Quantization Postulates for a Particle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating that the operators x^2 p_x^2 + p_x^2 x^2 and (xp_x + p_x x)^2/2 differ only by terms of order ℏ^2. Participants emphasize the importance of correctly handling the non-commuting nature of the operators x and p_x in quantum mechanics. There is confusion regarding the classification of x and p_x as either classical observables or quantum operators, leading to clarifications about their representations. The suggestion is made to expand the second term first to identify differences more clearly. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of operator algebra in quantum mechanics and the need for precise notation and definitions.
kilojoules
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Show that the operators x^2 p_x^2+p_x^2 x^2 and 〖 (xp_x+p_x x)〗^2/2 differ only by terms of order ℏ^2.






The attempt at a solution is attached (Postulates.pdf)
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
I don't know what you are trying to do in your solution ,you should explain it better. The first line equality is not correct,keep in mind that x,p momentum do not commute. I suggest expanding the second term first and see how it differs from the first.
 
I first found the quantum mechanical operator corresponding to the classical quantities xP_x, and according to the information I found on a downloaded file ("Dry2ans.pdf"), can't remember the source, I found that:
xP_x → xP_x + P_x x

As per your suggestion, bp_psy, I don't know which second term you are talking about. Is it of the first expansion or which one?
 
You initial post does not say that x,p_x are classical observables but operators.Which one is it?
The classical observable xp_x is represented by hermitian operator \hat{x}\hat{p}_{x}+\hat{p}_{x} \hat{x} as they say in that document but the operator \hat{x}\hat{p}_{x} is very different from \hat{x}\hat{p}_{x}+\hat{p}_{x}\hat{x}. Sometime people do not hat their operators so you shouldn't always assume that no hats mean classical observables.
What I meant by the second term is \frac{(\hat{x}\hat{p}_{x}+\hat{p}_{x}\hat{x})^2}{2}.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top