Two-Level Quantum System, Need help Finding State at time t

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a two-level quantum system characterized by a Hamiltonian matrix. Participants explore the properties of the Hamiltonian, including its hermiticity, eigenvalues, and eigenvectors, as well as the implications for energy measurements in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the hermiticity of the Hamiltonian and its significance, the process of finding eigenvalues and eigenvectors, and the implications of measurement outcomes based on the state of the system. There is also a focus on the assumptions regarding the basis states and their relation to energy eigenstates.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants questioning initial assumptions about the basis states and exploring how to express states in terms of eigenvectors. Some guidance has been provided regarding the normalization of states and the interpretation of coefficients in quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the potential confusion arising from the treatment of eigenstates and the implications of imaginary coefficients in quantum state representations. There is an acknowledgment of the need to clarify definitions and assumptions within the context of the problem.

B3NR4Y
Gold Member
Messages
170
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


|1> and |2> form an orthonormal basis for a two-level system. The Hamiltonian of this system is given by:
<br /> \hat{H} = \epsilon<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 1 &amp; i \\<br /> -i &amp; 1<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />

a.) Is this Hamiltonian hermitian? What is the significance of a hermitian operator?
b.) Find the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of this hamiltonian.
c.) Suppose a particle is in the state |1&gt;. An energy measurement is performed on the particle. What are the possible outcomes of such a measurement, and what are the probabilities?

Homework Equations


All that should be necessary is the Schrödinger equation.
\hat{H} |\psi&gt; = E|\psi&gt;

The Attempt at a Solution


For part a I checked that the eigenvalues of the hamiltonian are real. This kills two birds with one stone because part b asks for the eigenvectors. They were real, and given by 2ε and 0. The significance of an operator being hermitian is that hermitian operators correspond to observables.

For part b I just went through the rigor of finding the eigenvectors.
They were
|1&gt; = <br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> i \\<br /> 1 <br /> \end{pmatrix}<br /> and
<br /> |2&gt; =<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> -i \\<br /> 1 <br /> \end{pmatrix}<br /> The first corresponds to the eigenvalue 2ε and the second corresponds to the eigenvalue 0.

For part C I used Schrödinger's equation and said that since |1> is an eigenvector of the hamiltonian it has a constant definite energy given by 2ε with 100% probability. This is where I feel like I am wrong, because I think this violates an uncertainty principle.

For part D I am not sure what to do. I know I should multiple by some exponent with time, but I'm not sure how to find this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
B3NR4Y said:
For part b I just went through the rigor of finding the eigenvectors.
They were
|1>=(i1)|1>=(i1) |1> = \begin{pmatrix} i \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} and
|2>=(−i1)|2>=(−i1) |2> = \begin{pmatrix} -i \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} The first corresponds to the eigenvalue 2ε and the second corresponds to the eigenvalue 0.
The problem doesn't say that ##|1\rangle## and ##|2\rangle## are energy eigenvectors and you shouldn't assume this way.
B3NR4Y said:
For part C I used Schrödinger's equation and said that since |1> is an eigenvector of the hamiltonian it has a constant definite energy given by 2ε with 100% probability. This is where I feel like I am wrong, because I think this violates an uncertainty principle.
If in part b) you don't assume that ##|1\rangle## and ##|2\rangle## are energy eigenvectors, these vectors will be some superposition states of the energy eigenvectors and thus the energy measurement will yield a multiple possibilities.
 
Yeah my assumption about the basis was stupid. I did some extra reading to refresh my memory from my first quantum course and realized that.

Since |1> and |2> are any two linearly independent vectors, then an arbitrary state |ψ> can be written c1 |1> + c2 |2>. In the case that part c says, c2 = 0 and c1=1. However I am not sure how to write the |1> state in terms of the eigenvectors which I think is necessary. I was thinking that if the basis vectors are given by
|1&gt; =<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 1 \\<br /> 0<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br /> and
<br /> |2&gt; =<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 0 \\<br /> 1<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />

Writing |1> in terms of the eigenvectors is difficult to me.
 
B3NR4Y said:
Since |1> and |2> are any two linearly independent vectors, then an arbitrary state |ψ> can be written c1 |1> + c2 |2>.
Yes that's right.
B3NR4Y said:
In the case that part c says, c2 = 0 and c1=1. However I am not sure how to write the |1> state in terms of the eigenvectors which I think is necessary.
You actually have a good start already since you have calculated the eigenvectors of ##H## in the basis ##\{| i \rangle\}## with ##i = 1,2##. However, let's rename the two eigenvectors using different notation, let's say ##|a\rangle## and ##|b\rangle##. Written in vector notation, these eigenvectors of ##H## will become
$$
|a\rangle =
\begin{pmatrix}
i \\ 1
\end{pmatrix} = i
\begin{pmatrix}
1\\ 0
\end{pmatrix}+
\begin{pmatrix}
0\\ 1
\end{pmatrix} = i|1\rangle + |2\rangle
$$
and
$$
|b\rangle =
\begin{pmatrix}
-i \\ 1
\end{pmatrix} = -i
\begin{pmatrix}
1\\ 0
\end{pmatrix}+
\begin{pmatrix}
0\\ 1
\end{pmatrix} = -i|1\rangle + |2\rangle
$$
Your task is to invert these two equations such that ##|1\rangle## and ##|2\rangle## are explicitly written in terms of ##|a\rangle## and ##|b\rangle##. After that, you should normalize them.
 
I see, that is shockingly easy.

So once I have that I should compute &lt;1|\hat{H}|1&gt; and the coefficient of each term is the probability of that energy?
 
B3NR4Y said:
So once I have that I should compute <1|^H|1>
You are not required to calculate the average of the measurement results, only the possible outcomes and the corresponding probability are asked.
 
Okay I have that |1> can be written:
|1\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}i} \left(|a\rangle-|b\rangle\right)
With this I apply H, which I can use the Schrödinger equation to find. The only thing I am uneasy on now is that I think the coefficients will be imaginary, and I am not sure how to reconcile that. I remember in the past we had problems with clebsch-gordan tables and if the coefficients were imaginary we just took the length of that vector (i.e. -i/2 would just be given 1/2).

Sorry if all of these are stupid questions, I haven't done any of this all summer and am trying to get back in the swing of it.
 
Last edited:
B3NR4Y said:
Okay I have that |1> can be written:
|1⟩=1√2i(|a⟩−|b⟩)|1⟩=12i(|a⟩−|b⟩)​
Yes that's right.
B3NR4Y said:
The only thing I am uneasy on now is that I think the coefficients will be imaginary, and I am not sure how to reconcile that.
The coefficients are generally complex numbers, it's the probabilities which equal the modulus square of those coefficients that are real.
B3NR4Y said:
I remember in the past we had problems with clebsch-gordan tables and if the coefficients were imaginary we just took the length of that vector (i.e. -i/2 would just be given 1/2).
I don't remember one has to deal with imaginary coefficients in calculating CG coefficients. The proportionality constant between the states ##|s_1s_2;SS\rangle## and ## |s_1s_2;s_1s_2\rangle## is agreed to be 1 and also the action of the lowering and raising operators gives only real coefficient, so the CG coefficients must be real.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K