What is the solution to Zwiebach eqn (17.44) on page 395?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy Snyder
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around Zwiebach's equation (17.44) from page 395, which involves the expression e^{-i\ell x_0/R}pe^{i\ell x_0/R} and its relation to p + \frac{\ell}{R}. Participants are exploring the implications of the equation, particularly in the context of the integer nature of \ell and the conditions under which the equation holds true.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants question the validity of the equation when \frac{\ell}{R} is not small and whether additional conditions were omitted by the author. Others suggest that the equation is valid to all orders and propose using commutation relations to analyze the expression further.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, attempting to derive the equation and discussing the implications of their findings. There is a recognition of the complexity involved, with some expressing uncertainty about the adequacy of their approaches. A few participants have indicated they will revisit the problem later.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of potential typographical errors in the equations presented, specifically regarding the use of uppercase and lowercase letters for variables. The discussion also reflects on the broader implications of the equation's validity across different orders of \ell/R.

Jimmy Snyder
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
22
[SOLVED] Zwiebach eqn (17.44) page 395

Homework Statement


Equation (17.44) is:
[tex]e^{-i\ell x_0/R}pe^{i\ell x_0/R} = p + \frac{\ell}{R}[/tex]



Homework Equations


Equation (17.43)
[tex]\ell \in \mathbb{Z}[/tex]



The Attempt at a Solution


Equation (17.44) is easy to derive if [itex]\frac{\ell}{R}[/itex] is small. but since [itex]\ell[/itex] can be any integer, there doesn't seem to be any way to insure that. Did the author simply forget to mention some conditions necessary for it to be true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jimmysnyder said:

Homework Statement


Equation (17.44) is:
[tex]e^{-i\ell x_0/R}pe^{i\ell x_0/R} = p + \frac{\ell}{R}[/tex]



Homework Equations


Equation (17.43)
[tex]\ell \in \mathbb{Z}[/tex]



The Attempt at a Solution


Equation (17.44) is easy to derive if [itex]\frac{\ell}{R}[/itex] is small. but since [itex]\ell[/itex] can be any integer, there doesn't seem to be any way to insure that. Did the author simply forget to mention some conditions necessary for it to be true?

It's true to all orders. Just use [itex][ x_0^n, p] = i n x_0^{n-1}[/itex].
 
nrqed said:
It's true to all orders. Just use [itex][ x_0^n, p] = i n x_0^{n-1}[/itex].
Thanks for taking a look at this nrqed. If [itex]\frac{\ell}{R}[/itex] were small, then I would expand the exponentials to linear terms. But it isn't small, so it would seem that I need to keep all terms. But if I consider up to quadratic terms I get:
[tex]p + \frac{\ell}{R} + \frac{\ell^2}{2!R^2}(x_0^2p + x_0px_0 - px_0^2) + \mathcal{O}({\frac{\ell^3}{R^3}})[/itex]<br /> Using your suggestion this becomes:<br /> [tex]p + \frac{\ell}{R} + \frac{\ell^2}{2!R^2}(2ix_0 + x_0px_0) + \mathcal{O}(\frac{\ell^3}{R^3})[/itex]<br /> This doesn't seem to improve things. Is there a simpler approach that I am missing?[/tex][/tex]
 
Last edited:
jimmysnyder said:
Thanks for taking a look at this nrqed. If [itex]\frac{\ell}{R}[/itex] were small, then I would expand the exponentials to linear terms. But it isn't small, so it would seem that I need to keep all terms. But if I consider up to quadratic terms I get:
[tex]p + \frac{\ell}{R} + \frac{\ell^2}{2!R^2}(x_0^2p + x_0Px_0 - px_0^2) + \mathcal{O}({\frac{\ell^3}{R^3}})[/itex]<br /> Using your suggestion this becomes:<br /> [tex]p + \frac{\ell}{R} + \frac{\ell^2}{2!R^2}(2ix_0 + x_0Px_0) + \mathcal{O}(\frac{\ell^3}{R^3})[/itex]<br /> This doesn't seem to improve things. Is there a simpler approach that I am missing?[/tex][/tex]
[tex][tex] <br /> Hi Jimmy,<br /> <br /> I am in a hurry because I am teaching a class in 15 minutes and have stuff to do. I will get back to you early this afternoon.[/tex][/tex]
 
nrqed said:
I will get back to you early this afternoon.
Take your time. When you get back to it, you will find that I erroniously put upper case P's in my equations. They should be lower case. I fixed it in my post.

Edit - With your help, I have figured this out. Thanks nrqed.
 
Last edited:
jimmysnyder said:
Take your time. When you get back to it, you will find that I erroniously put upper case P's in my equations. They should be lower case. I fixed it in my post.

Edit - With your help, I have figured this out. Thanks nrqed.

I just got back from my classes. I am glad it worked out! As you see, it works to all orders.

Glad I could help!


Patrick
 
Just for the record, here is the solution:
[tex]e^{-ilx_0/R}pe^{ilx_0/R}[/tex]

[tex]= (\Sigma\frac{1}{n!}(\frac{-il}{R})^nx_0^np)e^{ilx_0/R}[/tex]

Now using nrqed's suggestion:

[tex]= (\Sigma\frac{1}{n!}(\frac{-il}{R})^npx_0^n + \Sigma_0\frac{1}{n!}(\frac{-il}{R})^ninx_0^{n-1})e^{ilx_0/R}[/tex]

[tex]= (p\Sigma\frac{1}{n!}(\frac{-il}{R})^nx_0^n + \Sigma_1\frac{1}{n!}(\frac{-il}{R})^ninx_0^{n-1})e^{ilx_0/R}[/tex]

[tex]= (pe^{-ilx_0/R} + \frac{\ell}{R}\Sigma_1\frac{1}{(n-1)!}(\frac{-il}{R})^{n-1}x_0^{n-1})e^{ilx_0/R}[/tex]

[tex]= (pe^{-ilx_0/R} + \frac{\ell}{R}\Sigma_0\frac{1}{n!}(\frac{-il}{R})^n}x_0^n)e^{ilx_0/R}[/tex]

[tex]= (pe^{-ilx_0/R} + \frac{\ell}{R}e^{-ilx_0/R})e^{ilx_0/R}[/tex]

[tex]= p + \frac{\ell}{R}[/tex]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
10K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
10K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K