Neutron Spin Time Evolution in Interferometer

In summary, The conversation discusses finding the wavefunction and expectation values of a neutron that is initially in a state polarized along the positive z direction and is subjected to a constant magnetic field in the x-direction. It also discusses the behavior of a beam of monoenergetic neutrons in an interferometer split into two separate beams, one of which is subjected to the same magnetic field. The final result is that the number of neutrons detected in the combined beam is proportional to (1+cos(ωt)).
  • #1
hpar
3
0
Hey Everyone,

I'm working on a question and can't quite get the answer out.

QUESTION:


Part (a)
"[itex]\left|\alpha\right\rangle[/itex] and [itex]\left|\beta\right\rangle[/itex] are the eigenfunctions for neutrons polarized respectively along positive and negative z directions. If the neutron, initially in state [itex]\left|\alpha\right\rangle[/itex] at t = 0 is subjected to a constant magnetic field B in the x-direction, show that its wavefunction becomes

[itex]\left|\Psi(t)\right\rangle = \left|\alpha\right\rangle \cos(\omega t) + i\left|\beta\right\rangle \sin(\omega t) [/itex]

where [itex]\omega = \mu B / \hbar[/itex]

Obtain also the expectation values of each of the components of the magnetic moment as a function of time and interpret the results.

Part (b)
In an interferometer, a beam of monoenergetic neutrons initially in state [itex]\left|\alpha\right\rangle[/itex] is split into two separate beams that propagate in different directions, one of which is subjected to a magnetic field as above. The beams travel equal effective path lengths and are then recombined coherently, i.e their wavefunctions are added. Show that the number of neutrons detected in the combined beam is proportional to (1+cos(ωt)).


Attempt at a Solution

The first part is reasonably easy to get out. We can make use of the property:
[itex]
e^{i\theta(\mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{\sigma } )} = \mathbf{I} \cos\theta + i (\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{\sigma})\sin\theta [/itex]

The hamiltonian because of a uniform magnetic field has an extra term of the form
[itex]
\widehat{H} = - \mathbf{\mu} \cdot \mathbf{B}
[/itex]

where μ is the magnetic moment which can be related to their definition of ω. We can use the time evolution operator applied on a general state of psi to get the answer they want out. For a magnetic field in the x direction:

[itex]
\mathbf{B} = (B,0,0)
[/itex]

so in the relation we wrote above, we're left with the the time evolution operator U(t) = exp(iω*σxt), the pauli matrix in the x direction. Theta is Omega. We want a state of the form:

[itex]\left|\Psi(t)\right\rangle = a \left|\alpha\right\rangle + b\left|\beta\right\rangle [/itex]
which can be written as a spinor of the form:
[itex]
\begin{pmatrix}
a\\
b
\end{pmatrix}
[/itex]

and we have the equation:
[itex]
U(t) \left|\Psi(t)\right\rangle = \exp(i\omega\widehat{\sigma_x} t) \begin{pmatrix}
a\\
b
\end{pmatrix}
=
\begin{pmatrix}
\alpha(t)\\
\beta(t)
\end{pmatrix}
[/itex]

Now, solving for alpha and beta, and applying the initial boundary conditions, we get the required result.

[itex]\left|\Psi(t)\right\rangle = \left|\alpha\right\rangle \cos(\omega t) + i\left|\beta\right\rangle \sin(\omega t) [/itex]


I'm struggling with the expected values. If I understand the question properly, we want

<μ> = <ψ|μ|ψ>, and we should have three components, one for each component of μ (the three pauli matrices. So if I want the expected value of μ in the x direction, I would have:

[itex]
\left\langle\psi|\mu_x|\psi\right\rangle = \frac{\gamma \hbar}{2} \begin{pmatrix}
\cos(\omega t) & i\sin(\omega t)
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 \\
1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos(\omega t)\\
i\sin(\omega t)
\end{pmatrix}
\\
\left\langle\psi|\mu_x|\psi\right\rangle = \frac{\gamma \hbar}{2} (2i\cos(\omega t)\sin(\omega t)) = \frac{i\gamma \hbar}{2} \sin(2\omega t)
[/itex]

and that's an imaginary answer, so it must be wrong.. since an observable has to be real! I'm not quite sure where I've gone wrong and would really appreciate the feedback.

For part (b), this is how far I get:
one half of the beam goes through the same uniform magnetic field as before, so it behaves as we've just derived, and the wavefunction after it has gone through becomes:

[itex]\left|\Psi_B(t)\right\rangle = \left|\alpha\right\rangle \cos(\omega t) + i\left|\beta\right\rangle \sin(\omega t) [/itex]

on the other path, we have a stationary state of the hamiltonian, so the state remains at [itex]\left|\alpha\right\rangle [/itex]. We add the two wavefunctions to get:
[itex]
\left|\chi(t)\right\rangle = \left|\Psi_B(t)\right\rangle + \left|\Psi_0\right\rangle = \left|\alpha\right\rangle \cos(\omega t) + i\left|\beta\right\rangle \sin(\omega t) + \left|\alpha\right\rangle \\
\left|\chi(t)\right\rangle = \left|\alpha\right\rangle(\cos(\omega t)+1) + i\left|\beta\right\rangle \sin(\omega t)
[/itex]
Now, from here I'm not quite sure how to calculate the 'number of neutrons detected'. Does it have anything to do with the flux? Or do we take the probability density? The (1+cosθ) we want is in there, so it seems close.

Would really appreciate anyone's help on this!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
hpar said:
I'm struggling with the expected values. If I understand the question properly, we want

<μ> = <ψ|μ|ψ>, and we should have three components, one for each component of μ (the three pauli matrices. So if I want the expected value of μ in the x direction, I would have:

[itex]
\left\langle\psi|\mu_x|\psi\right\rangle = \frac{\gamma \hbar}{2} \begin{pmatrix}
\cos(\omega t) & i\sin(\omega t)
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 \\
1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos(\omega t)\\
i\sin(\omega t)
\end{pmatrix}
\\
\left\langle\psi|\mu_x|\psi\right\rangle = \frac{\gamma \hbar}{2} (2i\cos(\omega t)\sin(\omega t)) = \frac{i\gamma \hbar}{2} \sin(2\omega t)
[/itex]

and that's an imaginary answer, so it must be wrong.. since an observable has to be real! I'm not quite sure where I've gone wrong and would really appreciate the feedback.

First, this post should probably be in the HW forum. You've done a great job showing your work, though.

Second, when you compute ##\langle\psi|## you have to take both the transpose and the complex conjugate. When you fix the appropriate sign, you will find that the imaginary part is zero.

For part (b), this is how far I get:
one half of the beam goes through the same uniform magnetic field as before, so it behaves as we've just derived, and the wavefunction after it has gone through becomes:

[itex]\left|\Psi_B(t)\right\rangle = \left|\alpha\right\rangle \cos(\omega t) + i\left|\beta\right\rangle \sin(\omega t) [/itex]

on the other path, we have a stationary state of the hamiltonian, so the state remains at [itex]\left|\alpha\right\rangle [/itex]. We add the two wavefunctions to get:
[itex]
\left|\chi(t)\right\rangle = \left|\Psi_B(t)\right\rangle + \left|\Psi_0\right\rangle = \left|\alpha\right\rangle \cos(\omega t) + i\left|\beta\right\rangle \sin(\omega t) + \left|\alpha\right\rangle \\
\left|\chi(t)\right\rangle = \left|\alpha\right\rangle(\cos(\omega t)+1) + i\left|\beta\right\rangle \sin(\omega t)
[/itex]
Now, from here I'm not quite sure how to calculate the 'number of neutrons detected'. Does it have anything to do with the flux? Or do we take the probability density? The (1+cosθ) we want is in there, so it seems close.

Suppose you were asked a different question: how many neutrons are detected in the ##|\alpha\rangle## state? How would you compute that, supposing that the total number of neutrons in the beam was ##N##? Is there another quantity that we could add to this to get the total number of neutrons detected?
 
  • #3
ok, I get it now I think, Thanks! And should have posted in the HW section.. sorry about that

So for part (a), I just forgot to take the complex conjugate, so our expected value ends up being zero.. Physically how do we interpret this? I mean we have a magnetic field in the x direction, but our magnetic moment's expected value in that direction is zero..

for part (b), if I was to look for the number of neutrons in state alpha, I would take the coefficient squared to get the probability of being in state alpha, so effectively, for all neutrons in all states, we just take ||ψ>|2 = (1+cos(ωt))2 + sin2(ωt) to get the required answer. That gives us the probability, that we then multiply by N, the total number of neutrons.

Thanks again for your help!
 
  • #4
hpar said:
So for part (a), I just forgot to take the complex conjugate, so our expected value ends up being zero.. Physically how do we interpret this? I mean we have a magnetic field in the x direction, but our magnetic moment's expected value in that direction is zero..

Classically, the torque on a magnetic dipole is perpendicular to both the magnetic moment and external field.
 

Related to Neutron Spin Time Evolution in Interferometer

1. What is a neutron spin time evolution?

Neutron spin time evolution refers to the change in the direction of a neutron's spin over time. This phenomenon is often studied in interferometers, which are devices that use beams of neutrons to measure the effects of gravity and other physical forces.

2. How does an interferometer measure neutron spin time evolution?

An interferometer uses beams of neutrons that are split into two paths and then recombined. The recombined beams create an interference pattern, which is affected by the neutron's spin. By analyzing this pattern, scientists can determine the neutron's spin direction and how it changes over time.

3. What is the significance of studying neutron spin time evolution?

The study of neutron spin time evolution is important for understanding fundamental physics and the behavior of subatomic particles. It also has practical applications, such as in the development of quantum technologies and precision measurements.

4. How is the neutron spin time evolution affected by external factors?

The neutron's spin time evolution can be affected by external factors such as magnetic fields, electric fields, and gravitational fields. These factors can cause the neutron's spin to precess (or rotate) at a certain rate, which can be measured in an interferometer.

5. What are potential future developments in the study of neutron spin time evolution?

Scientists are continually working to improve the precision and accuracy of interferometers in order to study neutron spin time evolution with greater detail and sensitivity. Additionally, there is ongoing research into using neutron spin time evolution for quantum computing and communication, as well as for testing fundamental theories in physics.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
617
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
738
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
541
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
9
Views
995
Replies
3
Views
836
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
828
Replies
8
Views
786
Back
Top