Hello!(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I have two questions regarding QM.

First, I tried to rotate J_z into J_y for the j=1 representation by the transformation rule for matrices.. I took my rotationvector to be (1,0,0) and rotated about 3/4 pi radians which I thought would give me S_y. Instead I got S_z again!

Wolfram alpha says that this transformation always gives S_z, no matter what angle.

My idea was: (exp(-i*pauli_x*x*pi/2)^(-1)) S_z exp(-i*pauli_x*x*pi/2)

and in wolfram alpha I wrote:

(exp(-i*{{0,1,0},{1,0,1},{0,1,0}}*x*pi/2)^(-1)){{1,0,0},{0,0,0},{0,0,-1}} exp(-i*{{0,1,0},{1,0,1},{0,1,0}}*x*pi/2)

and gets {{1,0,0},{0,0,0},{0,0,-1}} with no dependence of x.

Where does my logic break down?

Second, I just want a confirmation that I understood the exlusion principle correct.

For a three (identical)particle system we get a six dimensional subspace of the hilbertspace that corresponds to the same physical system,

|x>|y>|z>, |y>|x>|z>, ... etc.

But nature does only use the subspaces , of this six dimensional subspace, which are totally antisymmetric or symmetric. This means that we have no ambiguity in choosing the state vector, if we know wether our particles are fermions or boson.

Does this seem right? :-)

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# SU(2) generators in j=1, and pauli uncertainty

Loading...

Similar Threads for generators pauli uncertainty | Date |
---|---|

I Do the SU(n) generators represent any observables? | Feb 14, 2018 |

A Srednicki's normalization choice for lie algebra generators | Jul 9, 2017 |

I Why does SU(2) have 3 parameters/generators like the SO(3)? | May 8, 2017 |

Pauli Matrices as generators of SU(2) | Nov 30, 2009 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**