Why Does the Momentum Operator Yield Different Results in Rotations?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the application of the momentum operator in quantum mechanics, specifically regarding its effect on an eigenket during rotations. The user questions why applying the operator yields a specific transformed state rather than an expected alternative. The calculations reveal that the operator correctly transforms the state, but confusion arises from mistakenly applying a backward rotation. The rotation matrix for an infinitesimal rotation about the z-axis is introduced to clarify this misunderstanding. Ultimately, the user grapples with the implications of the quantum mechanical operator for rotations and its relation to the momentum operator.
Laura08
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello, sorry I am new to this forum, I hope I found the right category. I have a question about the momentum operator as in Sakurai's "modern quantum mechanics" on p. 196

If I let

1-\frac{i}{\hbar} d\phi L_{z} = 1-\frac{i}{\hbar} d\phi (xp_{y}-yp_{x})

act on an eigenket | x,y,z \rangle

why do I get | x-yd\phi,y+xd\phi,z \rangle

and not | x+yd\phi,y-xd\phi,z \rangle ,

with the momentum operators

p_{x}=\frac{\hbar}{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x} , p_{y}=\frac{\hbar}{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}

Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
can you show us why you think that would yeild:

| x+yd\phi,y-xd\phi,z \rangle

?
 
I just use the operator on each component:

[1-\frac{i}{\hbar} d\phi (xp_{y}-yp_{x})] | x,y,z \rangle =

[1-d\phi (x \frac{\partial}{\partial y}-y \frac{\partial}{\partial x})] | x,y,z \rangle =

|x-d\phi (x \frac{\partial x}{\partial y}-y \frac{\partial x}{\partial x}),y-d\phi (x \frac{\partial y}{\partial y}-y \frac{\partial y}{\partial x}),z-d\phi (x \frac{\partial z}{\partial y}-y \frac{\partial z}{\partial x}) \rangle =

|x-d\phi (0-y),y-d\phi (x-0),z-d\phi (0-0) \rangle =

| x+yd\phi,y-xd\phi,z \rangle
 
Isn't that the correct answer?
 
Well, I think the calculation is correct, but then I did a backwards rotation, which I didn't intend to do.
The rotation matrix for an infinitesimal rotation about the z-axis is (if I rotate the vector, not the system)

<br /> R_{z}(d\phi) = \left(\begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 1 &amp; -d\phi &amp; 0\\<br /> d\phi &amp; 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 \end{array}\right), R_{z}(d\phi)^{-1} = \left(\begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 1 &amp; d\phi &amp; 0\\<br /> -d\phi &amp; 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 \end{array}\right)

So | x+yd\phi,y-xd\phi,z \rangle = R_{z}(d\phi)^{-1}| x,y,z \rangle

Yet if you try to determine the quantum mechanical operator for an infinitesimal rotation around the z-axis, starting with

\hat{R}| x,y,z \rangle = | x-yd\phi,y+xd\phi,z \rangle

(as done e.g. here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotation_operator" , you find

\hat{R} = 1-\frac{i}{\hbar} d\phi L_{z}

And then inserting this result for \hat{R} leads me back to my problem...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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