Uncertainties & Total Angular Momentum

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on determining the uncertainty quantity using total angular momentum operators in quantum mechanics, specifically the commutation relations between the operators J(x), J(y), and J(z). The user, SK, correctly applies the commutation relation [J(x), J(y)]|m> = iħJ(z)|m> and seeks clarification on whether this approach is valid. The equation is confirmed to be [J(x), J(y)]|m> = iħm|m>, emphasizing the relationship between angular momentum and uncertainty in quantum states.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with angular momentum operators
  • Knowledge of commutation relations in quantum physics
  • Experience with eigenstates and eigenvalues in quantum systems
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of commutation relations in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the concept of uncertainty in quantum states
  • Learn about the role of angular momentum in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the mathematical framework of quantum operators
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in quantum mechanics, physicists analyzing angular momentum, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of uncertainty in quantum systems.

Sekonda
Messages
201
Reaction score
0
Hey,

My question is on determining an 'uncertainty' quantity using total angular momentum operators in the x,y and z directions where we know the commutation relations between the x,y and z directions of the total angular momentum operators.

Uncertainty_Q.png


I'm not really sure where to go with this at all, I let the commutator given act on a state |m> i.e. an eigenfunction of J(z)

[\hat{J_{x}},\hat{J_{y}}]|m>=i\hbar\hat{J_{z}}|n>=i\hbar m|m>

So the commutator must equal i*hbar*m, right? Anyway I'm not sure if this is even a correct way to begin, but it should be pretty straightforward however I haven't really come across a question like this before.

By the way I replaced subscripts 1,2,3 with x,y and z repsectively.

Thanks for any help!
SK
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Woops, the equation should read:

Sekonda said:
[\hat{J_{x}},\hat{J_{y}}]|m>=i\hbar\hat{J_{z}}|m>=i\hbar m|m>

not 'n' ket but 'm' ket.

Sorry...

SK
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
957
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K