Understanding Spin States in Hilbert Space

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of spin states in quantum mechanics, particularly focusing on the representation of spin states in a 2-D Hilbert space as demonstrated in the Stern-Gerlach experiment. Participants explore the mathematical justification for the independence of spin states and the implications of representing these states as vectors within a Hilbert space.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about how to construct a ket pointing in the ##\hat{x}## direction from kets pointing in the ##\hat{z}## direction.
  • One participant asserts that any pair of linearly independent kets can act as a basis in a 2-D Hilbert space, suggesting that this allows for the expression of spin states in different directions.
  • Another participant questions the linear independence of the kets ##|+>## and ##|->##, wondering why they cannot be expressed as scalar multiples of each other.
  • Participants clarify that the Hilbert space of electron spin is a complex space and does not directly correspond to 3D physical space.
  • One participant seeks recommendations for texts that delve into the mathematics of Hilbert spaces, indicating a desire for deeper understanding beyond their current resources.
  • Another participant notes that while the mathematics of spin-1/2 particles is relatively simple, the implications of the state vectors contain comprehensive information about measurement outcomes.
  • Some participants suggest that using the term "vector" may cause confusion and propose alternative terminology such as "elements" or "states." They also draw parallels between spin states and polarization states.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints regarding the nature of spin states and their representation in Hilbert space. There is no consensus on the linear independence of the spin states or the best terminology to use, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in understanding the relationship between Hilbert space and physical space, as well as the mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics that may not be fully addressed in some textbooks.

member 545369
Hello

In our Quantum Mechanics lecture we have been discussing a simplified model of the Stern-Gerlach experiment. Let ##|+>## and ##|->## denote an electron that is "spin up" and "spin down" (with respect to ##\hat{z}##), respectively. Our professor then asserted that ##|+>## and ##|->## acted as a basis for a 2-D Hilbert space. It follows that a spin in ##\hat{x}## could then be constructed in the following way: $$|+_x > = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} ( |+> + |->)$$ however, this confuses me. How can we possible construct a ket pointing in ##\hat{x}## out of kets pointing in ##\hat{z}##??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Of course it is confusing. You have no experience with quantum mechanics because these things are not apparent at macroscopic scales. One way to say it is that, since the dimension of the Hilbert space is 2, any pair of kets which are linearly independent can act as a basis. So there has to be a way to express |+x> in terms of |+z> and |-z> since |+z> and |-z> span the whole space. This means that a particle that is in |+z> has some probability (it turns out to be 50%) of being in |+x> and some probability of being in |-x> (again 50%). I would recommend (as I often do) the Feynman lectures on Physics, Vol3 Ch 6, which explains this in some detail in a way which is fairly easy to understand.
 
Thanks for the reply. So I guess my question now becomes: is there any form of mathematical justification for claiming that ##|+>## and ##|->## are linearly independent? Why isn't it the case that ##|+> = (-1)|->##, just like how ##\hat{z} = (-1) \hat{-z}##?
 
talrefae said:
Thanks for the reply. So I guess my question now becomes: is there any form of mathematical justification for claiming that ##|+>## and ##|->## are linearly independent? Why isn't it the case that ##|+> = (-1)|->##, just like how ##\hat{z} = (-1) \hat{-z}##?

These are spin states, not spin in a 3D direction. That's an important thing to start to understand. States exist in a complex Hilbert space, not in 3D real vector space space.

The Hilbert space of electron spin is only 2D, but that has no direct relationship to 2D or 3D physical space.
 
PeroK said:
States exist in a complex Hilbert space, not in 3D real vector space space.

That's so weird! I am very curious as to how a Hilbert Space describes states as "vectors". Unfortunately my Quantum book (McIntyre) is not delving much into the mathematics behind Quantum Mechanics…

Can anyone suggest a good text that isn't afraid to get into the mathematics behind Hilbert Spaces? (relative background: I've taken Analysis, complex variables, ODEs, PDEs, … etc)
 
talrefae said:
That's so weird! I am very curious as to how a Hilbert Space describes states as "vectors". Unfortunately my Quantum book (McIntyre) is not delving much into the mathematics behind Quantum Mechanics…

Can anyone suggest a good text that isn't afraid to get into the mathematics behind Hilbert Spaces? (relative background: I've taken Analysis, complex variables, ODEs, PDEs, … etc)

Well, the mathematics of spin-1/2 particles is about as simple as it gets: states are 2D complex vectors and operators are 2x2 complex matrices. The important point is that the state (vector/ket) contains all the information about the state.

In this case, the z-spin-up state is not just a certain spin in the z-direction, but tells you everything about any spin measurement. The state of z-spin-up means that a measurement of spin in the z-direction returns spin-up with 100%, which might suggest that it is simply spin-up in the z-direction. But, it also tells you that a measurement of spin in the x or y directions returns spin-up and spin-down with 50% each. And, using linear algebra, you can calculate the probabilities for measurements about any other axis as well.

I'm not familiar with McIntyre, but he ought to cover the maths as well as any other author. I think the book has a good reputation.
 
If using the word "vector" to describe the elements of a Hilbert space confuses you, you could call them "elements" or "states". As PeroK says, they are separate entities from vectors in 3D space. Although bear in mind that the 3D physical space of Euclidean geometry is also a Hilbert space.
 
You might have less consternation if you considered polarisation. The |H> and |V> states are clearly orthogonal and any other vector might be built from a sum of the two. However with spin the states of up and down states are orthogonal so it’s more tricky to picture.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K