The time-dependence of the expectation values of spin operators

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the time-dependence of expectation values for spin operators in a quantum system subjected to an external magnetic field. The initial equations of motion for the spin operators are established, indicating that the z-component remains constant while the x and y components evolve over time. The use of Ehrenfest's theorem is proposed to calculate the expectation values, with a specific focus on the commutation relations involving the Hamiltonian. Participants suggest simplifying the expression for the commutator and question whether the Heisenberg picture is necessary for the calculations. The conversation emphasizes the need for clarity on the next steps to compute the time-dependent expectation values effectively.
Rayan
Messages
17
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
Assume a spin s= 1/2 is subjected to an external magnetic field B. The Hamiltonian is then given by H, and that at t= 0, the spin of the particle is in the eigenstate of the S_x operator with the eigenvalue:
Relevant Equations
$$ \hat{H} = -\frac{eB}{mc} \hat{S}_z = w\hat{S_z} $$
$$ \hat{S}_x|\psi (t= 0)⟩= \frac{\hbar}{2}|\psi(t= 0)⟩$$
So first I derived the expressions for the dynamics of the spin operators and got:
$$ \frac{d\hat{S}_y}{dt} = w\hat{S}_x^H $$
$$ \frac{d\hat{S}_x}{dt} = w\hat{S}_y^H $$
$$ \frac{d\hat{S}_z}{dt} = 0 $$

Now I want to calculate the time-dependence of the expectation values of the spin operators, To do that I used Ehrenfest theorem (for an arbitrary $S_i$):

$$ \frac{d}{dt} ⟨ S_i ⟩_H = \frac{1}{i\hbar} ⟨ [ \hat{S}_i , \hat{H} ] ⟩ + ⟨ \frac{\partial S_i }{dt} ⟩ $$

Starting with the first term:
$$ ⟨ [ \hat{S}_i , \hat{H} ] ⟩ = ⟨ {S}_i \hat{H} ⟩ - ⟨ \hat{H} \hat{S}_i ⟩ = w ( ⟨ \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_i \hat{U} \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_z \hat{U} ⟩ - ⟨ \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_z \hat{U} \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_i \hat{U} ⟩ ) =$$
$$ = w ( ⟨ \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_i \hat{S}_z \hat{U} ⟩ - ⟨ \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_z \hat{S}_i \hat{U} ⟩ ) $$

So my question is what is the best/easiest way to go now? I tried using the definition of expectation value and the fact that the state at t=0 is ( changing to z-basis ):

$$ |\psi (t= 0)⟩ = |+⟩_x = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} ( |+⟩_z + |-⟩_z ) $$

So that

$$ ⟨ [ \hat{S}_i , \hat{H} ] ⟩ = \frac{w}{2} \Bigl( ⟨ ⟨+|_z + ⟨-|_z | e^{-iw\hat{S}_zt} \hat{S}_i \hat{S}_z e^{iw\hat{S}_zt} | |+⟩_z + |-⟩_z ⟩ \Bigr) $$

But I don't really know how to continue here to find the expectation value of the exponential term with t-dependence! Any advice appreciated:)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rayan said:
Homework Statement: Assume a spin s= 1/2 is subjected to an external magnetic field B. The Hamiltonian is then given by H, and that at t= 0, the spin of the particle is in the eigenstate of the S_x operator with the eigenvalue:
The problem statement is incomplete. What is it that you are supposed to calculate?

Rayan said:
So first I derived the expressions for the dynamics of the spin operators and got:
$$ \frac{d\hat{S}_y}{dt} = w\hat{S}_x^H $$
$$ \frac{d\hat{S}_x}{dt} = w\hat{S}_y^H $$
$$ \frac{d\hat{S}_z}{dt} = 0 $$
Are you sure about those?

Rayan said:
Starting with the first term:
$$ ⟨ [ \hat{S}_i , \hat{H} ] ⟩ = ⟨ {S}_i \hat{H} ⟩ - ⟨ \hat{H} \hat{S}_i ⟩ = w ( ⟨ \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_i \hat{U} \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_z \hat{U} ⟩ - ⟨ \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_z \hat{U} \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_i \hat{U} ⟩ ) =$$
$$ = w ( ⟨ \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_i \hat{S}_z \hat{U} ⟩ - ⟨ \hat{U}^{\dagger} \hat{S}_z \hat{S}_i \hat{U} ⟩ ) $$
Stat by finding a simplified equation for ## [ \hat{S}_i , \hat{H} ] ##.

And do you have to use the Heisenberg picture?
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top