltonian have only non-negative eigenvalues? If the sign in front of the |2\rangle\langle 2| is + instead of a - you get eigenvalues 0 and 2a, which makes more sense (assuming a is real and positive). So might this be a typo, or am I wrong in general about the eigenvalues of a Hamiltonian? Or am I taking this toy "Hamiltonian" too seriously?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
In non-relativistic quantum mecanics, the signs of energy eigenvalues depend on where the zero for energy is (arbitrarily) chosen. For example, in the harmonic oscillator, the zero is chosen at the equilibrium position, and the energies are all positve, while in the hydrogen atom, the zero is chosen at r = infinity. For hydrogen, bound states have negative energies, while scattering states have positive energies because they can "make it to infinity".

Both of these zeros are arbitary and chosen for convenience.

What is necessary, is that the spectrum of energies has a lower bound, e.g., -13.7 ev for hydrogen. If no lower bound exists, then the system can spiral down to lower and lower energies, and, in the process, release an infinite amount of energy.
 
George Jones said:
For hydrogen, bound states have negative energies, while scattering states have positive energies because they can "make it to infinity".

Well, duh, how did I forget bound states? Well, I did. That's not even QM, the bound "states" in Newtonian mechanics have negative energy. Thanks for jogging my fuzzy memory. Guess I have a lot of review to do.
 
Last edited:
Nevermind. I figured it out.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K