Spherical tensor operators' commutation with lowering/raising operator

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the commutation relation of spherical tensor operators with lowering and raising operators as presented in Shankar's "Principles of Quantum Mechanics" (2nd edition), specifically equation (15.3.11). The user challenges the correctness of Shankar's equation, noting that their derived result lacks the overall \(\pm\) sign on the right-hand side, consistently yielding a positive \(\hbar\). They reference Sakurai's "Modern Quantum Mechanics" (2nd edition) as supporting their interpretation, suggesting a potential typo in Shankar's text, which is not acknowledged in existing erratas. The user concludes that differing conventions may explain the discrepancies between the texts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of spherical tensor operators in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with commutation relations and their implications
  • Knowledge of quantum mechanics textbooks, specifically Shankar and Sakurai
  • Ability to derive equations from quantum mechanics principles
NEXT STEPS
  • Review Shankar's "Principles of Quantum Mechanics" for context on spherical tensor operators
  • Examine Sakurai's "Modern Quantum Mechanics" for alternative interpretations of the commutation relation
  • Study Edmonds and Messiah's texts for additional insights on tensor operators
  • Research conventions in quantum mechanics regarding spherical tensors and their implications
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in quantum mechanics, particularly those studying spherical tensor operators and their applications in quantum theory. This discussion is beneficial for anyone seeking clarity on the discrepancies between authoritative texts in the field.

cattlecattle
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I'm studying Shankar's book (2nd edition), and I came across his equation (15.3.11) about spherical tensor operators:
[J_\pm, T_k^q]=\pm \hbar\sqrt{(k\mp q)(k\pm q+1)}T_k^{q\pm 1}

I tried to derive this using his hint from Ex 15.3.2, but the result I got doesn't have the overall \pm sign on the RHS (i.e., it's always +\hbar on the RHS). And I think my result agrees with the result of k=1 where T_1^\pm=\mp\frac{V_x\pm iV_y}{\sqrt{2}},T_1^0=V_z as well.

So I thought this was simply a typo from Shankar's book, but it seems all erratas of this book don't list this as a typo. And the wikipedia article and various other online tutorials all agree with Shankar.

However, Sakurai's book agrees with me (second edition, Eq 3.11.25b)

I'm wondering which version is correct, or could it be that the two versions are adopting different conventions. I'm leaning towards the belief that Shankar's version is a typo and all the online tutorials and the wikipedia article are simply copying the same typo.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
My references (Edmonds and Messiah) agree with you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K