Solving for <p>, <x> and <x^2> using raising and lowering operators

njdevils45

Homework Statement


A) Show that <x>=<p>=0
hint: use orthogonality
B) Use the raising and lowering operators to evaluate an expression for < x2 >

Homework Equations


d60319a2d0031cbc5dcae0218b0668ad.png

Also A- and A+ will definitely come in handy

The Attempt at a Solution


I tried setting up the equations for <x> and <p> but I don't know how the operators are meant to be used in this scenario. I think that the integral is meant to be set up as ∫eq1*xop*the general equation for ψn for a harmonic oscillator, however whatever I do I can't get the math to come out to 0 in the end for either.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is this the entire problem exactly as stated? Clearly it is possible to find states such that ##\langle x\rangle \neq 0## and the same for ##\langle p\rangle##.
 
Yes that's the entire problem
 
Thereis no mention of what state you should compute the expectation values for?
 
None at all. That's why I'm confused, I might just ask the professor for help on the setup to be honest
 
If the state is not mentioned the problem statement is misleading at best. Now, it is true for the energy eigenstates so this is presumably the missing assumption. It is generally not true for linear combinations of energy eigenstates that contain adjacent energy states.
 
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