Question about commutation and operator

In summary: X)|\beta\rangle=|(\langle\alpha|X)|\beta\rangle[/tex]which is weird. That last equation is not the same as the first one. In the first one, the parens are important; in the second one, the parens are not important.In summary, The conversation discusses a relation in chapter 3 of the book by J.J. Sakurai, involving the quantum numbers of total angular momentum, the z-component of angular momentum, and a third quantum number. The author presents a result for when the angular momentum operator, J_z, acts on an arbitrary operator, A. There may be confusion about how J_z acts
  • #1
KFC
488
4
I am reading the book by J.J.Sakurai, in chapter 3, there is a relation given as

[tex]\langle \alpha', jm|J_z A |\alpha, jm\rangle[/tex]

Here, j is the quantum number of total angular momentum, m the component along z direction, [tex]\alpha[/tex] is the third quantum number. [tex]J_z[/tex] is angular momentum operator, A is arbritary operator. Generally, [tex]J_z[/tex] is not commutate with A, but Sakurai just give the result directly as following

[tex]m\hbar\langle \alpha', jm|A|\alpha, jm\rangle[/tex]

As you see, this just like have [tex]J_z[/tex] acting on the bar and returns the [tex]m\hbar\langle \alpha', jm|[/tex]. My question is: how can [tex]J_z[/tex] acting on the bar vector?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
KFC said:
I am reading the book by J.J.Sakurai, in chapter 3, there is a relation given as

[tex]\langle \alpha', jm|J_z A |\alpha, jm\rangle[/tex]

Here, j is the quantum number of total angular momentum, m the component along z direction, [tex]\alpha[/tex] is the third quantum number. [tex]J_z[/tex] is angular momentum operator, A is arbritary operator. Generally, [tex]J_z[/tex] is not commutate with A, but Sakurai just give the result directly as following

[tex]m\hbar\langle \alpha', jm|A|\alpha, jm\rangle[/tex]

As you see, this just like have [tex]J_z[/tex] acting on the bar and returns the [tex]m\hbar\langle \alpha', jm|[/tex]. My question is: how can [tex]J_z[/tex] acting on the bar vector?

It is correct to let J_z act on the bra in the way it does. If you are worried about this you can go back to chapter one and review the properties of bras and kets. For example
[tex]
\langle \alpha |\beta\rangle=(\langle \beta | \alpha\rangle)^*
[/tex]

You can use the above relation to rewrite the quantity of your interest with [itex]J_z^\dagger=J_z[/itex] acting on a ket if you want.
 
  • #3
olgranpappy said:
It is correct to let J_z act on the bra in the way it does. If you are worried about this you can go back to chapter one and review the properties of bras and kets. For example
[tex]
\langle \alpha |\beta\rangle=(\langle \beta | \alpha\rangle)^*
[/tex]

You can use the above relation to rewrite the quantity of your interest with [itex]J_z^\dagger=J_z[/itex] acting on a ket if you want.

Thank you so much. I forget the relation [tex]J_z^\dagger=J_z[/tex], thanks again :)
 
  • #4
you're welcome.
 
  • #5
You already got the answer, but you may find this interesting too:

Fredrik said:
A bra is a linear function that takes kets to complex numbers, i.e. it's a member of the dual space H*. There's a theorem that guarantees that for each ket [itex]|\alpha\rangle\in H[/itex], there's a bra [itex]\langle\alpha|\in H^*[/itex] that takes an arbitrary ket [itex]|\beta\rangle[/itex] to the scalar product [itex](|\alpha\rangle,|\beta\rangle[/itex]).

Recall that when T is a linear function acting on x, it's conventional to write Tx instead of T(x). This convention is used with bras. Also, whenever two | symbols should appear next to each other, only one is written out. So we have e.g.

[tex](|\alpha\rangle,|\beta\rangle)=\langle\alpha|(|\beta\rangle)=\langle\alpha||\beta\rangle=\langle\alpha|\beta\rangle[/itex]

This takes some getting used to. This is one place where it gets confusing: If [itex]X[/itex] is an operator, [itex]X^\dagger[/itex] is defined by

[tex](|\alpha\rangle,X|\beta\rangle)=(X^\dagger|\alpha\rangle,|\beta\rangle)[/tex]

but in bra-ket notation, this equation is just

[tex]\langle\alpha|(X|\beta\rangle)=(\langle\alpha|X)|\beta\rangle[/tex]
 

Related to Question about commutation and operator

1. What is commutation in the context of operators?

Commutation, also known as commutativity, refers to the property of operators in mathematics and physics where the order in which they are applied does not affect the final result.

2. Why is commutation important in quantum mechanics?

In quantum mechanics, commutation is important because it allows us to define and study physical observables, such as position and momentum, as operators that can be measured and manipulated mathematically.

3. How do you determine if two operators commute?

To determine if two operators commute, you can use the commutator, which is defined as the difference between the operators multiplied in two different orders. If the commutator is equal to zero, the operators commute.

4. Can non-commuting operators be simultaneously measured?

No, non-commuting operators cannot be simultaneously measured. This is known as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which states that the more precisely one observable is measured, the less precisely the other can be known.

5. How does commutation relate to the uncertainty principle?

Commutation is closely related to the uncertainty principle, as it is the mathematical representation of the fact that certain physical observables cannot be measured simultaneously with complete accuracy. If two operators do not commute, their corresponding observables cannot be measured simultaneously with certainty.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
891
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
847
Replies
12
Views
1K
Back
Top