What Values of α and β Represent an Extended Canonical Transformation?

Magister
Messages
82
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The transformation equations are:

<br /> Q=q^\alpha cos(\beta p)<br />

<br /> P=q^\alpha sin(\beta p)<br />

For what values of \alpha and \beta do these equations represent an extended canonical transformation?

The Attempt at a Solution


Well, just for a start, what is the condition for a canonical transformation to be an extended canonical transformation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I got a solution but it doesn't seems very satisfactory

I believe that the condition for a canonical transformation to be an extended canonical transformation is that

<br /> PQ^\prime = \lambda p q^\prime<br />

But I am not 100% sure.

Then I do

<br /> PQ^\prime = q^\alpha sen(\beta p)(\alpha q^{\alpha-1}q^\prime cos(\beta p)-q^\alpha \beta sen(\beta p) p^\prime)<br />

Now I do the small angle approximation saying that \beta is small. Is this point that I am not sure because the problem statement don't gives any information about this approximation.
However, doing this I get:

<br /> PQ^\prime \simeq \alpha q^{2\alpha -1} \beta p q^\prime - \beta^3 q^{2\alpha} p^2 p^\prime<br />

Using

<br /> \beta^3 \simeq 0<br />

and

<br /> \alpha=\frac{1}{2}<br />

I get

<br /> PQ^\prime \simeq \frac{\beta}{2} p q^\prime<br />

At least I get the condition of an extended canonical transformation

Am I thinking right?
Thanks for any suggestion.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top