Understanding Quantum Mechanics: Equations for Spin Along x and y Axes Explained

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter doggydan42
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axes Spin
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical representation of quantum spin states along the x and y axes, as presented in Leonard Susskind's "Quantum Mechanics the Theoretical Minimum." Participants explore the implications of the equations defining these states, the role of Pauli spin matrices, and the geometric interpretations associated with them.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants discuss the definitions of the spin states |r>, |l>, |i>, and |o> and their mathematical forms, questioning the implications of the signs and imaginary components in the equations.
  • Others argue that exchanging the negative signs in the definitions of |r> and |l> would violate the eigenvalue relations associated with the Pauli spin matrices, specifically ##\sigma_x##.
  • There is a suggestion that the choice of the Pauli matrices and their arrangement is conventionally tied to the right-handed coordinate system, with some participants questioning the implications of using an imaginary Pauli matrix.
  • Some participants express confusion regarding the significance of the imaginary components in the Pauli matrices and their relation to the geometry of the system.
  • It is noted that the Pauli matrices are not unique and can form different bases for the generators of rotations, with a possibility of cyclic permutations among them.
  • Participants explore the relationship between the commutation relations of the Pauli matrices and angular momentum, raising questions about the uniqueness of solutions satisfying these relations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying viewpoints on the implications of the mathematical definitions and the role of the Pauli matrices. There is no consensus on the interpretation of the imaginary components or the uniqueness of the Pauli matrices, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight limitations in understanding the geometric implications of the Pauli matrices and the role of imaginary numbers, suggesting that further clarification may be needed regarding the foundational concepts in quantum mechanics.

doggydan42
Messages
169
Reaction score
18
I am currently reading Leonard Susskind's "Quantum Mechanics the Theoretical Minimum". In chapter 2.3 and 2.4, he defines |r>, |l> and|i>, |o>, for r and l along the x-axis and i and o along the y axis.

The equations are:

$$|r> = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|u>+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|d>$$
Since ##<r|l>=0##,
$$|l> = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|u>-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|d>$$

It then follows that,
$$|i> = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|u>+\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}|d>$$
$$|o> = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|u>-\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}|d>$$

I understand that if r and l are real, then i and o must have an imaginary component (proof is done in excercise2.3); however, would it be possible to replace r for i and l for o to switch where the imaginary nmber is and maintain the same meaning within the equation.

Also, I understand that for ##<r|l>=0## then l must have ##-|d>## if the d in r is positive. Would it be possible to exchange the negative sign in r and l, or similarly replace l with r and vice versa.

Overall, given the possible ambiguity in choices for the negative sign and the imaginary component, why are these specific equations chosen?

Thank you in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
doggydan42 said:
Would it be possible to exchange the negative sign in r and l, or similarly replace l with r and vice versa.

Does this book talk about the Pauli spin matrices? |r> must be an eigenvector of ##\sigma_x## with eigenvalue 1 and |l> must be an eigenvector of ##\sigma_x## with eigenvalue -1. This is because |r> is directed along the +x axis and |l> is directed along the -x axis. If you exchange the negative sign in r and l then the eigenvalue relations won't hold.

##\sigma_x## is a two-by-two matrix with zeroes on the diagonal and 1 on the off-diagonal elements.

And |u> is directed along the z axis. It is a column vector of length two with a 1 in the first position and a zero in the second position. |d> is a column vector with a zero in the first position and a 1 in the second position, because it is directed along the -z axis.
 
Gene Naden said:
Does this book talk about the Pauli spin matrices? |r> must be an eigenvector of ##\sigma_x## with eigenvalue 1 and |l> must be an eigenvector of ##\sigma_x## with eigenvalue -1. This is because |r> is directed along the +x axis and |l> is directed along the -x axis. If you exchange the negative sign in r and l then the eigenvalue relations won't hold.

##\sigma_x## is a two-by-two matrix with zeroes on the diagonal and 1 on the off-diagonal elements.

And |u> is directed along the z axis. It is a column vector of length two with a 1 in the first position and a zero in the second position. |d> is a column vector with a zero in the first position and a 1 in the second position, because it is directed along the -z axis.

The book does talk about paulispin matrices. It makes sense now that the relations hold for choice of direction, though why can't we choose ##\sigma_x## to have the imaginary pauli matrix, which would result in ##\sigma_y## becoming the initial pauli matrix for ##\sigma_x##?

Thank you
 
doggydan42 said:
The book does talk about paulispin matrices. It makes sense now that the relations hold for choice of direction, though why can't we choose ##\sigma_x## to have the imaginary pauli matrix, which would result in ##\sigma_y## becoming the initial pauli matrix for ##\sigma_x##?
You could do that, but then you would have a left-handed coordinate system instead of a right-handed one. The latter is chosen by convention.
 
DrClaude said:
You could do that, but then you would have a left-handed coordinate system instead of a right-handed one. The latter is chosen by convention.

If it all comes down to a case of how we set-up the coordinate system, then maybe I am confused about the interpretation of the pauli matrices. I understand that ##\sigma_z## which includes both 1 and -1 where u and d would be in a matrix, but then ##\sigma_x## has ones along the off-diagonals. How does the puali matrix relate the geometry that represent the right-handed coordinate system?

Thank you
 
doggydan42 said:
How does the puali matrix relate the geometry that represent the right-handed coordinate system?
DrClaude said:
... then you would have a left-handed coordinate system instead of a right-handed one. The latter is chosen by convention.

The Pauli matrices have commutation relations similar to those of angular momentum:
##[\sigma_a,\sigma_b]=\epsilon_{abc}\sigma_c## For example ##[\sigma_x,\sigma_y]=2i\sigma_z##. This may be related to having a right-handed coordinate system because the cross product of a unit vector on the x-axis with a unit vector on the y-axis gives a unit vector on the z axis.
 
Gene Naden said:
The Pauli matrices have commutation relations similar to those of angular momentum:
##[\sigma_a,\sigma_b]=\epsilon_{abc}\sigma_c## For example ##[\sigma_x,\sigma_y]=2i\sigma_z##. This may be related to having a right-handed coordinate system because the cross product of a unit vector on the x-axis with a unit vector on the y-axis gives a unit vector on the z axis.

I see the relationship between angular momentum, which is even discussed in the book, but there is a factor of i. Further, the pauli matrices are:

$$\sigma_z = \begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0\\
0 & -1
\end{pmatrix}
$$
$$\sigma_x = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1\\
1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}
$$
$$\sigma_y = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & -i\\
i & 0
\end{pmatrix}
$$

Is there any significance to the placement of the 1's and i's within the matrix that can reveal the geometry of the system?
 
The factor of ##i## is part of the regular commutation relations of angular momentum, which are, for example ##[L_x,L_y]=iL_z## where I am using natural units in which hbar is equal to one.

In general, the matrices could be different, I think. The important thing is that they satisfy the commutation relations. These are, as we have said, related to the handedness of the coordinate system.
 
Gene Naden said:
The factor of ##i## is part of the regular commutation relations of angular momentum, which are, for example ##[L_x,L_y]=iL_z## where I am using natural units in which hbar is equal to one.

In general, the matrices could be different, I think. The important thing is that they satisfy the commutation relations. These are, as we have said, related to the handedness of the coordinate system.

That makes sense with the relation between the commutator and poisson brackets. Are these unique solutions that satisfy the commutation relations? Is it possible to prove if it is or isn't unique?

Thank you
 
  • #10
The Pauli matrices are not unique. The form a basis for the generators of rotations. You can have a different basis. But I haven't seen anybody do that. I think you could permute x, y and z cyclically ##\sigma_x \rightarrow \sigma_y##, ##\sigma_y \rightarrow \sigma_z##, ##\sigma_z \rightarrow \sigma_x##
The state vectors would be different if the Pauli matrices were different. For example, if we permute x, y and z cyclically then the column vector with 1 in the first position and 0 in the second position might represent |r>.
 
  • #11
Gene Naden said:
The Pauli matrices are not unique. The form a basis for the generators of rotations. You can have a different basis. But I haven't seen anybody do that. I think you could permute x, y and z cyclically ##\sigma_x \rightarrow \sigma_y##, ##\sigma_y \rightarrow \sigma_z##, ##\sigma_z \rightarrow \sigma_x##
The state vectors would be different if the Pauli matrices were different. For example, if we permute x, y and z cyclically then the column vector with 1 in the first position and 0 in the second position might represent |r>.

I guess my confusion with the pauli matrices lies in i. ##\sigma_z## seems to represent the possible outcomes of measuring the spin along z. However ##\sigma_y## has two imaginary numbers. What is the best way to think about the meaning behind the puali matrices.

Thank you.
 
  • #12
doggydan42 said:
That makes sense with the relation between the commutator and poisson brackets. Are these unique solutions that satisfy the commutation relations? Is it possible to prove if it is or isn't unique?

Thank you

If you assume that \sigma_z = \left( \begin{array}\\ 1 &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; -1 \end{array} \right), then the commutation rules and hermiticity imply that:

\sigma_x = \left( \begin{array}\\ 0 &amp; e^{i\alpha} \\ e^{-i\alpha} &amp; 0 \end{array} \right)
\sigma_y = \left( \begin{array}\\ 0 &amp; -i e^{i\alpha} \\ +i e^{-i\alpha} &amp; 0 \end{array} \right)

for some phase \alpha. It's just a convenience to pick \alpha = 0.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Gene Naden
  • #13
Well they represent quantum operators, so there can be complex numbers. Remember the operators for angular momentum in the Schrödinger equation:
##L^\vec=\vec r \times \vec p = \vec r \times -i \nabla##
They have i in them.

The possible measurement outcomes are represented by the eigenvalues of the matrices (or operators). These eigenvalues are real. This is because the Pauli matrices are Hermition. See Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermitian_matrix#Properties
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K