A little problem with charge operator

In summary, the problem is that the operator Q is likely to be 1, which means that the contribution to the proton wave function from the isospin is zero.
  • #1
idontkonw
3
0
I have a problem where it's said that the operator Q is likely to be:

[itex]Q=\sum^3_{i=1}[\frac{1}{2}B_i + I_{3,i}][/itex]

I have to apply this to the proton wave function which is the same as you can see in equation (3.20) here: https://www.google.es/url?sa=t&rct=...mYGwBQ&usg=AFQjCNFeF1HkxpOSTjbWuly9_EJcuTEWeQ

I have only the formula for the first equal. If I apply it because B number is the same for all of them this contribution is 0 and applying the isospin I get also 0 so I have that <p|Q|p>=0 which I assume it's wrong because Q=1. What do I do wrong?

Also, in this formula (3.20) how do they get the second equal? I mean the sum of this terms. I suppose all is about transpose operator but I'm getting quite confused with this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You should get 1 both for "u up u down d up" and for "u up u up d down". They have to be the same (and the same as Q for the whole proton), otherwise the proton would not have a well-defined charge.
 
  • #3
mmm let me explain how I'm doing this. Let's take the last way of 3.20:


[itex]Q(|u\uparrow u\downarrow d\uparrow> -2|u\uparrow u\uparrow d\downarrow>)= \left[ \left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{2}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{2}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} - \frac{1}{2}\right)\right] -2 \left[ \left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{2}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{2}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{3} - \frac{1}{2}\right)\right](|u\uparrow u\downarrow d\uparrow> -2|u\uparrow u\uparrow d\downarrow>)=1-2=-1[/itex]

So yes each part is 1 but because of -2 I get -1. Shouldn't be the result 1?
 
  • #4
You cannot subtract/multiply with prefactors like that.

Your "real" calculation is ##\langle \psi|Q|\psi \rangle##. If you expand this, each summand is evaluated independent of the others, and their prefactors are squared. As result, you get ##\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\cdot 1\right)^2 \cdot 1 + \left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\cdot 2\right)^2 \cdot 1 = 1## where I corrected ##\sqrt{3} \to \sqrt{5}##.

If you know that the proton has a well-defined charge, both components have to have the same charge, so you can ignore all prefactors and evaluate a single component only with the formula in post 1.
 
  • #5
Oh man, I'm feeling really really genius... I think it's time to stop studying. Enought for today. What a big mistake. All for no writing long expressions...

Thanks a lot!
 

Related to A little problem with charge operator

1. What is the charge operator?

The charge operator is a mathematical operator used in quantum mechanics to describe the charge of a particle. It is represented by the symbol Q and is a fundamental property of particles that determines their interactions with electromagnetic fields.

2. How does the charge operator work?

The charge operator acts on a wave function, which describes the quantum state of a particle. It returns a numerical value, which represents the charge of the particle. The sign of the value indicates whether the particle has a positive or negative charge.

3. What is the significance of the charge operator in quantum mechanics?

The charge operator is a fundamental tool in quantum mechanics that helps to describe the behavior of particles at the subatomic level. It is used in many equations and principles, such as the Schrödinger equation and the Pauli exclusion principle.

4. Can the charge operator be measured?

No, the charge operator cannot be directly measured. It is a mathematical concept that helps to describe the properties of particles. However, the numerical value returned by the charge operator can be measured experimentally using techniques such as particle accelerators.

5. Are there any limitations to the charge operator?

While the charge operator is a useful tool in quantum mechanics, it has some limitations. It does not take into account the spin or magnetic properties of particles, and it cannot fully describe the behavior of particles in strong electromagnetic fields. Other operators, such as the spin operator, are needed to fully understand the properties of particles.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
888
Replies
23
Views
657
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
833
Back
Top