I am confused about a proof my Quantum Mechanics textbook has left "as an exercise for the reader".
So, we've got the angular momentum operator ˆL. We've also got the generalized angular momentum ˆJ:ˆL=ℏˆJ. We've got the commutation relations [^Jk,^Jl] and [^J2,^Jk].
We've introduced the "ladder operators" ^J+=1√2(^J1+i^J2) and ^J−=1√2(^J1−i^J2).
Then, we went on to prove three properties for the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of ^J2 and ^J3: ^J2|J,m⟩=J2|J,m⟩, ^J3|J,m⟩=m|J,m⟩:
m2≤J2 (so there are minimal and maximal ms).
J+ "raises" m to m+1, J− "lowers" m to m−1.
j (which comes from J2→j(j+1)) is an integer or half-integer number.
The question my textbook asks is: Why is Δm an integer number?
I thought it was because of the second property but when I asked my professor, he told me this was not a good proof. "J+ changing m from 0 to 1 does not prove that Δm=1/3 is impossible".
So, how do I prove this? I thought it was quite trivial, but it turned out it is not.
P.S.: I already viewed this question but it doesn't help me much.
Edit: I may have got a little "lost in translation". The real question my textbook asks is Why is Δm an integer number?
Answer
Your points ,1-3 are fine. There are is a maximal and a minimal value of m. Call the maximal value M (we have to call it something). Now we can apply the lower operator any number of times, each time it lowers the value of m by a full integer amount. The maximum and minimum value have a a finite difference d. So if you round d up to the nearest integer n you see that applying the lowering operator n times must yield the state of lowest m (or else hit a zero magnitude state first). So a finite number of applications of the lowering operator sent the maximum value M to the minimum value, so they differ by an integer amount (each time you lowered, m went down by 1). So the maximum and the minimum values of m differ by an integer.
To me, this is the proof that j=M is an integer or half integer value (n=j−(−j)=2j). It sounds like your proofs are backwards and you are also trying to prove an untrue claim (that m must be integer when for instance the spin of a spin 1/2 particle can have m=1/2).
To explicitly show that m=1/2 is possible, let Jx=ℏ√3/4σx, Jy=ℏ√3/4σy, Jz=ℏ√3/4σz and J2=ℏ23/4(σ2x+σ2y+σ2z). Then note that they satisfy the commutation relations. Then note that the eigenvalues of Jz are ±ℏ/2 hence m=±1/2 by definition.
Thus it is impossible to prove your desired claim that m is an integer from the hyopthesi since the above paragraph satisfies the hypothesi and yet the conclusion is false as m=1/2 is not an integer but is a perfectly fine value.
Response to the edited question
If you have two values of m that differ by a noninteger then the lowering operator applied many times to each can't both stop at one and the very same lowest m state. So there would have to be a state besides the lowest m state that is sent to zero by the lowering operator.
Show (or assume) that can't happen and you are pretty much done.
No comments:
Post a Comment