Why Don't Angular Momentum and the Square of Momentum Commute?

Legion81
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
I have been told that L and P^2 do not commute, but I don't see why. It seems like the commutator should be zero.

<br /> <br /> \left[ \vec{L} , P^2 \right] = \left[ L^k , P_i P_i \right]<br /> = \left[ L_k , P_i \right] P_i - P_i \left[ L_k , P_i \right]<br /> = \left( - i \hbar \epsilon_{i}^{km} P_m \right) P_i - P_i \left( - i \hbar \epsilon_{i}^{km} P_m \right) <br /> = - i \hbar \epsilon_{i}^{km} \left( P_m P_i - P_i P_m \right) <br /> = - i \hbar \epsilon_{i}^{km} \left[ P_m , P_i \right] <br /> = 0<br /> <br />

What is wrong with this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Oh, I found one mistake but it still leads me to the same conclusion. The second equality should be plus, not minus: [A,BC] = [A,B]C+B[A,C]:

<br /> \left[ \vec{L} , P^2 \right] = \left[ L^k , P_i P_i \right] = \left[ L^k , P_i \right] P_i + P_i \left[ L^k , P_i \right] = \left( - i \hbar \epsilon_{i}^{k m} P_m \right) P_i + P_i \left( - i \hbar \epsilon_{i}^{k m} P_m \right) = - i \hbar \epsilon_{i}^{k m} \left( P_m P_i + P_i P_m \right)<br />
and since P_m , P_i commute,
<br /> \left[ \vec{L} , P^2 \right] = - 2 i \hbar \epsilon_{i}^{k m} P_m P_i = 2 \left[ L^k , P_i \right] P_i = 2 \left[ \vec{L} , P^2 \right]<br />
but the only thing which satisfies
<br /> \left[ \vec{L} , P^2 \right] = 2 \left[ \vec{L} , P^2 \right]<br />
is zero.
So I'm back to saying that L and P^2 commute. Any ideas?
 
Last edited:
Your calculations are correct. If \hat{L}_i did not commute with \hat{P}^2, angular momentum would not be conserved for a free particle.
 
fzero, I didn't even think of that! A free particle would have zero potential energy, so for L to be conserved it would still have to commute with the Hamiltonian, and that means L and P^2 must commute (2m factor is irrelevant). I thought for sure I was making a mistake somewhere since my mind is a notorious hangout for mathematical absurdities. Maybe I can get some points back that were taken off on my test. Thanks.
 
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