Sx acting on up spin particle confusion

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the confusion surrounding the measurement of the x component of spin for a spin-up particle, specifically in the context of quantum mechanics as described in Griffiths' textbook. When measuring the x component of a spin-up particle, the result is indeed h-bar/2 times the spin-down state, indicating a transition from the z-axis to the x-axis. This behavior is explained by the need to project the spin-up state onto the eigenstates of the Sx operator, which involves calculating the probability amplitudes for the measurement outcomes. The participants clarify that one cannot directly apply a measurement operator to a state vector to obtain a deterministic result, as quantum mechanics only allows for probabilistic predictions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly spin states.
  • Familiarity with quantum operators, specifically Sx and Sz.
  • Knowledge of eigenstates and their role in quantum measurements.
  • Proficiency in linear algebra, particularly in the context of quantum state vectors.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of quantum state projection and its implications for measurement outcomes.
  • Learn about the mathematical formulation of spin operators in quantum mechanics.
  • Explore the relationship between different spin bases, particularly the transition between z and x axes.
  • Investigate the role of probability amplitudes in quantum measurements and their calculations.
USEFUL FOR

Students of quantum mechanics, physicists working with spin systems, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of quantum measurement theory and operator dynamics.

DocZaius
Messages
365
Reaction score
11
I am reading Griffiths and I am having trouble interpreting the results of measuring the x component of spin on a spin-up particle.

If you have a spin up particle, my understanding is that it is assumed to be up in the preferred axis, z. I would think that measuring its x component should give half probability of h-bar/2 and half of negative h-bar/2. But what I get is h-bar/2 times spin down (down in z axis right?):

Sx\uparrow=\frac{\hbar}{2}<br /> \left( \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 0 &amp; 1 \\<br /> 1 &amp; 0 \end{array} \right)<br /> \left( \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 1 \\<br /> 0 \end{array} \right)<br /> =\frac{\hbar}{2}\downarrow

I don't see why this would make any sense. You measure the x component of the spin of a spin-up particle and get h-bar over 2 times spin down? Does that mean the particle is now spin down on the z axis? Shouldn't it be on the x-axis now that we measured it in respect to the x component?

Also, just to be clear: the generic spin-up spinor without a (z) superscript implies it is a spinor of the z axis right?

X=X^{(z)} ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You didn't measure anything. Applied to eigenstates of Sz, the Sx operator acts as a stepping operator (it's equal to ½(S+ + S-)) The S+ gives zero, and the S- steps you down. So no wonder you got the spin down state!: wink:

What you want to do is find the overlap between the spin up state and the eigenstates of Sx. This will give you the probability amplitude of measuring each value of Sx. From the matrix you wrote, the eigenstates of Sx are (1/√2)(1, ±1).
 
So if I wish to measure the x component of the spin-up particle, I first project spin-up onto Sx's eigenvectors, thereby expressing it as a linear combination of them, then Sx that vector?

1) V = <Sx's first eigenvector|Spin up vector> (Sx's first eigenvector) + <Sx's second eigenvector|Spin up vector> (Sx's secondeigenvector)
2) (Sx)V

Is that right?
 
yes,you will have to first define up and down with respect to x axis.
 
?? why would you apply the spinx operator to spin up state
 
One cannot make a measurement in quantum mechanics. One can only predict probabilities for numerous measurements. There is no mathematical operation as we know it now that one can use in quantum mechanics were one applies something to a state vector, and gets back a result. This can't happen since the results are random, and you never hit a state vector with something and get a random result back. You can calculate the probability of obtaining a result in a lab where you do an actual mesearment. For your case it would be \langle \uparrow_{x}|\uparrow_{z}\rangle or something like that depending what you want to know.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K