DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:1911.04248V3 [Gr-Qc] 10 Jan 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:1911.04248V3 [Gr-Qc] 10 Jan 2020 Modified commutators are not sufficient to determine a quantum gravity minimal length scale Michael Bishop∗ Mathematics Department, California State University Fresno, Fresno, CA 93740 Jaeyeong Leey and Douglas Singletonz Physics Department, California State University Fresno, Fresno, CA 93740 (Dated: January 13, 2020) Abstract In quantum gravity it is generally thought that a modified commutator of the form [^x; p^] = 2 i~(1 + βp ) is sufficient to give rise to a minimum length scale. We test this assumption and find that different pairs of modified operators can lead to the same modified commutator and yet give different or even no minimal length. The conclusion is that the modification of the operators is the main factor in determining whether there is a minimal length. This fact - that it is the specific form of the modified operators which determine the existence or not of a minimal length scale - can be used to keep or reject specific modifications of the position and momentum operators in theory of quantum gravity . arXiv:1911.04248v3 [gr-qc] 10 Jan 2020 ∗Electronic address: [email protected] yElectronic address: [email protected] zElectronic address: [email protected] 1 I. QUANTUM GRAVITY MINIMAL LENGTH SCALE There are generic and broad arguments that any theory of quantum gravity should have some fixed fundamental minimal length scale [1{5]. As pointed out in [6], a fundamental length scale can be obtained generically from many different approaches to quantum grav- ity (e.g. string theory, loop quantum gravity, path integral quantum gravity) and would have many important observable consequences for cosmology such as the smoothing of the ultraviolet behavior of particle physics and the small distance structure of the Lorentz trans- formations. At low momentum, the relationship between the uncertainty in position and const: momentum should take the standard form, namely ∆x∆p ∼ const: ) ∆x ∼ ∆p . At large enough momentum, quantum gravity arguments indicate a linear relationship between ∆x and ∆p, namely ∆x ∼ ∆p [1] [5]. These physically motivated arguments imply the following generalized uncertainty principle (GUP) [7] " # ∆x∆p ≥ ~ 1 + β(∆p)2 ; (1) 2 where β is a phenomenological parameter that is assumed to be connected with the scale 1 of quantum gravity. The GUP in (1) leads to the relationship ∆x ∼ ∆p + β∆p which, as p shown in [8], leads to a minimum length of order β. Good reviews of the appearance of a minimal length scale in quantum gravity can be found in [9, 10]. One important feature of this phenomenological GUP approach to a minimal length scale from quantum gravity is that these models open up the possibility of experimental tests. A recent overview of the status of experimental tests and experiment limits in GUP models can be found in [11]. Any uncertainty principle between position and momentum is connected with a commu- tator between position and momentum operators. In reference [8], Kempf, Mangano, and Mann (KMM) connected the GUP in equation (1) with the following modified commutator 0 0 2 [^x ; p^ ] = i~(1 + βp ) : (2) The primes on the position and momentum operators on the left hand side of (2) indicate that these operators are modified versions of the standard quantum position operator (^x = i~@p in momentum space orx ^ = x in coordinate space) and momentum operator (^p = −i~@x in coordinate space orp ^ = p in momentum space). In this work, primed operators will indicate modified operators and unprimed will be the usual operators. On the right hand side 2 of (2), the p2 term is the standard quantum momentum and not the modified momentum. In the following section, we show that there are a host of different ways to modify the operators, x^0 andp ^0, which yield the exact same modified commutator in equation (2). However, these different ways to modify the position and momentum operators do not all lead to the GUP in (1) and do not all lead to a minimum length. This is the main point of this work { that it is the modification of the position and momentum operators, more than the modification of the commutator, which determines if there is a minimum length scale. II. MODIFIED UNCERTAINTY RELATIONSHIP For two generic operators A and B, the connection between their uncertainties ∆A and ∆B and their commutator [A; B] is given by [12] 1 ∆A∆B ≥ j h[A; B]i j : (3) 2 We now apply the relationship in (3) to the various operators in the previous section and show that despite all the operators having the same modified commutator, the uncertainty relationship is qualitatively different for the different operators. We begin by examining the original KMM modified operators [8] wherex ^0 = i~(1 + βp2) andp ^0 =p ^,(i.e. the momentum operator is not modified). Inserting these into (3) yields ∆x0∆p ≥ ~ 1 + β(∆p)2 + βhp^i2 ; (4) 2 where we have used (∆p)2 = hp^2i−hp^i2. An important point to note is that we have written ∆p rather than ∆p0 since the momentum operator just is the standard one. This is not the case for all the other modified operators. One can write ∆x0 as a function of ∆p and find 0 1 that ∆x ∼ ∆p + β∆p. As shown in [8], this leads to a minimal uncertainty in position of p ∆x0 = ~ β. A key point in obtaining this minimal distance, connected with the modified position and momentum operators of [8], is that the momentum operator is simply the regular momentum operator from quantum mechanics. Thus, the ∆p which appears on the left hand side and right hand side of (4) are the same. This is what allows one to write a direct lower bound on 0 1 ∆x . The competition between a decreasing ∆p and an increasing ∆p term leads a strictly positive lower bound on ∆x0 and a minimum length scale. When the modified momentum 3 operator is different from the usual momentum operator then equation (4) is replaced by ∆x0∆p0 ≥ ~ 1 + β(∆p)2 + βhp^i2 ; (5) p 2 0 0 where pp indicates that the p (the modified momentum operator) is a function of p (the 0 standard momentum operator). This function ∆pp will in general be different for each 0 0 different modified momentum operatorp ^ . Depending on the specific form of pp, (5) may still have a global minimum for ∆x0, or it may have only a local minimum for ∆x0, or may 0 0 not lead to a minimum for ∆x at all. For example, if the functional dependence of ∆pp on 0 γ 0 const: β ∆p is of the form ∆pp / (∆p) then the relationship in (5) would yield ∆x ∼ (∆p)γ + ∆pγ−2 . If 0 ≤ γ ≤ 2 then there exists a minimum length scale, although for γ = 0 this minimum scale occurs at ∆p = 0, which is unphysical. Thus the existence or not of a minimum length 0 scale depends crucially on the functional form of ∆pp in terms of ∆p, which ultimately depends on the relationship betweenp ^0 andp ^. In general, (5) can be used to put a lower bound on ∆x0 of the form 2 2 0 ~ (1 + β(∆p) + βhp^i ) ∆x = 0 : (6) 2 ∆pp The difficulty in the above approach in finding whether or not there is a minimum length 0 is that it is hard to write down the functional relationship between ∆pp and ∆p, i.e. to find 0 ∆pp as a function of ∆p. To deal with this issue, we will examine (6) for specific states, 0 jΨtesti in the following section. This will allow the explicit calculations of ∆pp and ∆p. We then investigate whether or not the generalized uncertainty principle (GUP) in equation (6) gives a minimum length. III. DETERMINATION OF MINIMAL LENGTHS FOR VARIOUS MODIFIED POSITION AND MOMENTUM OPERATORS There is a large family of modified operators which all have the commutation relation [x0; p0] = i~(1 + βp2). The modification of the position and momentum operator of reference [8] which gave the modified commutator in (2) was 0 2 0 x^ = i~(1 + βp )@p ;p ^ = p : (7) The modified operators in (7) are in momentum space andx ^ = i~@p is the usual position operator. The momentum operator is not altered from the standard form. 4 A simple way to get the position space versions of the momentum space modified operators in (7) is to make the simple change i~@p 7! x and p 7! −i~@x so that (7) becomes 0 2 2 0 x^ = (1 − β~ @x)x ;p ^ = −i~@x : (8) There is some freedom in (8) in that one could also write the modified position operator as 0 2 2 x^ = x(1 − β~ @x) i.e. with x leading the derivative operator. Both (7) and (8) lead to the same modified commutator as can be seen by explicitly pluggingx ^0 andp ^0, from either (7) or (8), into the commutator in (2). Equations (7) (8) are not the only ways to write down the modified operators. A different set of modified operators which treat the modified position and momentum equally and still lead to the modified commutator in (2) is given by [13] 0 −βp2=2 0 βp2=2 x^ = i~e @p ;p ^ = e p : (9) One can obtain the position space version of the modified operators in (9) by again making the simple replacement i~@p 7! x and p 7! −i~@x to give 2 2 2 2 0 β~ @x=2 0 −β~ @x=2 x^ = e x ; ;p ^ = −i~ e @x : (10) Substituting the operators from either (9) or (10) into [^x0; p^0] leads to the modified commu- tator in (2).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rotation and Spin and Position Operators in Relativistic Gravity and Quantum Electrodynamics
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 4 December 2019 doi:10.20944/preprints201912.0044.v1 Peer-reviewed version available at Universe 2020, 6, 24; doi:10.3390/universe6020024 1 Review 2 Rotation and Spin and Position Operators in 3 Relativistic Gravity and Quantum Electrodynamics 4 R.F. O’Connell 5 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State University; Baton Rouge, LA 70803-4001, USA 6 Correspondence: [email protected]; 225-578-6848 7 Abstract: First, we examine how spin is treated in special relativity and the necessity of introducing 8 spin supplementary conditions (SSC) and how they are related to the choice of a center-of-mass of a 9 spinning particle. Next, we discuss quantum electrodynamics and the Foldy-Wouthuysen 10 transformation which we note is a position operator identical to the Pryce-Newton-Wigner position 11 operator. The classical version of the operators are shown to be essential for the treatment of 12 classical relativistic particles in general relativity, of special interest being the case of binary 13 systems (black holes/neutron stars) which emit gravitational radiation. 14 Keywords: rotation; spin; position operators 15 16 I.Introduction 17 Rotation effects in relativistic systems involve many new concepts not needed in 18 non-relativistic classical physics. Some of these are quantum mechanical (where the emphasis is on 19 “spin”). Thus, our emphasis will be on quantum electrodynamics (QED) and both special and 20 general relativity. Also, as in [1] , we often use “spin” in the generic sense of meaning “internal” spin 21 in the case of an elementary particle and “rotation” in the case of an elementary particle.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 ANGULAR MOMENTUM and ROTATIONS
    Chapter 5 ANGULAR MOMENTUM AND ROTATIONS In classical mechanics the total angular momentum L~ of an isolated system about any …xed point is conserved. The existence of a conserved vector L~ associated with such a system is itself a consequence of the fact that the associated Hamiltonian (or Lagrangian) is invariant under rotations, i.e., if the coordinates and momenta of the entire system are rotated “rigidly” about some point, the energy of the system is unchanged and, more importantly, is the same function of the dynamical variables as it was before the rotation. Such a circumstance would not apply, e.g., to a system lying in an externally imposed gravitational …eld pointing in some speci…c direction. Thus, the invariance of an isolated system under rotations ultimately arises from the fact that, in the absence of external …elds of this sort, space is isotropic; it behaves the same way in all directions. Not surprisingly, therefore, in quantum mechanics the individual Cartesian com- ponents Li of the total angular momentum operator L~ of an isolated system are also constants of the motion. The di¤erent components of L~ are not, however, compatible quantum observables. Indeed, as we will see the operators representing the components of angular momentum along di¤erent directions do not generally commute with one an- other. Thus, the vector operator L~ is not, strictly speaking, an observable, since it does not have a complete basis of eigenstates (which would have to be simultaneous eigenstates of all of its non-commuting components). This lack of commutivity often seems, at …rst encounter, as somewhat of a nuisance but, in fact, it intimately re‡ects the underlying structure of the three dimensional space in which we are immersed, and has its source in the fact that rotations in three dimensions about di¤erent axes do not commute with one another.
    [Show full text]
  • Hamilton Equations, Commutator, and Energy Conservation †
    quantum reports Article Hamilton Equations, Commutator, and Energy Conservation † Weng Cho Chew 1,* , Aiyin Y. Liu 2 , Carlos Salazar-Lazaro 3 , Dong-Yeop Na 1 and Wei E. I. Sha 4 1 College of Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA; [email protected] 2 College of Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61820, USA; [email protected] 3 Physics Department, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61820, USA; [email protected] 4 College of Information Science and Electronic Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] † Based on the talk presented at the 40th Progress In Electromagnetics Research Symposium (PIERS, Toyama, Japan, 1–4 August 2018). Received: 12 September 2019; Accepted: 3 December 2019; Published: 9 December 2019 Abstract: We show that the classical Hamilton equations of motion can be derived from the energy conservation condition. A similar argument is shown to carry to the quantum formulation of Hamiltonian dynamics. Hence, showing a striking similarity between the quantum formulation and the classical formulation. Furthermore, it is shown that the fundamental commutator can be derived from the Heisenberg equations of motion and the quantum Hamilton equations of motion. Also, that the Heisenberg equations of motion can be derived from the Schrödinger equation for the quantum state, which is the fundamental postulate. These results are shown to have important bearing for deriving the quantum Maxwell’s equations. Keywords: quantum mechanics; commutator relations; Heisenberg picture 1. Introduction In quantum theory, a classical observable, which is modeled by a real scalar variable, is replaced by a quantum operator, which is analogous to an infinite-dimensional matrix operator.
    [Show full text]
  • The Position Operator Revisited Annales De L’I
    ANNALES DE L’I. H. P., SECTION A H. BACRY The position operator revisited Annales de l’I. H. P., section A, tome 49, no 2 (1988), p. 245-255 <http://www.numdam.org/item?id=AIHPA_1988__49_2_245_0> © Gauthier-Villars, 1988, tous droits réservés. L’accès aux archives de la revue « Annales de l’I. H. P., section A » implique l’accord avec les conditions générales d’utilisation (http://www.numdam. org/conditions). Toute utilisation commerciale ou impression systématique est constitutive d’une infraction pénale. Toute copie ou impression de ce fichier doit contenir la présente mention de copyright. Article numérisé dans le cadre du programme Numérisation de documents anciens mathématiques http://www.numdam.org/ .
    [Show full text]
  • 22.51 Course Notes, Chapter 9: Harmonic Oscillator
    9. Harmonic Oscillator 9.1 Harmonic Oscillator 9.1.1 Classical harmonic oscillator and h.o. model 9.1.2 Oscillator Hamiltonian: Position and momentum operators 9.1.3 Position representation 9.1.4 Heisenberg picture 9.1.5 Schr¨odinger picture 9.2 Uncertainty relationships 9.3 Coherent States 9.3.1 Expansion in terms of number states 9.3.2 Non-Orthogonality 9.3.3 Uncertainty relationships 9.3.4 X-representation 9.4 Phonons 9.4.1 Harmonic oscillator model for a crystal 9.4.2 Phonons as normal modes of the lattice vibration 9.4.3 Thermal energy density and Specific Heat 9.1 Harmonic Oscillator We have considered up to this moment only systems with a finite number of energy levels; we are now going to consider a system with an infinite number of energy levels: the quantum harmonic oscillator (h.o.). The quantum h.o. is a model that describes systems with a characteristic energy spectrum, given by a ladder of evenly spaced energy levels. The energy difference between two consecutive levels is ∆E. The number of levels is infinite, but there must exist a minimum energy, since the energy must always be positive. Given this spectrum, we expect the Hamiltonian will have the form 1 n = n + ~ω n , H | i 2 | i where each level in the ladder is identified by a number n. The name of the model is due to the analogy with characteristics of classical h.o., which we will review first. 9.1.1 Classical harmonic oscillator and h.o.
    [Show full text]
  • Assignment 7: Solution
    Quantum Mechanics I / Quantum Theory I. 14 December, 2015 Assignment 7: Solution 1. In class, we derived that the ground state of the harmonic oscillator j0 is given in the position space as 1=4 m! 2 −m!x =2~ 0(x) = xj0 = e : π~ (a) This question deals with finding the state in the momentum basis. Let's start off by finding the position operatorx ^ in the momentum basis. Show that @ pjx^j = i pj : ~@p This is analogous to the expression of the momentum in the position basis, @ xjp^j = −i~ @x xj . You will use [Beck Eq. 10.56] expressing the momentum eigenstate in the position basis as well as the definition of the Fourier transform. @ (b) Sincea ^j0 = 0 and the position operator pjx^ = i~ @p , construct a differential equation to find the wavefunction in momentum space pj0 = f0(p). Solve this equation to find f0(p). Plot f0(p) in the momentum space. (c) Verify that your f0(p) = pj0 derived above is the Fourier transform of xj0 = 0(x). Answer (a) Lets find the position operator in momentum space pjx^j = pjx^1^j Z = dx pjx^jx xj Z = dx pjx x xj * x^jx = xjx : Now the normalized wavefunction of the momentum eigenstate in the position representation is 1 xjp = p eipx=~ Eq 10.56 in Beck 2π~ Z 1 −ipx= ) pjx^j = p dxe ~x xj : (1) 2π~ Due Date: December. 14, 2015, 05:00 pm 1 Quantum Mechanics I / Quantum Theory I. 14 December, 2015 Now @ −ix e−ipx=~ = e−ipx=~ @p ~ @ i e−ipx=~ = xe−ipx=~: ~ @p Inserting into Eq (1): i Z @ pjx^j = p ~ dx e−ipx=~ xj 2π~ @p Z @ 1 −ipx= = i~ p dxe ~ xj @p 2π~ @ = i pj ; ~@p where e(p) is the Fourier transform of (x).
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 Mathematical Formalism of Quantum Mechanics
    Chapter 3 Mathematical Formalism of Quantum Mechanics 3.1 Hilbert Space To gain a deeper understanding of quantum mechanics, we will need a more solid math- ematical basis for our discussion. This we achieve by studying more thoroughly the structure of the space that underlies our physical objects, which as so often, is a vector space, the Hilbert space . Definition 3.1 A Hilbert space is a finite- or infinite-dimensional, linear vector space with scalar product in C. The Hilbert space provides, so to speak, the playground for our analysis. In analogy to a classical phase space, the elements of the vector space, the vectors, are our possible physical states. But the physical quantities we want to measure, the observables, are now operators acting on the vectors. As mentioned in Definition 3.1, Hilbert spaces can be finite- or infinite-dimensional, as opposed to classical phase spaces (which are always 6n-dimensional, where n is the particle number). We shall therefore investigate those two cases separately. 3.1.1 Finite–Dimensional Hilbert Spaces In finite dimensions the vectors of a Hilbert space, denoted by , and the corresponding scalar products differ from the standard Euklidean case onlyH by the choice of complex quantities C instead of real ones R. It means that for vectors x, y ∈ H x1 y1 . i i x = . , y = . , x , y , C , (3.1) ∈ xn yn 55 56 CHAPTER 3. MATHEMATICAL FORMALISM OF QUANTUM MECHANICS where represents the n-dimensional Hilbert space under consideration, the scalar prod- uct canH be written as 1 y n i .
    [Show full text]
  • An Approach to Quantum Mechanics
    An Approach to Quantum Mechanics Frank Rioux Department of Chemistry St. John=s University | College of St. Benedict The purpose of this tutorial is to introduce the basics of quantum mechanics using Dirac bracket notation while working in one dimension. Dirac notation is a succinct and powerful language for expressing quantum mechanical principles; restricting attention to one-dimensional examples reduces the possibility that mathematical complexity will stand in the way of understanding. A number of texts make extensive use of Dirac notation (1-5). In addition a summary of its main elements is provided at: http://www.users.csbsju.edu/~frioux/dirac/dirac.htm. Wave-particle duality is the essential concept of quantum mechanics. DeBroglie expressed this idea mathematically as λ = h/mv = h/p. On the left is the wave property λ, and on the right the particle property mv, momentum. The most general coordinate space wave function for a free particle with wavelength λ is the complex Euler function shown below. ⎛⎞⎛⎞⎛⎞x xx xiλπ==+exp⎜⎟⎜⎟⎜⎟ 2 cos 2 π i sin 2 π ⎝⎠⎝⎠⎝⎠λ λλ Equation 1 Feynman called this equation “the most remarkable formula in mathematics.” He referred to it as “our jewel.” And indeed it is, because when it is enriched with de Broglie’s relation it serves as the foundation of quantum mechanics. According to de Broglie=s hypothesis, a particle with a well-defined wavelength also has a well-defined momentum. Therefore, we can obtain the momentum wave function (unnormalized) of the particle in coordinate space by substituting the deBroglie relation into equation (1).
    [Show full text]
  • Rotations and Angular Momentum
    rotations.nb:11/3/04::13:48:13 1 RotationsandAngularmomentum Á Intro Thematerialheremaybefoundin SakuraiChap3:1-3,(5-6),7,(9-10) MerzbacherChap11,17. Chapter11ofMerzbacherconcentratesonorbitalangularmomentum.Sakurai,andCh17ofMerzbacherfocuson angularmomentuminrelationtothegroupofrotations.Justaslinearmomentumisrelatedtothetranslationgroup, angularmomentumoperatorsaregeneratorsofrotations.Thegoalistopresentthebasicsin5lecturesfocusingon 1.J asthegeneratorofrotations. 2.RepresentationsofSO 3 3.Additionofangularmomentum+ / 4.OrbitalangularmomentumandYlm ' s 5.Tensoroperators. Á Rotations&SO(3) ü Rotationsofvectors Beginwithadiscussionofrotationsappliedtoa3-dimensionalrealvectorspace.Thevectorsaredescribedbythreereal vx numbers,e.g.v = v .ThetransposeofavectorisvT = v , v , v .Thereisaninnerproductdefinedbetweentwo ML y ]\ x y z M ] M vz ] + / T M T ] vectorsbyu ÿ v =Nv ÿ^u = uv cos f,wherefistheanglebetweenthetwovectors.Underarotationtheinnerproduct betweenanytwovectorsispreserved,i.e.thelengthofanyvectorandtheanglebetweenanytwovectorsdoesn't change.Arotationcanbedescribedbya3ä3realorthogonalmatrixRwhichoperatesonavectorbytheusualrulesof matrixmultiplication v'x vx v' = R v and v' , v' , v' = v , v , v RT ML y ]\ ML y ]\ x y z x y z M ] M ] M v'z ] M vz ] + / + / M ]]] M ]]] N ^ N ^ Topreservetheinnerproduct,itisrequirdthatRT ÿ R = 1 u'ÿ v' = uRT ÿ Rv = u1v = u ÿ v Asanexample,arotationbyfaroundthez-axis(orinthexy-plane)isgivenby rotations.nb:11/3/04::13:48:13 2 cos f -sin f 0 R f = sin f cos f 0 z ML ]\ M ] + / M 0 0 1 ] M ]]] N ^ Thesignconventionsareappropriateforarighthandedcoordinatesystem:putthethumbofrighthandalongz-axis,
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Why Do We Need Position Operator in Quantum Theory?
    A New Look at the Position Operator in Quantum Theory Felix M. Lev Artwork Conversion Software Inc., 1201 Morningside Drive, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266, USA (Email: [email protected]) Abstract: In standard quantum theory the momentum and position operators are on equal footing and wave functions in momentum and coordinate representations are related to each other by the Fourier transform. However, while the momentum operator is unambiguously defined as one of the operators of the symmetry algebra, the position operator has a physical meaning only in semiclassical approximation and should be defined from additional considerations. We show that, as a consequence of the in- consistent definition of standard position operator, an inevitable effect in standard theory is the wave packet spreading (WPS) of the photon coordinate wave function in directions perpendicular to the photon momentum. This leads to the fundamen- tal paradox that we should see not separate stars but only an almost continuous background from all stars. We propose a new consistent definition of the position op- erator. In this approach WPS in directions perpendicular to the particle momentum is absent regardless of whether the particle is nonrelativistic or relativistic. Hence the above paradox is resolved. Moreover, for an ultrarelativistic particle the effect of WPS is absent at all. Different components of the new position operator do not com- mute with each other and, as a consequence, there is no wave function in coordinate representation. PACS: 11.30.Cp, 03.65.-w, 03.63.Sq, 03.65.Ta Keywords: quantum theory, position operator, semiclassical approximation 1 Why do we need position operator in quantum theory? In standard quantum theory the momentum and position operators are on equal foot- ing and wave functions in the momentum and coordinate representations are related to each other by the Fourier transform.
    [Show full text]
  • Observables and Measurements in Quantum Mechanics
    Chapter 13 Observables and Measurements in Quantum Mechanics ill now, almost all attention has been focussed on discussing the state of a quantum system. T As we have seen, this is most succinctly done by treating the package of information that defines a state as if it were a vector in an abstract Hilbert space. Doing so provides the mathemat- ical machinery that is needed to capture the physically observed properties of quantum systems. A method by which the state space of a physical system can be set up was described in Section 8.4.2 wherein an essential step was to associate a set of basis states of the system with the ex- haustive collection of results obtained when measuring some physical property, or observable, of the system. This linking of particular states with particular measured results provides a way that the observable properties of a quantum system can be described in quantum mechanics, that is in terms of Hermitean operators. It is the way in which this is done that is the main subject of this Chapter. 13.1 Measurements in Quantum Mechanics One of the most difficult and controversial problems in quantum mechanics is the so-called measurement Quantum System problem. Opinions on the significance of this prob- S lem vary widely. At one extreme the attitude is that there is in fact no problem at all, while at the other extreme the view is that the measurement problem Measuring is one of the great unsolved puzzles of quantum me- Apparatus chanics. The issue is that quantum mechanics only M ff provides probabilities for the di erent possible out- Surrounding Environment comes in an experiment – it provides no mechanism E by which the actual, finally observed result, comes Figure 13.1: System interacting with about.
    [Show full text]
  • PY 451 Notes — April 12-19, 2018 Mcintyre Chap. 7 Notes — Spectrum of Angular Momentum Professor Kenneth Lane1 A. Preliminar
    PY 451 Notes | April 12-19, 2018 McIntyre Chap. 7 notes | Spectrum of Angular Momentum Professor Kenneth Lane1 A. Preliminaries 1.) In the following I will use J = (Jx;Jy;Jz) = (J1;J2;J3) for a generic angular momentum, L = r × p for the orbital angular momentum of a particle whose position (operator) is r and momentum is p, and S for the spin operator of the particle. (For a massive particle, its spin is defined as its total angular momentum when it is at rest. The spin is therefore an intrinsic fundamental property of the particle, like its mass, electric charge, and other quantities which are not effected by the particle's motion. Defining the spin for a massless particle like the photon is a little tricky, so we won't be concerned with that here.) For a particle in motion, its total angular momentum (operator) is J = L + S. 2.) As for spin, angular momentum is a hermitian operator and its commutation relations with itself are [Jx;Jy] = i~Jz plus cyclic permutations. They are written compactly using the summation convention of summing over repeated indices: 3 X [Ja;Jb] = i~ abcJc ≡ i~ abcJc; (a; b; c = 1; 2; 3): (1) c=1 Here, abc is the completely antisymmetric Levi-Civita tensor introduced in the Chapter 2 notes. 3.) It is convenient to define ladder operators for angular momentum, y J± = Jx ± iJy = J1 ± iJ2 = J∓: (2) These have the commutation relations (from Eq. (1)) [Jz;J±] = ±~J± ; [J+;J−] = 2~Jz : (3) 4.) The square of the angular momentum operator is 2 2 2 2 1 2 J = JaJa ≡ Jx + Jy + Jz = 2 (J+J− + J−J+) + Jz : (4) This is also hermitian and its possible eigenvalues must be non-negative (≥ 0).
    [Show full text]