I Spin up and Spin down states can be written as .... why?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Sara Kennedy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spin States
Sara Kennedy
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Spin up and spin down states in the x direction can be written as

|Upx> = 1/ √2 ( |Upz> + |Downz> )
and
|Downx> = 1/ √2 ( - |Upz> + |Downz> )

My textbook just stated the above facts without referencing why and I've been going through the spin chapter for a while now and I can't see it. Why is this true?

Is it something to do with permutation rotation and orthogonality? For example I could switch the x to y and the z to x and the expressions would be correct
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Find the matrix form of ##S_x## in the basis ##|z;\pm\rangle## and then find its eigenvectors. Alternatively, you can also apply the rotation operator about the y-axis by 90 degree to the ##|z;\pm\rangle## states.
 
Hm okay I have the Sx matrix and a matrix in the n direction Sn. Do you know of any online notes that explain how to change from one basis to another? I found a few questions but they look like homework solutions and I was after explanations, it doesn't explain change of basis in my book. Just to clarify, |z;±> means spin up and spin down states in z direction right?
 
Sara Kennedy said:
Do you know of any online notes that explain how to change from one basis to another? I found a few questions but they look like homework solutions and I was after explanations, it doesn't explain change of basis in my book.
Try searching for "change of coordinates matrix", you should find a number of resources on this matter. In general, to find the change of coordinate matrix, you have to know how the vector in one basis is expressed in terms of the basis vectors in the other basis.
Sara Kennedy said:
Just to clarify, |z;±> means spin up and spin down states in z direction right?
Yes.
 
Sara Kennedy said:
I was after explanations
See http://feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/III_06.html for a derivation of these equations (6.32) for "amplitudes". The derivation starts from the fact that a 360 degree rotation changes the sign of both amplitudes (because otherwise a 180 degree rotation would be physically equivalent to a 360 degree rotation).
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top