Possible Outcomes of Measuring Spin-1 Particle in Different Axes

In summary: The only difference is that now you know that the particle is in that state, and the probabilities of getting these results are 1/2.
  • #1
DanAbnormal
23
0

Homework Statement



A spin-1 particle is measured in a stern gerlach device, set up to measure [tex]S_{z}[/tex]. What are the possible outcomes?

In this case, the outcome is zero. The same particle is measured by a second deviced which measures [tex]S_{x}[/tex]. What are the possible outcomes of this measurement and their respective probabilities?

Homework Equations



[tex]S_{x}[/tex]
567befd85d4aad993b3ad34d999ab108.png


[tex]S_{z}[/tex]
c3e2f9ac1d85eec4ab1ed3ce35312711.png


The Attempt at a Solution



So for the first part, acting [tex]S_{z}[/tex] on the orthonormal basis for a spin 1 particle ([tex]m_{s}[/tex]= -1, 0, 1) gives the possible outcomes -[tex]\hbar[/tex], 0 and [tex]\hbar[/tex]

In this case, the measurement is zero, which means the particle is in the state with [tex]m_{s}[/tex] = 0.

Now for this next part, making a measurement of the [tex]S_{x}[/tex] observable of this particle, do I need to diagonalise the [tex]S_{x}[/tex] matrix, or is it enough to act [tex]S_{x}[/tex] straight onto the vector for [tex]m_{s}[/tex] = 0? If I do the latter, it gives a superposition state of the [tex]m_{s}[/tex] = 1 and [tex]m_{s}[/tex] = -1 vectors, both multiplied by [tex]\hbar[/tex]/[tex]\sqrt{2}[/tex], and this isn't an eigenfunction of [tex]S_{x}[/tex]... is it?

I was trying to think about this physically. If the first measurement gives a value of zero for spin along the z axis then this means spin must be aligned either along the y-axis or x axis. So upon making the second measurement, the possible outcomes for spin along the x-axis must be zero (if the spin is along y) or the either plus/minus the component of spin along the x-axis.
So the main question is, are the possible outcomes for the second measurement 0, and whatever value I get for acting [tex]S_{x}[/tex] onto the vector for [tex]m_{s}[/tex] = 0, or do I need to diagonalise the [tex]S_{x}[/tex] to get the true eigenvalues/eigenvectors of [tex]S_{x}[/tex]? As I understood, all spin measurements are made relative to the z axis...

Im just a bit confused is all.

Cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Your answer to the first question is correct.

Second question
Once the measurement is made, the particle is in state (0,1,0) or |0> according to your suggested orthonormal set. What do you get when you operate on this state with Jx?
 
  • #3
kuruman said:
Your answer to the first question is correct.

Second question
Once the measurement is made, the particle is in state (0,1,0) or |0> according to your suggested orthonormal set. What do you get when you operate on this state with Jx?

When I act Jx onto |0> I get the added superposition of |1> and |-1> [(1,0,0) and (0,0,1)] both weighted by [tex]\hbar[/tex]/2

But |0> is not an eigenvector of Jx is it? so what meaning does this action have? If the measurement in the z-axis defined the particle to be in state |0> in that axis, then does this not imply the spin of the particle must be aligned in either the x or y axes?
 
  • #4
DanAbnormal said:
When I act Jx onto |0> I get the added superposition of |1> and |-1> [(1,0,0) and (0,0,1)] both weighted by [tex]\hbar[/tex]/2

But |0> is not an eigenvector of Jx is it?
It is not. However, regardless of what component you measure, the result of the measurement can only be -1, 0 or +1. What differs from orientation to orientation with each measurement is the probability of getting one of the three results. So in this particular case, what are the probabilities of getting -1, 0 or +1?

Incidentally, the weights of each state must be pure numbers, hbar should not be in the picture.
 
  • #5
kuruman said:
It is not. However, regardless of what component you measure, the result of the measurement can only be -1, 0 or +1. What differs from orientation to orientation with each measurement is the probability of getting one of the three results. So in this particular case, what are the probabilities of getting -1, 0 or +1?

Incidentally, the weights of each state must be pure numbers, hbar should not be in the picture.

Well what I did was obtain the eigenvalues of the Sx matrix (without the hbar/(root 2) element ), which turned out to be 0, and +/- root 2
I then obtained the eigenvectors, for these, which when acted on by Sx gives 0, hbar/2, and -hbar/2 as possible outcomes, and the probability I got for the +/- hbar/2 eigenvalues were each 1/2, and the 0 eigenvalue was associated with a probability of zero.

I still don't understand the difference between obtaining eigenvectors of the Sx matrix and finding outcomes from these, and acting Sx straight onto the z-axis |0> state.
Im really sorry!

Is my method correct though?
 
  • #6
Once you make the first measurement, you know that your particle is in the eigenstate |0> or column vector (0,1,0). After the first measurement you make a second measurement and measure Sx. The possible outcomes of this second measurement are one of the eigenvalues of Sx, which you can get by diagonalizing Sx, namely -1, 0 or +1. Note that, after the second measurement, your particle is in one of the eigenstates of Sx and that you can obtain these eigenstates from the diagonalization process. Now then, the probability that you get a given one of the three eigenvalues after the second measurement is the square of the inner product of the original state (0,1,0), expressed as a row vector, with the (column) eigenvector of Sx corresponding to that particular eigenvalue.
 
  • #7
DanAbnormal said:
I still don't understand the difference between obtaining eigenvectors of the Sx matrix and finding outcomes from these, and acting Sx straight onto the z-axis |0> state.
If a system is in the state [itex]\vert \psi \rangle[/itex], the amplitude of finding it in the state [itex]\vert \phi \rangle[/itex] is [itex]A = \langle \phi \vert \psi \rangle[/itex], and the probability is then given by the modulus of the amplitude squared, P=|A|2. In this problem, [itex]\vert \phi \rangle[/itex] is an eigenstates of Sx and [itex]\vert \psi \rangle[/itex] is the m=0 eigenstate of Sz. Making the measurement has nothing to do with applying the operator Sx to a state. The only reason you need it is to find its eigenvalues and eigenvectors.
 
  • #8
Oh thanks guys! That makes sense to me now, considering all the maths I've just done. I was following a procedure just not totally getting it. But do now!
 

FAQ: Possible Outcomes of Measuring Spin-1 Particle in Different Axes

What is a vector space in quantum mechanics?

In quantum mechanics, a vector space is a mathematical structure used to represent the state of a quantum system. It is a collection of mathematical objects, called vectors, which can be added together and multiplied by complex numbers to represent the possible states of a quantum system.

How is a vector space used in quantum mechanics?

A vector space is used in quantum mechanics to describe the state of a quantum system. This allows us to perform calculations and make predictions about the behavior of the system.

What are the properties of a vector space in quantum mechanics?

In quantum mechanics, a vector space must satisfy certain properties, including the ability to add vectors, multiply vectors by complex numbers, and have a basis set of vectors that can be used to represent all possible states of the system.

Can a vector in a quantum mechanics vector space have complex numbers as components?

Yes, in quantum mechanics, vectors can have complex numbers as components. This is because the state of a quantum system can have both real and imaginary parts, and complex numbers are necessary to represent this.

How is a vector space different from a Hilbert space in quantum mechanics?

A vector space is a more general mathematical structure, while a Hilbert space is a specific type of vector space that satisfies additional properties, such as being complete and having an inner product defined on it. In quantum mechanics, Hilbert spaces are often used to represent the state of a system, as they provide a more complete and rigorous mathematical framework.

Similar threads

Back
Top