A How Does Position Interact with Spin Angular Momentum in Quantum Mechanics?

dnl914
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
How do the position operator x and the spin angular momentum operator S commute?
I know how position and momentum commute, but now I have the spin angular momentum operator involved as well as a dot product. Specifically, what would the commutation [x,S·p] be?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dnl914 said:
I know how position and momentum commute, but now I have the spin angular momentum operator involved as well as a dot product. Specifically, what would the commutation [x,S·p] be?
The spin angular momentum operator commutes with both position and momentum (i.e., its commutator with those operators vanishes), since it operates on a different part of the Hilbert space from those operators (the spin operator operates on the spin degrees of freedom, not the configuration space degrees of freedom).

Note that the total angular momentum operator, which includes orbital angular momentum as well as spin, does not commute with position or momentum (i.e., its commutator with those operators does not vanish).
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and PeroK
dnl914 said:
TL;DR Summary: How do the position operator x and the spin angular momentum operator S commute?

I know how position and momentum commute, but now I have the spin angular momentum operator involved as well as a dot product. Specifically, what would the commutation [x,S·p] be?
The answer depends on whether you work in non-relativistic quantum mechanics of relativistic quantum-field theory.

In non-relativistic quantum mechanics the spin is just an additional "intrinsic angular momentum" degree of freedom, which is implement by a set of self-adjoint operators, obeying the angular-momentum commutation relations,
$$[\hat{s}_j,\hat{s}_k]=\mathrm{i} \hbar \epsilon_{jkl} \hat{s}_l.$$
Since it's providing entirely independent degrees of freedom, the spin operators commute with both position and momentum operators,
$$[\hat{s}_j,\hat{x}_k]=0,\quad [hat{s}_j,\hat{p}_k]=0.$$
You get the wave-mechanics description by choosing as a complete set of compatible observables the position, ##\hat{\vec{s}}^2##, and ##\hat{s}_3##.

A particle, in addition of mass, has the spin-quantum number ##s \in \{0,1/2,1 \ldots \}## as and additional intrinsic property. I.e., for a certain kind of partice you have only states with one ##s##. So a complete basis is ##|\vec{x},m_s \rangle## with ##m_s \in \{-s,-s+1,\ldots,s-1,s \}## fulfilling the eigenvalue equations
$$\hat{\vec{x}} |\vec{x},m_s \rangle=\vec{x} |\vec{x},m_s \rangle, \quad \hat{s}_3 |\vec{x},m_s \rangle=\hbar m_s |\vec{x},m_s \rangle, \quad \hat{\vec{s}}^2 |\vec{s},m_s \rangle=\hbar^2 s(s+1) |\vec{x},m_s \rangle.$$
The wave function is now a ##(2s+1)## component "spinor":
$$\psi(\vec{x})=\begin{pmatrix} \langle \vec{x},s|\psi \rangle \\ \langle \vec{x},s-1|\psi \rangle \\ \vdots \\ \langle \vec{x},-s|\psi \rangle \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} \psi_s(\vec{x}) \\ \psi_{s-1}(\vec{x}) \\ \vdots \\ \psi_{-s}(\vec{x}) \end{pmatrix}.$$
The spin operators are represented as ##(2s+1) \times (2s+1)##-dimensional self-adjoint matrices
$$\vec{s}_{m_s m_s'}=\langle m_s|\hat{\vec{s}}|m_s' \rangle.$$
The spin entirely acts on the components of the spinor-valued wave function and does nothing related ##\vec{x}##
$$[\hat{\vec{s}} \psi(\vec{x})]_{m_s}=\sum_{m_s'=-s}^s \vec{s}_{m_s m_s'} \psi_{m_s'}(\vec{x}).$$
The position operator for wave functions is simply the multiplication with ##\vec{x}##, which commutes with the matrix multiplication of the wave funtion for spin. Also momentum is given as an operator acting on position-wave functions as ##\hat{\vec{p}}=-\mathrm{i} \hbar \vec{\nabla}##, which also commutes with the matrix multiplication of the wave function with the spin matrices.

In relativistic QFT it's an entirely different business. There you need the more complicated theory of the unitary representation of the Poincare group.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Thread 'Lesser Green's function'
The lesser Green's function is defined as: $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\langle C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\rangle=i\bra{n}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\ket{n}$$ where ##\ket{n}## is the many particle ground state. $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{n}e^{iHt'}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(0)e^{-iHt'}e^{iHt}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ First consider the case t <t' Define, $$\ket{\alpha}=e^{-iH(t'-t)}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ $$\ket{\beta}=C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt'}\ket{n}$$ $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{\beta}\ket{\alpha}$$ ##\ket{\alpha}##...
Back
Top