Spin state function of a beam of particles in terms of eigenfunctions.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the spin state function of a beam of particles, specifically atoms with a spin quantum number of 1/2 and zero orbital angular momentum. The original poster seeks to express the spin state function in terms of the eigenfunctions of the spin operators \(\hat{S}^2\) and \(\hat{S}_z\), given that the spin is +1/2 along the x-axis.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to express the spin state function and questions whether their assumption about the relationship between spin in the x and z directions is correct. Some participants suggest exploring the eigenstates of \(S_x\) in terms of \(S_z\) eigenstates and mention the possibility of a relative phase between terms.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, with some providing expressions for the eigenstates of \(S_x\) in terms of \(S_z\). There is an acknowledgment of the complexity of the relationship between the spin states and the implications for measurements, particularly in the context of a Stern-Gerlach experiment.

Contextual Notes

There is an underlying assumption about the compatibility of spin measurements along different axes, and the discussion hints at the implications of polarization in the context of the experiment mentioned.

Mithra
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hi there, I apologise that I should probably know this/its a stupid question but I seem to have forgotten all physics over the holiday and so any help would be great!

I have been told that there is a beam of atoms with spin quantum number 1/2 and zero orbital angular momentum, with spin +1/2 along the x axis. I am then asked what the spin state function of this beam is in terms of eigenfunctions of \hat{S}^2 and \hat{S}_z, being the kets |1/2 , m_{s_z} = 1/2> and |1/2 , m_{s_z} = -1/2>

Would I be right in assuming that the answer is simply
\phi_s = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|1/2 , m_{s_z} = 1/2> + \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|1/2 , m_{s_z} = 1/2>
because knowing the spin in the x direction doesn't tell you about the z direction (as they are incompatible observables) or is it more complex than that? Any help/advice greatly appreciated, thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You want to find the eigenstates of Sx in terms of the eigenstates of Sz. Your answer is a good guess, but there could be a different relative phase between the two terms.
 
Thanks for the help :).

I got the eigenstates of S_x in terms of S_z as

\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}> + |\frac{1}{2},\frac{-1}{2}>
and
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}> - |\frac{1}{2},\frac{-1}{2}>

With the first one corresponding to the same eigenvalue as the positive spin in the x direction given by S_x. Is that anything like what the correct answer would be? (I'm guessing that it should be similar to if the beam is not polarised as the following questions suggest that they would not be differentiated by a Stern-Gerlach experiment with the magnetic field along z.).

I don't know how much you're actually allowed to say "yes that's the correct answer" but thanks for the help anyway ;).
 
Mithra said:
Thanks for the help :).

I got the eigenstates of S_x in terms of S_z as

\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}> + |\frac{1}{2},\frac{-1}{2}>
and
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}> - |\frac{1}{2},\frac{-1}{2}>

With the first one corresponding to the same eigenvalue as the positive spin in the x direction given by S_x. Is that anything like what the correct answer would be?
Yup, that's it.
(I'm guessing that it should be similar to if the beam is not polarised as the following questions suggest that they would not be differentiated by a Stern-Gerlach experiment with the magnetic field along z.).

I don't know how much you're actually allowed to say "yes that's the correct answer" but thanks for the help anyway ;).
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K