Simultaneous measuring of two operators

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Caulfield
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Measuring Operators
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the conditions under which two quantum mechanical observables can be simultaneously measured, specifically focusing on the commutation of their corresponding operators. Participants explore the implications of non-commuting operators on the definiteness of measurement outcomes in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why particles can only be in a state of definite values for two observables if the corresponding operators commute.
  • Another participant explains that measuring an observable collapses the state into an eigenstate, and a particle can only be in an eigenstate of both observables if the operators commute.
  • A participant provides a mathematical example involving the commutation relation [A,B] = -iħ, suggesting that non-commuting operators lead to different wave functions, implying that the measurement of one observable disturbs the state of the other.
  • Another participant asserts that if a state is an eigenstate of both operators, then they must commute, though notes that this may depend on specific conditions and subspaces.
  • A later reply references a theorem on non-commuting observables and suggests that commuting observables share the same set of eigenvectors, indicating a deeper compatibility between them.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of non-commuting operators and the conditions under which observables can be simultaneously measured. There is no consensus on the interpretation of these concepts, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention conditions and subspaces that may affect the commutation of operators, but these aspects remain unclear and unresolved within the discussion.

Caulfield
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hello everybody.

I am new here, and also new to quantum mechanics. This is the question to which I can't answer neither in mathematical nor physical way.

a,b → observables (like position and momentum)
A,B → corresponding operators.

"It is possible for particles to be in a state of definite a and b at the same time only if the corresponding operators A and B commute."

Why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When you measure something, you collapse its state into an eigenstate of whatever you are measuring. The state remains undisturbed if it is already an eigenstate of whatever you are measuring. This is why a particle in an eigenstate of A is said to have a definite value of A. A particle can be in an eigenstate of both A and B only if A and B commute.

The other way to say it is that if you measure an observable A on a particle in a state, you will get a particular result with certainty only if the state is an eigenstate of A. This is why we say an eigenstate of A has a definite value of A. Again, a particle can only be in an eigenstate of both A and B only if A and B commute.
 
Last edited:
if they don't commute, for example: [A,B]=-iħ

A(ψ)=a(ψ)

BA(ψ)=Ba(ψ)

-iħA(B(ψ))=aB(ψ)

A(B(ψ))=(i/ħ)aB(ψ)

but A(ψ)=aψ, and (i/ħ) is not equal to a.

This means we have two different wave functions as eigenfunctions of the operator A. (So eigenstate is disturbed)

How this imply that B(ψ) is not equal to bB(ψ)? (that is, how does it imply that b is not definite?)
 
Let ψ be an eigenstate of A and of B.

Aψ=aψ

Bψ=bψ

[A,B]ψ
=ABψ-BAψ
=Abψ-Baψ
=bAψ-aBψ
=baψ-abψ
=0

So if ψ is an eigenstate of A and B, then A and B will commute. (It may depend on the subspace, and some other conditions, which I don't remember.)
 
Caulfield said:
"It is possible for particles to be in a state of definite a and b at the same time only if the corresponding operators A and B commute."

Its a theorem on non commuting observables:
http://www.pa.msu.edu/~mmoore/Lect23_HeisUncPrinc.pdf

Also any good book on QM will detail it - eg see section 8.4 - Ballentine - Quantum Mechanics - A Modern Development.

But seeing why commuting observables have no issues isn't that hard. Basically it means they have the same set of eigenvectors, which roughly translates to they are really the same observation in disguise - note to the more knowledgeable reading this - I said ROUGHLY. Technically such are said to be compatible.

Thanks
Bill
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K