Part II Principles of Quantum Mechanics Anne Christine Davies Notes 2015
Part II Principles of Quantum Mechanics Anne Christine Davies Notes 2015
Michaelmas 2015
Prof. A.C. Davis
Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 Dirac Formalism 2
2.1 States and Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2 Observables and measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3 Bases and Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4 Position and momentum basis – wavefunctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.5 Simultaneous Measurements and Complete Commuting Sets . . . . . . 14
6 Perturbation Theory 35
6.1 The non-degenerate case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
i
CONTENTS ii
7 Angular Momentum 42
7.1 Recap of orbital angular momentum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
7.2 General analysis of angular momentum eigenstates . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.3 Matrix representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
7.4 Some physical aspects of angular momentum and spin . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.5 Addition of angular momentum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
10 Quantum Basics 76
10.1 Classical and Quantum Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
10.2 EPR experiment and Bell’s inequality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
10.3 Density operators and hidden sectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
CONTENTS iii
BOOKS
‚ B.H. Bransden and C.J. Joachain Quantum Mechanics, 2nd edition. Pearson 2000
(£50-60 on Amazon)
‚ J. Binney and D. Skinner The Physics of Quantum Mechanics, 3rd edition. Cappella
Archive 2013 (£23.71)
‚ P.A.M. Dirac The Principles of Quantum Mechanics. Oxford University Press 1967
reprinted 1999 (£23.99).
Most of these books are expensive new and there are a lot of pedagogic books on
quantum mechanics, so it’s good to look at those in the library since many books are
good in one area but poor in another. Other books may be recommeneded through
the course.
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1 Introduction
‹ Recall features of elementary (IB) quantum mechanics:
‹ wave-particle duality. Waves behaving like particles – e.g., light quanta, pho-
tons and vice-versa; interference of electrons passing through crystal grating and
electron microscope. To make this more precise need:
‹ wavefunction ψpxq for particle. Probability density |ψpxq|2 ; probability is in-
trinsic to the theory.
‹ 0bservables become (hermitian) operators on wavefunctions. Lack of
commutation limits simultaneous measurement – leads to precise version of un-
certainty principle.
‹ Schrödinger’s equation specifies dynamics (evolution in time) and determines
energy levels.
This is enough to understand e.g., the hydrogen atom and transcends classical
physics.
‹ Aim of this course:
‹ Will not dwell on applications in any detail, but will keep track of what the mathe-
matical formalism is for.
‹ Assume IB QM and IA Dynamics but no electromagnetism beyond Coulomb’s law
and intuitive ideas about magnetism.
Plan:
2. Dirac formalism.
3. Harmonic oscillator.
4. Pictures of quantization.
5. Composite systems and identical particles.
6. Perturbation theory.
7. Angular momentum.
8. Transformations and symmetries.
9. Time-dependent perturbation theory.
10. Quantum basics.
2 DIRAC FORMALISM 2
2 Dirac Formalism
2.1 States and Operators
A quantum state is described at each instant by a state |ψy which belongs to a complex
vector space V . Then
moon , loo|ψy
looxφ| moon ÞÑ xφ|ψy
loomoon or formally V:ˆV Ñ C, (2.1.2)
‘bra’ ‘ket’ ‘bra(c)ket’
with
´ ¯
xφ| α1 |ψ1 y ` α2 |ψ2 y “ α1 xφ|ψ1 y ` α2 xφ|ψ2 y ,
´ ¯
β1 xφ1 | ` β2 xφ2 | |ψy “ β1 xφ1 |ψy ` β2 xφ2 |ψy , (2.1.3)
V ÐÑ V :
with |ψy ÐÑ xψ| “ p |ψyq: (use same label for corresponding states)
and α|ψy ` β|φy ÐÑ α˚ xψ| ` β ˚ xφ| .
(2.1.4)
The inner product is
V ˆV Ñ C
|φy, |ψy ÞÑ xφ|ψy “ p|φyq: |ψy , (2.1.5)
This means that the inner product is positive semidefinite. Note that knowing xφ|ψy
for all xφ| determines |ψy uniquely and vice-versa.
The physical content of any state is unaltered by changing |ψy Ñ α|ψy pα ‰ 0q. We
shall usually normalize states by k|ψyk2 “ 1 but still have the freedom to change
|ψy Ñ eiθ |ψy. The absolute phase of a single state never has any physical significance,
2 DIRAC FORMALISM 3
but relative phases in combination such as α|φy ` β|ψy can be significant; for example,
for interference phenomena.
The space V is complete; we assume appropriate sequences or series converge. A
complete inner product space of this kind is a Hilbert space and this term is often
used for the space V in QM. V can be either finite or infinite dimensional and we shall
see examples of both.
An operator Q is a linear map on states, V Ñ V :
and, by definition ´ ¯
Q α|φy ` β|ψy “ αQ|φy ` βQ|ψy . (2.1.8)
The same operator can be regarded as acting ‘to the left’ on dual states, V : Ñ V : :
or, equivalently,
´ ¯:
xφ|Q: |ψy “ Q|φy |ψy
“ xψ|Q|φy˚ @ |ψy, |φy . (2.1.12)
´ ¯:
xψ|pABq: |φy “ pABq|ψy |φy defn of pABq:
´ ¯:
“ A|ψ 1 y |φy |ψ 1 y ” B|ψy
“ xψ 1 |A: |φy defn of A:
´ ¯: ´ ¯
“ B|ψy A: |φy
“ xψ|B : A: |φy defn of B : .
(2.1.14)
Q: “ Q . (2.2.1)
Such operators are called observables because they correspond to physical, measur-
able, quantities e.g., position, momentum, energy, angular momentum. Key results for
any hermitian Q:
(i)
Q|ψy “ λ|ψy
and xψ|Q: “ λ˚ xψ|
(2.2.2)
ñ xψ|Q “ λ˚ xψ| since Q is hermitian
ñ xψ|Q|ψy “ λxψ|ψy “ λ˚ xψ|ψy .
But k|ψyk2 “ xψ|ψy ‰ 0 p|ψy ‰ 0q and so deduce
λ “ λ˚ . (2.2.3)
2 DIRAC FORMALISM 5
(ii) Let |ny be eigenstates of Q with eigenvalues λ “ qn real, with n a discrete label
possibly of infinite range.
Q|ny “ qn |ny
and Q|my “ qm |my
(2.2.4)
or xm|Q “ qm xm|
ñ xm|Q|ny “ qn xm|ny “ qm xm|ny .
So qn ‰ qm ñ xm|ny “ 0.
‹ For any observable Q there is an orthonormal basis of eigenstates t|nyu for the space
of states V with
Q|ny “ qn |ny ,
xm|ny “ δmn . (2.2.5)
where αn “ xn|ψy.
k|ψyk2 “ xψ|ψy “ 1
´ÿ ¯´ ÿ ˘ ÿ
ðñ ˚
αm xm| αn |ny “ |αn |2 “ 1 . (2.2.7)
m n n
There might be several states with the same eigenvalue λ. Define the eigenspace for
a given eigenvalue by
Vλ “ t|ψy : Q|ψy “ λ|ψyu , (2.2.8)
which has the basis t|ny : qn “ λu.
The degeneracy of λ is the number of states in this basis, or dim Vλ . We say that λ
is non-degenerate if the degeneracy is 1.
r Note that passing from our three key results to the conclusion p‹q is achieved by
choosing an orthonormal basis for each Vλ :
(ii) ensures that these spaces are mutually orthogonal;
(iii) implies that the sum of all the eigenspaces is V , the entire space of states. u
Consider a measurement of Q when the system is in state |ψy immediately before.
Then
In this example we had degeneracy: two states with eigenvalue 0. However, often have
the case with λ non-degenerate with eigenstate |ny unique up to a phase. Then
In general, ÿ ÿ
ppλq “ |αn |2 “ 1 , (2.2.13)
λ n
where Amn “ xm|A|ny are the matrix elements of the complex matrix representing
the operator A in this basis. Note that the entries in this matrix depend on the basis; a
familiar result in linear algebra for any linear map. In contrast, the result of operating
with A on any state is independent of the basis. Check this result
ÿ
|φy “ A|ψy
loooooomoooooon ô β m “ Amn αn . (2.3.4)
n
basis-independent
loooooooooomoooooooooon
basis-dependent
Q3
Q ` , eQ , sin pQq assuming convergence . (2.3.7)
3
But what about 1{Q or logpQq?
For Q an observable and |ny an eigenbasis for Q:
setting
f pQq|ny “ f pqn q|ny (2.3.9)
defines f pQq provided f pqn q is defined for all n; f pQq is defined on a basis and so is
defined on any state. This is certainly true if f is a polynomial or a power series that
converges for all qn . If qn ‰ 0 @ n then can define
1
Q´1 |ny “ |ny , (2.3.10)
qn
and likewise logpQq is defined if 0 ă qn ă 8.
A useful way to express that t|nyu is an orthonormal basis is the completeness rela-
tion or resolution of the identity:
ÿ
|nyxn| “ I , the identity operator. (2.3.11)
n
2 DIRAC FORMALISM 9
The notation is ´ ¯ ´ ¯
|nyxm| |ψy
loomoon loomoon “ loomoon loomoon .
|ny xm|ψy (2.3.12)
operator state state number
This is confirmed by applying each side to an arbitrary state
ÿ
|nyxn|ψy “ |ψy “ I|ψy . (2.3.13)
n
In the case where the eigenvalues are degenerate then we can define a projection oper-
ator onto the subspace of eigenstates with eigenvalue λ by
ÿ
Pλ “ |nyxn| . (2.3.15)
n: qn “λ
The bases considered so far may be infinite but have been assumed discrete which
includes countably infinite bases. However, we can extend the index n to be continuous.
This requires some modifications in all relevant formulas:
$ ş
& |ψy “ ş dn αn |ny
ÿ ż
Ñ dn I “ ş dn |nyxn|
Q “ dn qpnq|nyxn|
n
%
xn|my “ δnm Ñ δpn ´ mq (2.3.16)
with |αn |2 “ |xn|ψy|2 . There is no longer a probability for discrete outcomes but a
probability density for the continuous range of n. We will see this below for position
and momentum operators.
ψpxq is just the usual position wavefunction and the standard interpretation is the ob-
vious extension of the measurement postulates in section 2.2 to continuous eigenvalues:
So, in particular, ż
2
k|ψyk “ xψ|ψy “ dx |ψpxq|2 “ 1 (2.4.7)
and with ż
1 1
xp|p y “ δpp ´ p q , dp |pyxp| “ I . (2.4.9)
It is very important that the eigenstates of x̂ and p̂ can be chosen so that they are
related by
1
xx|py “ ? eipx{~ , (2.4.10)
2π~
1
ñ xp|xy “ ? e´ipx{~ . (2.4.11)
2π~
We justify this later after deducing some consequences. First find action of x̂ and p̂ in
terms of position wavefunctions:
So
B
xx|p̂|ψy “ ´ i~ xx|ψy, (2.4.13)
Bx
and have recover familiar results. However, also have new possibility. Can expand
states in momentum basis instead:
ż
|ψy “ dp ψ̃ppq|py ,
which is the momentum space wavefunction where |ψ̃ppq|2 is the probability density for
measurements of momentum. Then have
ż ż
2
k|ψyk “ dp xψ|pyxp|ψy “ dp |ψ̃ppq|2 “ 1 . (2.4.15)
p̂2
Hpx̂, p̂q “ ` V px̂q (2.4.20)
2m
2 DIRAC FORMALISM 12
are
~2 B 2
on ψpxq : H ÝÑ ´ ` V pxq ,
2m Bx2
ˆ ˙
p2 B
on ψ̃ppq : H ÝÑ ` V i~ . (2.4.21)
2m Bp
It may be easy to interpret the potential term in momentum space. E.g., V pxq “
λxn ñ ˆ ˙
B Bn
V i~ “ λpi~qn n , (2.4.22)
Bp Bp
but more generally need to use first principles.
ż
xp|V px̂q|ψy “ dx xp|V px̂q|xyxx|ψy
ż ż
“ dx V pxqxp|xy dp1 xx|p1 yxp1 |ψy
ż ˆ ż ˙
1 1 ´ipp´p1 qx{~
“ dp dx V pxq e ψ̃pp1 q
2π~
ż
1
“ ? dp1 Ṽ pp ´ p1 qψ̃pp1 q . (2.4.23)
2π~
Thus H|ψy “ E|ψy becomes
~2 B 2 ψ
´ ` V pxq ψpxq “ E ψpxq in position space ,
2m Bx2
ż
p2 ? 1 1 1 1
2m ψ̃ppq ` 2π~ dp Ṽ pp ´ p q ψ̃pp q “ E ψ̃ppq in momentum space .
(2.4.24)
r Note that the convolution theorem derived here. u
Now return to the key condition in Eq. (2.4.10) and justify it:
1
xx|py “ ? eipx{~ . (2.4.25)
2π~
The point is that eigenstates are only ever unique up to a phase, even if normalized,
so we need to show there is a way to choose |xy and |py which makes this result true.
Doing this will involve an approach to translations to which we return later. Claim
that
|x0 ` ay “ e´iap̂{~ |x0 y , (2.4.26)
which involves the translation operator
8 ˆ ˙n
ÿ 1 ´ia
U paq ” e ´iap̂{~
“ p̂n , (2.4.27)
n“0
n! ~
defines position eigenstates |xy @ x given one with x “ x0 . To check this first note
that
rx̂, p̂s “ i~ ñ rx̂, p̂n s “ i~n p̂n´1 . (2.4.28)
2 DIRAC FORMALISM 13
‚ Now, the phase of xx0 |p0 y is a matter of convention but the modulus must be con-
sistent with
xp|p1 y “ δpp ´ p1 q , (2.4.35)
which is the desired normalization for the t|pyu basis. To check:
ż
1
xp|p y “ dx xp|xyxx|p1 y
ż
1 ipp1 ´pqx{~
“ dx e “ δpp ´ p1 q as required. (2.4.36)
2π~
‚ Similarly,
ż
1
xx|x y “ dp xx|pyxp|x1 y
ż
1 ippx´x1 q{~
“ dp e “ δpx ´ x1 q as expected. (2.4.37)
2π~
Note that the operator U paq implements translation by a on the position states.
2 DIRAC FORMALISM 14
‚ This second measurement must not change the value for Q and so still get result λ
if it is measured again immediately.
Q|λ, λ1 y “ λ|λ, λ1 y
Q1 |λ, λ1 y “ λ1 |λ, λ1 y , (2.5.1)
so QQ1 “ Q1 Q on these basis states and hence on all states since they can be expanded
on this basis.
holds for the restriction |ψy, |φy P Vλ . Hence, D a basis for Vλ consisting of
eigenstates of Q1 . Call these |λ, λ1 y.
‚ Doing this for each Vλ gives a basis of such joint eigenstates for V .
2 DIRAC FORMALISM 15
An example is the generalization from one to three dimensions of the position and
momentum operators px̂, p̂q. These obey the commutation relations defined in terms
of their Cartesian component operators in usual notation
rx̂i , p̂j s “ i~δij . (2.5.9)
One complete commuting set is
x̂ “ px̂1 , x̂2 , x̂3 q (2.5.10)
with joint eigenstates:
x̂i |xy “ xi |xy
orthonormality: xx|x1 y “ δş p3q px ´ x1 q
basis: |ψy “ d3 x ψpxq|xy
position space wavefunction ψpxq “ xx|ψy .
There are other possibilities such as tx̂1 , x̂2 , p̂3 u leading to mixed position and momen-
tum space wavefunctions.
3 PICTURES AND OPERATORS 16
U U : “ U :U “ 1 or U : “ U ´1 . (3.1.1)
|ψy ÞÑ |ψ 1 y “ U |ψy
xψ| ÞÑ xψ 1 | “ xψ|U : , (3.1.2)
and on operators
A ÞÑ A1 “ U AU : , (3.1.3)
under which all physical properties are unchanged:
Furthermore
C “ AB ÞÑ C 1 “ A1 B 1
C “ rA, Bs ÞÑ C 1 “ rA1 , B 1 s for any operators.
General results for unitary operators (compare with those for hermitian operators)
(i)
U |ψy “ λ|ψy
ñ xψ|U : “ λ˚ xψ|
(3.1.7)
ñ xψ|U : U |ψy “ k|ψyk2 “ |λ|2 k|ψyk2 ,
and hence |λ| “ 1 p|ψy ‰ 0q .
3 PICTURES AND OPERATORS 17
(ii)
U |ny “ λn |ny
and U |my “ λm |my
(3.1.8)
or xm|U : “ λ˚m xm| “ λ´1
m xm|
ñ xm|U : U |ny “ xm|ny “ λn λ´1m xm|ny .
So λn ‰ λm ñ xm|ny “ 0.
Example. Consider system with two energy eigenstates |1y, |2y with energy eigenvalues
E1 , E2 , respectively. We are interested in measuring Q defined by
Let the initial state, the state at t “ 0, be |ψp0qy “ |`y. Then have
1 ´ ¯
|ψptqy “ ? e´iE1 t{~ |1y ` e´iE2 t{~ |2y . (3.2.10)
2
The probability of measuring Q at time t and getting ˘1 is
ˇ ´
ˇ1 ¯´ ¯ˇˇ2
2 ´iE t{~ ´iE t{~
|x˘|ψptqy| “ ˇˇ x1| ˘ x2| e 1 |1y ` e 2 |2y ˇˇ
2
ˇ ´
ˇ 1 ´iE t{~ ¯ˇˇ2
´iE t{~
“ ˇˇ e 1
˘e 2 ˇ
2 ˇ
$ ´ ¯
2 pE1 ´E2 qt
& cos
’
’ 2~
“ ´ ¯ (3.2.11)
’
% sin 2 pE1 ´E2 qt
’
2~
Thus far we have worked in the Schrödinger picture where states depend on time
and operators do not. We can use U ptq to pass to the Heisenberg picture where the
3 PICTURES AND OPERATORS 19
time dependence is shifted from states to operators as follows (subscript denotes the
picture)
Schrödinger Heisenberg
E.g., a particle in one dimension x̂ptq, p̂ptq in Heisenberg picture (drop H subscripts).
We have that
rx̂ptq, p̂ptqs “ i~. (3.3.9)
I.e., the commutator at equal times is unchanged. Consider
p̂2
,
H “ 2m ` V px̂q /
/
/
/
/
/
.
d x̂ptq “ 1 rx̂ptq, Hs 1
“ m p̂ptq , Heisenberg equations of motion
dt i~ /
/
/
/
/
d p̂ptq “ 1 rp̂ptq, Hs “ ´V 1
px̂ptqq .
/
-
dt i~
(3.3.10)
Taking expectation values in any state |ψy (now independent of time in the Heisenberg
picture) gives
d xx̂y “ 1 xp̂y ,
,
dt m /
.
Ehrenfest’s Theorem, true in all pictures (3.3.11)
d xp̂y “ ´xV 1 px̂qy . /
-
dt
Note the similarity to classical equations of motion. For some potentials can solve
Heisenberg’s equations.
4 THE HARMONIC OSCILLATOR 20
d x̂ptq “ 1 p̂ptq
, d2 x̂ ` ω 2 x̂ “ 0
dt m dt2
/
.
ñ (3.3.13)
d p̂ptq “ ´mω 2 x̂ptq /
- d2 p̂ ` ω 2 p̂ “ 0 .
dt dt2
The solution is
p̂p0q
x̂ptq “ x̂p0q cos ωt ` sin ωt
mω
To find whether the new states are non-zero we compute their norms.
ka|λyk2 “ λ (already done above) (4.1.11)
which is only ever zero if λ “ 0.
ka: |λyk2 “ xλ|aa: |λy
“ xλ|a: a ` 1|λy
“ λ`1, (4.1.12)
which is never zero since λ ě 0. Because of these properties a: and a are called,
respectively, creation and annihilation operators.
Suppose there is an eigenstate |λy with λ not an integer. Then
a|λy, a2 |λy, . . . , am |λy, . . . are all non-zero.
eigenvalues: λ ´ 1, λ ´ 2, . . . , λ ´ m . . . .
(4.1.13)
But for m sufficiently large λ ´ m ă 0 which is a contradiction since all eigenvalues
are non-negative. By contrast if λ “ n “ 0, 1, 2, . . . then the contradiction is avoided
because
a|ny, a2 |ny, . . . , an |ny, are non-zero states
eigenvalues: n ´ 1, n ´ 2, . . . , 0,
(4.1.14)
m
but a |ny “ 0, m ą n and so the sequence terminates. Furthermore, have additional
eigenstates
a: |ny, pa: q2 |ny, . . . ,
(4.1.15)
eigenvalues: n ` 1, n ` 2, ... .
The eigenvalues of N are therefore precisely the non-negative integers and the oscil-
lator energy levels are
ˆ ˙
1
En “ ~ n ` n “ 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . . (4.1.16)
2
From calculations of norms above, we can choose normalized eigenstates |ny, xn|ny “ 1
which are then related by
? *
a: |ny “ ?n ` 1 |n ` 1y
ladder operators (4.1.17)
a|ny “ n |n ´ 1y
2
a|0y “ 0 , (4.1.18)
a a
1
have normalized eigenstates
0
1
|ny “ ? pa: qn |0y . (4.1.19)
n! 0 state
4 THE HARMONIC OSCILLATOR 23
In the absence of any internal structure can take tx̂u or tp̂u or tN u as a complete
commuting set. Then the energy levels are non-degenerate (eigenvalues of N label
them uniquely) and, in particular, |0y is completely specified by
a|0y “ 0 . (4.1.20)
If there is some internal structure then all states can carry an additional label i as-
sociated with some observable Q (or its eigenvalues) commuting with x̂, p̂, a, a: , N .
All energy levels have the same degeneracy with states |n; iy related by a, a: without
affecting i.
The analysis above is convenient for finding wavefunctions. In the position represen-
tation
|0y ù ψ0 pxq “ xx|0y
´ ¯1{2 ´ ¯ ´ ¯1{2 ´ ¯
a “ mω i p̂
x̂ ` mω ù mω ~ B
x ` mω
2~ 2~ Bx
´ ¯ (4.1.21)
a|0y “ 0 ù ~ B ψ pxq “ 0
x ` mω 0
Bx
2
´ mωx
ùñ ψ0 pxq “ N e 2~
¯1{4
´
with normalization factor N “ π~ mω .
Can also find wavefunctions for higher energy states by using Eq. (4.1.19). E.g.,
´ ¯1{2 ´ ¯
|1y “ a: |0y ù ψ1 pxq “ mω ~ B ψ pxq
x ´ mω 0
2~ Bx
(4.1.22)
´ ¯1{2
“ 2mω xψ0 pxq .
~
The correct normalization is guaranteed.
‚ The oscillator is the simplest QM model beyond steps, wells etc. that can be solved
exactly; the hydrogen atom with a Coulomb potential is also special in this respect. It
is a very useful example to use as test case for new ideas, approaches and techniques.
‚ Consider a smooth potential V pxq with equilibrium point x0 (V 1 px0 q “ 0). For
displacements x from equilibrium
1
V px0 ` xq “ V px0 q ` V 2 px0 qx2 ` Opx3 q , (4.2.1)
2
and so if the displacements are not too large neglecting the Opx3 q contribution may
be a good approximation. Indeed, can include the effects of these anharmonic cor-
rections systematically using perturbation theory (see later). The point is that we
start with a soluble model. E.g., diatomic molecules where the quantization of vibra-
tional energies is important in understanding the internal energy and hence the heat
capacity of the gas – has macroscopic consequences. In other systems this approach
can breakdown, though.
‚ More complicated systems can be analyzed in terms of normal modes: each mode is
a coherent motion in which all degrees of freedom oscillate with common frequency ω.
This is common classically and can now quantize this motion. The general solution
for the classical oscillator is
‚ Benzene ring with 6 CH units which oscillate around the “clock face” of the ring.
They are treated as if joined by identical springs. Actually, analyzed by discrete
group theory based on the symmetries of the ring.
‚ Crystal with # atoms N „ 1023 . The forces between the atoms are approximately
elastic and in 3D there are N “ 3N independent coordinates. Each of the 3N modes
is a collective motion of the atoms and if the approximation of elastic forces is good
then interaction between normal modes is small. If you excite just a single mode then
no other mode starts up – no energy transfer between modes; they are effectively
independent oscillators.
In fact,
ω
upxq “ eik¨x with polarization K k and |k| “ . (4.2.5)
c
This gives a wave solution with behaviour e˘ipk¨x´ωtq . General solution is a linear
combination of normal modes for various ω, , k – exact for EM field.
4 THE HARMONIC OSCILLATOR 25
The final step in Dirac’s systematic approach to QM: have seen how to incorporate
position and momentum wavefunctions and S and H pictures in a single logical frame-
work. But how do we pass from general classical system to its quantum version? In
particular, what are the fundamental quantum commutation relations between observ-
ables ; why rx̂, p̂s “ i~?
Any classical system can be described by a set of generalized positions xi ptq and mo-
menta pi ptq with 1 ď i ď N (may include angles, angular momentum etc.) and a
Hamiltonian Hpxi , pi q.
In classical dynamics a fundamental idea is that of the Poisson bracket of any two
functions f pxi , pi q and gpxi , pi q, say, which is defined to be
ÿ ˆ Bf Bg Bg Bf
˙
tf, gu “ ´ , (4.3.1)
i
Bxi Bpi Bxi Bpi
which is a new function of xi and pi . (pxi , pi q are coordinates on phase space and PB
is a symplectic structure.) In particular,
txi , pj u “ δij . (4.3.2)
Properties of the PB include antisymmetry, bilinearity and Jacobi identity. In this
formulation classical dynamics is given by Hamilton’s equation
df
“ tf, Hu . (4.3.3)
dt
4 THE HARMONIC OSCILLATOR 26
Check this for various choices for H and see that you derive Newton’s third law in a
first order formalism (i.e. first-order in time derivative).
In canonical quantization define quantum theory by
‚
classical f, g ÝÑ quantum fˆ, ĝ (4.3.4)
functions operators
‚ Poisson brackets become commutators
rfˆ, ĝs “ i~tf,
{ gu . (4.3.5)
In particular, get
rx̂i , p̂j s “ i~δij (4.3.6)
which are the canonical commutation relations.
‚ Moreover, Hamilton’s equations then become Heisenberg’s equations
d ˆ
i~ f “ rfˆ, Ĥs . (4.3.7)
dt
For those taking IIC Classical Dynamics this relationship between classical and quan-
tum mechanics should be mentioned near the end of the course.
All this provides a sound basis for understanding classical mechanics as a limit of quan-
tum mechanics with ~ Ñ 0. Going the other way, turning ~ “on” is more problematic
and not guaranteed to be either unique or, in some cases, even consistent. For exam-
ple, if we carry out the procedure above it is correct to Op~q but there may be Op~2 q
ambiguities related to how operators are ordered in defining functions like f pxi , pj q:
does xi multiply pi on left or right?
Alternative approach to quantization is to use path integrals which are sums of contri-
butions from all possible trajectories or paths between initial and final configurations
in phase space.
One of these is the classical trajectory or path. It is derived from an action principle:
the path that minimizes the action associated with the path. However, the quantum
amplitude involves contributions from all trajectories. This approach has its advan-
tages but, in principle, is equivalent to canonical quantization. In general need both,
especially for complicated systems where there are constraints amongst the variables.
Consider a particle in two dimensions with position operators x̂1 , x̂2 . Basis of joint
eigenstates can be constructed as
|x1 , x2 y “ |x1 y b |x2 y
x̂1 Ø x̂1 b I
x̂2 Ø I b x̂2 . (5.1.7)
5 COMPOSITE SYSTEMS AND IDENTICAL PARTICLES 28
This is the V “ V1 b V2 tensor product of states for two one-dimensional particles. The
wavefunction for |ψy b |φy is
´ ¯´ ¯
xx1 | b xx2 | |ψy b |φy “ xx1 |ψyxx2 |φy
“ ψpx1 qφpx2 q . (5.1.8)
with
ˆ ˙
1 2 1 2 2 1
Hi “ p̂ ` mω x̂i “ ~ω Ni ` ,
2m i 2 2
Ni “ a:i ai , rai , a:j s “ δij . (5.1.11)
5.2 Spin
Experiment shows that particles generally carry an internal degree of freedom called
spin or intrinsic angular momentum. Even if the particle appears ‘elementary’ or
pointlike, its space of states will be of the form V “ Vspace b Vspin with basis
where r takes a finite set of values: the quantum numbers associated with spin. The
particle is not ‘structureless’: the position operators, x̂, are not a complete commut-
ing set by themselves – there are additional observables Q acting just on Vspin with
rx̂i , Qs “ 0. We will understand these operators later in the study of angular momen-
tum but for now concentrate on the states.
Each kind of particle has a definite total spin S which is a half-integer 0, 21 , 1, 32 , . . .;
this is a basic characteristic like its mass or charge. For a spin S particle of non-zero
5 COMPOSITE SYSTEMS AND IDENTICAL PARTICLES 29
S basis states
0 |0y
1
| 12 y, | ´ 12 y also written Òyon, loo|mo (5.2.2)
2 loo|mo Óyon
up down
1 |1y, |0y, | ´ 1y
beam of
splits beam in two:
s = 1/2 in this case
particles
constructed from single particle states. If the particles are identical, Va u V , some-
thing interesting can be added.
5 COMPOSITE SYSTEMS AND IDENTICAL PARTICLES 30
When the two particles are identical its action on a general 2-particle state is
because |Ψy and W |Ψy must be physically equivalent if the particles are indistin-
guishable. But, given its action on the basis states
W 2 “ 1 ñ η 2 “ 1 or η “ ˘ 1 . (5.3.4)
Similarly, for multiparticle states with N ě 2 we can define Wpa,bq which exchanges
pxa , ra q Ø pxb , rb q by this action on the basis states. Then for a general N -particle
state
Wpa,bq |Ψy “ ηpa,bq |Ψy (5.3.6)
2
with, again, ηpa,bq “ ˘1 because Wpa,bq “ 1.
For any permutation π of t1, 2, . . . , N u define
Wπ |x1 , r1 ; x2 , r2 ;. . . ; xN , rN y
“ |xπp1q , rπp1q ; xπp2q , rπp2q ; . . . ; xπpN q , rπpN q y (5.3.7)
But algebra of swaps or transpositions implies ηpa,bq “ ˘ 1 with the same value for
all pairs pa, bq since any two swaps are conjugate. This makes physical sense since the
particle are identical and the initial choice for the labelling is not unique. Then, since
any π can be obtained as a sequence of swaps, we have alternative outcomes
#
1
ηπ “ (5.3.9)
sgnpπq “ p´1qp# swaps needed for πq ,
with the same alternative for all π. These correspond to two inequivalent 1-D repre-
sentations of the permutation group.
Hence, there are two fundamentally different kinds of particles:
5 COMPOSITE SYSTEMS AND IDENTICAL PARTICLES 31
Note that this applies only to identical particles. Indistinguishability has a different
character in QM from classical physics. It is the consequence of saying that you cannot
attach a label to a given particle and uniquely identify it from any other. You can no
longer follow individual particles because of the uncertainly principle.
In addition have the remarkable ‹ Spin-statistics relation. ‹
‚ Most common elementary particles are fermions: electrons, protons, neutrons, neu-
trinos, quarks, muons, τ – all spin 12 .
‚ Particles associated with forces are bosons: photons (EM), W ˘ , Z (weak nuclear),
gluons (strong nuclear) – all spin 1.
‚ Other particles such as mesons are bosons e.g., π, K are spin 0, the ρ is spin 1, and
many more have been observed with higher spin.
‚ The recently discovered Higgs boson (LHC experiments) has almost certainly spin 0
although this is still to be confirmed.
‚ The graviton has spin 2 but is yet to be observed - not likely in the near future (if
ever).
‚ The spin-statistics theorem applies even if the particles are not ‘elementary’. Indeed,
nucleons (proton etc) and mesons are made of quarks. Atoms obey the theorem, too.
5 COMPOSITE SYSTEMS AND IDENTICAL PARTICLES 32
with the wavefunctions for the basis of energy eigenfunctions for Vspace b Vspace
These have no definite symmetry but the following linear combinations do:
1
ΨS1 px1 , x2 q “ ? pψ0 px1 qψ1 px2 q ` ψ1 px1 qψ0 px2 qq , (5.5.7)
2
1
ΨA
1 px1 , x2 q “ ? pψ0 px1 qψ1 px2 q ´ ψ1 px1 qψ0 px2 qq , (5.5.8)
2
which are (S)ymmetric and (A)ntisymmetric, respectively. They are the S and A
1-D representations of the two-particle permutation group S2 .
Spin 0: Vspin is just one state so can ignore. Spin-statistics ñ the particles are
bosons, and states are in pV b V qS which in this case is pVspace b Vspace qS . The
allowed states are then
*
Ground state ΨS0 px1 , x2 q 2E0 both non-
degenerate (5.5.9)
1st excited state ΨS1 px1 , x2 q E0 ` E1
Note that only one of the two possible 1st excited states is allowed.
5 COMPOSITE SYSTEMS AND IDENTICAL PARTICLES 33
Spin 12 : Vspin has basis t| Òy, | Óyu for each particle. Vspin b Vspin therefore has
the basis
t| Òy| Òy, | Òy| Óy, | Óy| Òy, | Óy| Óyu , (5.5.10)
or normalized combinations with definite symmetry are
| Òy| Òy
´ ¯ ´ ¯
?1 | Òy| Óy ` | Óy| Òy ?1 | Òy| Óy ´ | Óy| Òy
2 2
(5.5.11)
| Óy| Óy
We would expect these two kinds of states, S and A, to be associated with a definite
spin quantum number. We can see what this is simply by counting since the degen-
eracy for spin S is 2S ` 1. We see that the S-states have S “ 1 and the A-state has
S “ 0. Note how state multiplets with a definite spin also have a definite symmetry.
This is no accident.
Spin-statistics ñ the particles are fermions, and the states belong to
The allowed states are (in hybrid notation, see Eq. (5.2.4))
There are four states in all made up of 1 ` 3 “ 4. The spin quantum numbers
associated with these are S “ 0 and S “ 1, respectively.
We can see that representations of the two-particle permutation group, S2 , are used
extensively in the analysis. The general analysis for N identical particles is based on
the representation theory of SN , the permutation group for N particles.
5 COMPOSITE SYSTEMS AND IDENTICAL PARTICLES 34
1 2 Ze2
Hpx̂, p̂q “ p̂ ´ . (5.6.2)
2m 4π0 |x̂|
Single electron states in Vspace are similar to hydrogen atom states (for which Z “ 1)
$
’
’ evals
H En
&
|n, l, my which are joint eigenstates of 2 2 (5.6.3)
’
’ L ~ lpl ` 1q
L3
%
~m
where
ˆ ˙2
m Ze2 1 2 Z
2
En “ ´ “ ´ α mc2 ,
2 4π0 ~ n2 2n2
n “ 1, 2, . . . principal quantum number ,
l “ 0, 1, . . . , n ´ 1 m “ 0, ˘1, ˘2, . . . , ˘l ,
looooooooomooooooooon (5.6.4)
2l ` 1 states
‚ Fill up energy levels, starting with the lowest, using Pauli Principle.
‚ This gives a rough picture of the periodic table with some qualitative insights into
chemical properties.
‚ The states that belong to a given energy En is called a shell. Atoms with completely
filled shells are unreactive/stable elements chemically. E.g.
E1 filled for Z “ 2 Ñ He
E1 & E2 filled for Z “ 10 Ñ Ne (5.6.6)
6 PERTURBATION THEORY 35
atomic n 1 2 3 4
no. element s s p s p d s p d f
1 H 1
2 He 2
6 C 2 2 2
9 F 2 2 5
10 Ne 2 2 6
11 Na 2 2 6 1
19 K 2 2 6 2 6 1
20 Ca 2 2 6 2 6 2
26 Fe 2 2 6 2 6 6 2
28 Ni 2 2 6 2 6 8 2
29 Cu 2 2 6 2 6 10 2
6 Perturbation Theory
Few quantum mechanical systems can be solved exactly. In perturbation theory we
start from a known, soluble, system
H|ny “ En |ny , (6.1)
with t|nyu an orthonormal basis of energy eigenstates, and calculate the energies and
eigenstates for a new perturbed Hamiltonian
pH ` µV q|ψy “ E|ψy , (6.2)
6 PERTURBATION THEORY 36
States t|nyu are still a basis when µ ‰ 0, and so we can always write
ÿ
|ψy “ α|ry ` βj |jy
j‰r
ÿ
“ αp|ry ` γj |jyq , (6.1.2)
j‰r
α Ñ 1, βj , γj Ñ 0 as µ Ñ 0 . (6.1.3)
First just substitute the expression for |ψy into Eq. (6.2):
ÿ ÿ
pEr ` µV q|ry ` γj pEj ` µV q|jy “ Ep|ry ` γj |jyq , (6.1.5)
j‰r j‰r
and, so far, this is still exact (all orders in µ). Substituting in the series expansions
from Eq. (6.1.4) and keeping terms to Opµ2 q gives
ÿ
µErp1q ` µ2 Erp2q ` . . . “ µxr|V |ry ` µ2 cj1 xr|V |jy ` . . . . (6.1.8)
j‰r
6 PERTURBATION THEORY 37
Again this is exact but the 2nd term on RHS is Opµ2 q, and so to leading order in µ
µ ci1 pEr ´ Ei q “ µxi|V |ry
xi|V |ry
ñ ci1 “ (note Ei ‰ Er since states non-degenerate)
Er ´ Ei
(6.1.11)
and so substituting in Eq. (6.1.8) we find
ÿ xr|V |jyxj|V |ry ÿ |xj|V |ry|2
Erp2q “ “ . (6.1.12)
j‰r
E r ´ E j j‰r
Er ´ E j
In summary,
ÿ |xj|V |ry|2
E “ Er ` µxr|V |ry ` µ2 ` ... , (6.1.13)
j‰r
Er ´ E j
˜ ¸
ÿ xj|V |ry
|ψy “ α |ry ` µ |jy ` ... , (6.1.14)
j‰r
Er ´ Ej
where α is chosen so that |ψy has unit norm. This is second order perturbation theory.
Example:
p̂2
´ ¯
H “ 2m ` 21 mω 2 x̂2 “ ~ω a: a ` 12
´ ¯ (6.1.15)
states |ny, En “ ~ω n ` 2 . 1
~ 2
Perturb with V “ mω 2 x̂2 “
2
mω pa2 ` a: ` 2a: a ` 1q. (6.1.16)
2
m
ω
Have
1
xn|V |ny “ 2
~ωp2n ` 1q
1
? ?
xn ` 2|V |ny “ 2
~ω n ` 1 n `2
1
? ?
xn ´ 2|V |ny “ 2
~ω n n ´ 1
xm|V |ny “ 0 all other m (6.1.17)
2
Perturbed energy of nth level to Opµ q:
ÿ |xm|V |ny|2
En ` µxn|V |ny ` µ2 En ´ Em
m‰n
¯2 ˆ ˙
pn ` 1qpn ` 2q npn ´ 1q
´
“ ~ωpn ` 1
q ` µ~ωpn ` 1
q ` µ 2 ~ω ` 2~ω
2 2 2 ´2~ω
m“n`2 m“n´2
` ˘` ˘
“ ~ω n ` 21 1 ` µ ´ 12 µ2 . (6.1.18)
6 PERTURBATION THEORY 38
Indeed, it may be that the series is only asymptotic and more sophisticated methods
are needed to estimate the energy shifts within a given accuracy.
Example. Ground state energy for Helium.
The unperturbed problem is two non-interacting electrons, charge ´e orbiting nucleus
with charge `2e. The Hamiltonian is
p̂2 2e2
Hpx̂1 , p̂1 q ` Hpx̂2 , p̂2 q with Hpx̂, p̂q “ ´ . (6.1.23)
2m 4π0 |x̂|
Single electron states and energies are
ˆ ˙2
|n l my 1 2e2 1 2α2 2
En “ ´ m ” ´ mc , (6.1.24)
wavefn ψnlm pxq 2 4π0 ~ n2 n2
2
where α “ 4πe ~c is the dimensionless fine structure constant: α « 1{137. The lowest
0
energy eigenstate for two electrons is
|Ψy “ |1 0 0y b |1 0 0y b |χy
1 ´ ¯
with |χy “ ? | Òy| Óy ´ | Óy| Òy the spin state . (6.1.25)
2
6 PERTURBATION THEORY 39
This state is totally antisymmetric since constrained by Fermi statistics. The two
electron wavefunction is then
Ψpx1 , x2 q “ ψ100 px1 qψ100 px2 q
ˆ ˙ 32
1 2
ψ100 pxq “ ? e´|x|{a2
π a2
ˆ ˙
1 1 ~
with pZ “ 2q a2 “ 2 “ 12 ˚ pBohr radiusq (6.1.26)
α mc
The two-electron unperturbed energy is
2E1 “ ´ 4α2 mc2 « ´ 108.8 eV . (6.1.27)
Compare with -13.6 eV for the hydrogen atom. (Note: mc2 « 500 KeV.)
Experimentally, the ground state for He is -79.0 eV. However, have neglected the
electron-electron interaction:
e2 1
. (6.1.28)
4π0 |x̂1 ´ x̂2 |
Treat this as a perturbation and write as µV px̂1 , x̂2 q with
~c
µ “ α, V px̂1 , x̂2 q “ . (6.1.29)
|x̂1 ´ x̂2 |
Then µ is dimensionless and V has energy dimensions. The first-order correction to
the energy is then
ż ż
3
αxΨ|V |Ψy “ α d x1 d3 x2 Ψ˚ px1 , x2 qV px1 , x2 qΨpx1 , x2 q
ż ż
~c
“ α d x1 d3 x2 |ψ100 px1 q|2 |ψ100 px2 q|2
3
|x1 ´ x2 |
5 2 2
“ α mc « 34.0 eV . (6.1.30)
4
The corrected ground state energy is then ´108.8 eV ` 34.0 eV « ´74.8 eV; in much
better agreement with experiment. Note that the variational principle is more efficient
(see AQM) at this level but does not help with higher-order corrections.
We might naively expect that the perturbation series is an expansion in α but we see
p1q
that E1 and the first-order correction E1 are both 9 α2 . In fact, all corrections are
9 α2 , so what is the expansion parameter? Including the 2nd-order correction the
energy can be written 2
ˆ ˙ˇ
2 2 2 51 25 1 ˇ
E “ ´ Z α mc 1 ´ ` ` . . . ˇ . (6.1.31)
8 Z 256 Z 2 ˇ
Z“2
So the expansion is in 1{Z for Z “ 2. The series “looks” convergent and gives an
answer close to experiment but to my knowledge it is not known if it actually converges.
However, treated as an asymptotic series it does give a believable answer. This is typical
of many problems in bound state systems.
In scattering theory (Quantum Electrodynamics) the expansion parameter is α but
convergence is still not provable.
2
This is the correct expression for all atoms with two electrons. For example, Li` which has Z “ 3
and Be2` which has Z “ 4.
6 PERTURBATION THEORY 40
Denote other states, not in this degenerate set, by |jy and reserve j to label these only.
Then, for general µ, expand the eigenfunction of the perturbed Hamiltonian as
E “ λ ` µE p1q ` µ2 E p2q ` . . . ,
ÿ ÿ
|ψy “ αr |ry ` βj |jy .
r j
with αr “ ar ` Opµq, βj “ Opµq . (6.2.3)
Note that for µ Ñ 0, |ψy Ñ |ψ0 y P Vλ but we do not yet know the values of the ar
which determine it uniquely in this limit. We shall see that the possible choices for the
ar are determined by the perturbation itself. Substitute into Eq. (6.2) and find
˜ ¸
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ
αr pEr ` µV q|ry ` βj pEj ` µV q|jy “ E αr |ry ` βj |jy . (6.2.4)
r j r j
Rearranging gives
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ
αr pE ´ Er q|ry ` βj pE ´ Ej q|jy “ µ αr V |ry ` µ βj V |jy . p˚˚q
r j
loooooooooooooooooooooooomoooooooooooooooooooooooon r j
loooooooooooooooomoooooooooooooooon
terms containing energy shifts terms containing V
(6.2.5)
Look for energy shift E “ λ ` µE p1q ` Opµ2 q and note that the correction is no longer
associated with a single state of the unperturbed problem but with all N states in Vλ .
Take the inner product of xs| with p˚˚q to get (remember Er “ . . . “ Es . . . “ EN “ λ)
ÿ ÿ
pE ´ Es qαs “ µ αr xs|V |ry ` µ βj xs|V |jy , (6.2.6)
r j
but the second term on RHS is Opµ2 q and αr “ ar ` Opµq, and so hence to leading
order ÿ
xs|V |ry ar “ E p1q as . (6.2.7)
r
p1q
Thus, E is an eigenvalue of the matrix xs|V |ry and the ar are the components of
the corresponding eigenvector. Since there are N degenerate states this is an N ˆ N
matrix and so have N solutions for E p1q with associated eigenvectors giving the ar in
each case.
We should expect something like this:
6 PERTURBATION THEORY 41
‚ Raising the degeneracy in this way is important in many physical phenomena. For
example, band structure for the electron levels in a crystal giving rise to delocalization
of electrons originally bound in each atom and so leading to electrical conduction
(see AQM).
with
ża ża
xy
α “ dx dy 2 |ψ12 px, yq|2
0 0 a
ˆ ˙2 ż a ˙2
πx ¯2 a
ż ˆ
2 1 ´ 2πy
“ dx x sin dy y sin
a a2 0 a 0 a
1
“ . (6.2.12)
4
ża ża
xy ˚
β “ dx dy 2 ψ12 px, yqψ21 px, yq
0 0 a
ˆ ˙2 ˆ ż a ˙2
2 1 πx 2πx
“ dx x sin sin
a a2 0 a a
ˆ ˙2
16
“ . (6.2.13)
9π 2
(6.2.14)
„ż a ża ˆ ˙
πx 2πx 1 πx 3πx 8a2
dx x sin sin “ dx x cos ´ cos “´ 2 .
0 a a 0 2 a a 9π
7 Angular Momentum
7.1 Recap of orbital angular momentum
Mainly to set the analysis to follow in some sort of context but also a few points of
special importance.
3
Then
rx̂i , p̂j s “ i~δij ñ rLi , Lj s “ i~ εijk Lk , rL2 , Li s “ 0 . (7.1.2)
In addition to these fundamental commutation relations we have
Consider the action of all these operators on wavefunctions. Using spherical polar
coordinates pr, θ, φq, the operators Li only involve angular derivatives and
1 B2 1
∇2 “ 2
r ´ 2 2 L2 . (7.1.4)
r Br
loomoon r ~
loomoon
radial angular
The joint eigenstates of L2 and L3 are the spherical harmonics Ylm pθ, φq:
where ˆ ˙
~2 1 B 2 ~2
´ prRl q ` lpl ` 1q ` V prq Rl “ ERl . (7.1.8)
2m r Br2 2mr2
Of particular importance is the behaviour of such solutions under parity: x ÞÑ ´x.
This is equivalent to
r ÞÑ r, θ ÞÑ π ´ θ, φ ÞÑ φ ` π . (7.1.9)
Then, under parity map have
m2 p̂1 ´ m1 p̂2
P̂ “ p̂1 ` p̂2 p̂ “ M (7.1.12)
M “ m1 ` m2 m “ mM
1 m2 reduced mass
rJ3 , J˘ s “ ˘~J˘
rJ` , J´ s “ 2~J3
rJ 2 , J˘ s “ 0 . (7.2.5)
Furthermore, we find
J` J´ “ J 2 ´ J32 ` ~J3
J´ J` “ J 2 ´ J32 ´ ~J3 (7.2.6)
and
and the states vanish only when equality occurs. Hence, from these bounds, we deduce
j ě m ě ´j
J` |j, my “ 0 iffi m “ j , (7.2.13)
J´ |j, my “ 0 iffi m “ ´j .
These results tell us all we need to know about the possible values of both j and m.
Remember, so far only know that m and j ě 0 are real.
Start from any given state |j, my.
Thus,
j integral. This possibility is realized in orbital angular momentum. The states |j, my
correspond to wavefunctions ψjm pxq or Yjm pθ, φq.
j half-integral. This possibility cannot arise for orbital angular momentum since
there are no solutions of the differential equations which are well-behaved in this case.
7 ANGULAR MOMENTUM 47
Analysis reveals mathematically that spin is possible with these quantum numbers but
still need to give (very brief) indication of experimental verification.
The set of states t|j, myu for fixed j is often called an angular momentum multiplet
or representation. From the analysis above (Eqns. (7.2.10, 7.2.11)) it is clear we can
choose normalized states |j, my with
a
J` |j, my “ ~ pj ´ mqpj ` m ` 1q|j, m ` 1y , (7.2.20)
a
J´ |j, my “ ~ pj ` mqpj ´ m ` 1q|j, m ´ 1y , (7.2.21)
which are key relations between the states. The whole multiplet can be defined by
‚ taking the top state, the one with maximum J3 eigenvalue: J` |j, jy “ 0,
‚ and applying J´n :
|j, j ´ ny “ Cjn J´n |j, jy , (7.2.22)
where Cjn is a constant computable using Eq. (7.2.21).
‚ Alternatively, can start with the bottom state, |j, ´jy and determine the others by
applying J`n .
Note that the choice of J3 as the member of the commuting set along with J 2 is a
convention. We could have chosen n¨J instead. n¨J has the same possible eigenvalues
as J3 but the eigenstates are linear combinations of the basis states t|j, myu. This will
be relevant when we discuss rotations.
If a and b are constant vectors (or at most operators which commute with S) then we
can contract ai and bj with both sides of Eqn. (7.3.10) to obtain
As a special case
pn ¨ σq2 “ I , (7.3.15)
where n is any unit vector. Note that this is equivalent to pn ¨ Sq2 “ 14 ~2 I, which
agrees with the fact that the eigenstates of n ¨ S are ˘ 21 ~; these are the only possible
results for measurement of spin along some direction n.
One last example of matrix properties corresponding to known properties of operators:
to be compared with
`1˘ `1 ˘ ~2
S 2 “ ~2 2 2
`1 I “ 3 I (7.3.17)
4
~2
which has eigenvalue 3 on any state.
4
J “ L`S . (7.4.2)
together imply
rJi , Jj s “ i~εijk Jk . (7.4.4)
How do we know the world works this way? Results of many experiments confirm it.
Here just mention the theoretical ideas underlying a few of them. The key idea is how
spin and angular momentum degrees of freedom enter into the Hamiltonian.
Main example for us is interaction with a background magnetic field. From classical
EM (no previous knowledge required) a moving distribution of electric charge interacts
with magnetic field Bpxq to produce energy
´µ ¨ B , (7.4.5)
7 ANGULAR MOMENTUM 50
This final result is all that is important for us. Now pass to quantum theory and
consider the effect of including such a term in the Hamiltonian for the electron in the
hydrogen atom (works for any spherically symmetric potential).
(i) Before we turn on any magnetic field have ψnlm pxq joint eigenstates of H, L2 , L3 with
degenerate energies E independent of m (as discussed in section 7.1).
Add a weak magnetic field along the 3-direction, B “ p0, 0, Bq and so
H Ñ H ´ γBL3 , (7.4.8)
but ψnlm pxq are still eigenstates and energies now split
E Ñ E ´ γB~m ´l ďmďl .
looooomooooon (7.4.9)
2l ` 1 levels
This is observed: spectral lines split into distinct lines. This is the Zeeman effect.
(iii) An electron in the atom has both an orbital magnetic moment µL 9L and a spin mag-
netic moment µS 9S. Like two bar magnets near each other there is an interaction
energy
µL ¨ µS 9 L ¨ S . (7.4.12)
This is called spin-orbit coupling and when included in the atomic Hamiltonian it
leads to splitting of spectral lines into doublets because of the spin- 21 of the electron.
The two yellow sodium D lines are a famous outcome. This is called atomic fine
structure.
7 ANGULAR MOMENTUM 51
(iv) Unlike orbital angular momentum, it is sometimes appropriate to consider spin to-
tally divorced from any space degrees of freedom. E.g., electron somehow confined
to one atomic site in a crystal. Then
H “ ´ γS ¨ B (7.4.13)
can be the complete Hamiltonian. If allow Bpzq “ p0, 0, Bpzqq to vary in space
rather than just separating energies can instead physically separate atoms according
to whether their spin states are Ò or Ó. This is due to
d dB ~ dB
force in z-dirn “ ´ p´γS ¨ Bpzqq “ ´ γS3 “ ¯γ (7.4.14)
dz dz 2 dz
This is the Stern-Gerlach experiment.
(v) The proton is spin- 21 and has a magnetic moment. Even if l “ 0 for the electron in
the H atom and no external field there is a weak interaction between the proton spin
I and electron spin S 9I ¨ S. There are two narrowly spaced levels and transitions
give radiation with wavelength « 21cm which is observed from interstellar hydrogen.
(vi) In water the proton magnetic moments of the hydrogen nuclei interact with an
external B-field, 9 ´ I ¨ B to produce two levels where the transition absorbs or
radiates microwaves. This forms the basis of MRI scanners.
Essential idea is that spin or angular momentum behaves like a magnet/dipole. Actu-
ally, an iron bar magnet is magnetized because of the sum of the microscopic electron
spin magnetic dipoles in the atoms which, below the Curie temperature (TC ), prefer to
align and produce the macroscopic magnetic dipole. (For T ą TC the magnetization
vanishes; at T “ TC there is a second-order phase transition.)
The existence of an atomic magnetic moment in iron and also the preference for them
to align and produce a macroscopic magnetization are due to the Pauli Exclusion
Principle (spin-statistics theorem) – a quantum effect. Look up Hund’s rule.
7 ANGULAR MOMENTUM 52
Consider two independent systems with angular momentum operators J p1q , J p2q acting
on spaces of states V p1q , V p2q each with standard basis t|ji , mi yu consisting of joint
piq
eigenstates of pJ piq q2 , J3 for i “ 1, 2.
Construct space of states for the combined system as V “ V p1q b V p2q with basis
(shorthand)
J “ J p1q b I ` I b J p2q
(7.5.3)
or simply “ J p1q ` J p2q .
Recall ji ě mi ě ´ji for i “ 1, 2 and so have total of p2j1 ` 1qp2j2 ` 1q basis states for
V.
Our aim is to find a new basis for V which consists of joint eigenstates |J, M y of J 2 and
J3 . We are seeking a change of basis for V from states with definite m1 , m2 to states
with definite J, M p“ m1 ` m2 q. Of course, either basis will do since they are both
span V , and it is usually the physics application that determines which basis is the
most appropriate to use. These bases correspond to classification by the alternative
complete commuting sets:
p1q 2 p1q p2q 2
pJ q , J3 , pJ p2q q2 , J3
loooooooooooooomoooooooooooooon or J , J3 , pJ p1q q2 , pJ p2q q2 .
loooooooooooomoooooooooooon (7.5.4)
|j1 , m1 , j2 , m2 y |J, M, j1 , j2 y
” |j1 , m1 y|j2 , m2 y
We now suppress the j1 , j2 labels as they are common to all states, and use the compact
notation |ji , mi y Ñ |mi y.
Since
p1q p2q
J3 “ J3 ` J3 , (7.5.5)
we have
¯ ¯
` p1q ` p2q
J3 |m1 ; m2 y “ J3 |m1 y |m2 y ` |m1 y J3 |m2 y
“ M |m1 ; m2 y with M “ m1 ` m2 . (7.5.6)
So the product states are eigenstates of J3 already and its eigenvalues have range
j1 ` j2 ě M ě ´pj1 ` j2 q . (7.5.7)
7 ANGULAR MOMENTUM 53
Note that this means that J ď j1 ` j2 since the maximum value of M available must
be the largest value J allowed. We shall see how this works now.
It is less obvious how to find eigenstates of J 2 . Since t|m1 ; m2 yu is a basis, we must
have ÿ
J
|J, M y “ Cm 1 m2
|m1 ; m2 y . (7.5.8)
m1 `m2 “M
The key idea is to find the top state for a given total angular momentum with
J` |J, M y “ 0 ô J “ M . (7.5.10)
Given M , which is easy to determine, we therefore know J for this state. Then the
others with the same J are found by applying J´ .
This is called the highest weight state since it is the state with the largest value
of M possible for given J. (This terminology arises in the group theory approach.)
The phase of the state on RHS (P V p1q b V p2q ) is chosen by convention to be `1.
p1q p2q
‚ Apply J´ “ J´ ` J´ to this state on LHS and RHS, respectively. We get
p1q p2q
J´ J´ ` J´
a ? ?
2pj1 ` j2 q |j1 ` j2 , j1 ` j2 ´ 1y “ 2j1 |j1 ´ 1y|j2 y ` 2j2 |j1 y|j2 ´ 1y
(7.5.12)
p1q p2q
using standard formulas for V on LHS and for V , V on RHS. The normalized
state is then
d d
j1 j2
|j1 ` j2 , j1 ` j2 ´ 1y “ |j1 ´ 1y|j2 y ` |j1 y|j2 ´ 1y . (7.5.13)
j1 ` j2 j1 ` j2
‚ But we have not yet found all |J, M y states. We started from a unique state with
M “ j1 ` j2 . At the next level down, with M “ j1 ` j2 ´ 1, there are two states:
j1+j2-1
j1+j2-2
-(j1+j2)+1
-(j1+j2)
where
e top states Ó apply J´
unique state K others (7.5.17)
u other states Ñ
with same M value
7 ANGULAR MOMENTUM 55
Can check that top states |ψy with J3 eigenvalue M are annihilated by J` directly.
This is also guaranteed by
Thus,
xJ, M ` 1|J` |ψy “ 0 @ J ą M ô J` |ψy “ 0 . (7.5.19)
The whole process stops with J “ |j1 ´ j2 | by counting. The number of states in the
alternative bases must be the same.
j1ÿ
`j2
p2j ` 1q “ p2j1 ` 1qp2j2 ` 1q . (7.5.20)
j“|j1 ´j2 |
j1 “ 21 , j2 “ 12 ñ J“1, 0
j1 “1, j2 “ 12 ñ J“ 32 , 12 (7.5.21)
j1 “1, j2 “1 ñ J“2, 1, 0
The range of J values matches bounds for addition of classical vectors J “ J p1q `J p2q
with lengths of J, j1 , j2 .
(ii) Clebsch-Gordan coefficients are found by explicit calculation of states for given j1
and j2 .
J 1 0
M Compare this results with the combination
1 of spin states in Eqns. (5.5.14) and (5.5.15)
with | 21 y “ | Òy, |´ 12 y “ | Óy which were
0 found previously by demanding definite sym-
metry; they are precisely the same.
-1
Have
3 (triplet) J “ 1 states symmetric
(7.5.25)
1 (singlet) J “ 0 state antisymmetric
Indeed, the permutation group and its representations are often central to constructing
multiplets in this way.
Tables for CG coefficients can be found in the Particle Data Group (PDG) Tables
( http://pdg.lbl.gov/2014/reviews/rpp2014-rev-clebsch-gordan-coefs.pdf). The PDG
collate all reviews and tables for properties of elementary particles.
The table for 2 b 1 giving states with M “ 1 is
J 3 2 1
m1 m2 M +1 +1 +1
2 -1 1/15 1/3 3/5
1 0 8/15 1/6 -3/10
0 1 2/5 -1/2 1/10
? a
Take but keep the sign. E.g., ´3{10 Ñ ´ 3{10.
Unlike the change of picture we change states or operators but not both. Such a
transformation is a symmetry of the quantum system if
Now consider a group G and transformations of a QM system U pgq for each g P G with
In any given case U pgq is a representation of G. Our aim is to find the unitary
operators U pgq when G is a group of translations, rotations or reflections. In these
cases we know how G acts geometrically
x ÞÑ gpxq , (8.1.6)
and on operators
U pgq: x̂ U pgq “ gpx̂q . (8.1.8)
These statements are equivalent. E.g., assuming the second one
´ ¯
x̂ U pgq|xy “ U pgqgpx̂q|xy “ gpxq U pgq|xy , (8.1.9)
x ÞÑ ga pxq “ x ` a (8.1.13)
8 TRANSFORMATIONS AND SYMMETRIES 58
U paq|xy “ |x ` ay
:
U paq x̂ U paq “ x̂ ` a , (8.1.14)
has precisely these properties. The effect of translation by a on ψpxq should be ψpx´aq
which is illustrated by the picture below.
R(x) R(x-a)
x x
0 a 0 a
Confirmation: on wavefunctions
ˆ ˙
B B
p̂ Ñ ´ i~ , U paq Ñ exp ´a (8.1.16)
Bx Bx
and so
ˆ ˙
B
U paqψpxq “ exp ´a ψpxq
Bx
1 2 2
“ ψpxq ´ a ψ 1 pxq ` a ψ pxq ´ . . .
2!
“ ψpx ´ aq Taylor’s theorem, (8.1.17)
as expected. Because of its special role in U paq the momentum p̂ is called the generator
of translations.
However, for fixed n the elements Rpθ, nq do commute and form a one-parameter,
abelian, subgroup:
The translation group is another example. It is with general ideas about such abelian
subgroups that we begin.
Consider some continuous group G, and let gα (α a real number) be a one parameter
family of group elements with
gα gβ “ gβ gα “ gα`β , g0 “ 1G , (8.2.3)
Also have
U pα ` δαq “ U pαqU pδαq “ U pδαqU pαq , (8.2.10)
so deduce
rQ, U pαqs “ 0 . (8.2.11)
From above have
BU pαq i ´ α ¯
“ ´ Q U pαq ñ U pαq “ exp ´i Q given U p0q “ 1. (8.2.12)
Bα ~ ~
Q is the generator of this family of transformations, the one-parameter subgroup,
within G. To find Q we equate
with
ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙
: i i
U pαq A U pαq “ I ` αQ ` ... A I ´ αQ ` ...
~ ~
i
“ A ` αrQ, As ` Opα2 q (8.2.14)
~
to obtain
rQ, As “ ´i~f pAq . (8.2.15)
Knowing the RHS for any A determines Q. Conversely, the behaviour of any quantity
under the transformation is fixed by its commutation relation with the generator.
Now suppose the continuous family gα corresponds to a symmetry of the quantum
system
rU pαq, Hs “ 0 ô rQ, Hs “ 0 . (8.2.16)
The second equation says that the observable Q is a conserved quantity:
‚ in S-picture can choose joint eigenstates of H and Q
Q|ψp0qy “ q|ψp0qy ñ Q|ψptqy “ q|ψptqy . (8.2.17)
For a spinless particle this is what we seek. Note that L transforms as a vector:
For a particle with spin the generator above needs to be modified to ensure that S
also transforms as a vector
rQ, Ss “ ´i~ n ^ S , (8.3.9)
and this is achieved by taking
Note that L and S are not separately conserved unless U “ 0. However, L2 and S 2
are conserved as is J 2 . So we can write (J “ L ` S)
J 2 ´ L2 ´ S 2 1
L¨S “ “ ~2 pjpj ` 1q ´ lpl ` 1q ´ sps ` 1qq (8.3.14)
2 2
for eigenstates of J 2 , L2 , S 2 with eigenvalues pj, l, sq, respectively.
We now have alternative definitions of a scalar operator A and a vector operator v
in terms of commutation relations:
scalar: rJi , As “ 0
vector: rJi , vj s “ i~ εijk vk . (8.3.15)
‚ On angular momentum states |j, my, fixed j, the angular momentum generators Ji
can be represented as p2j ` 1q ˆ p2j ` 1q matrices (see section 7.3).
‚ Then ˆ ˙
i
U pθq “ exp ´ θn ¨ J (8.3.16)
~
can be computed easily in some cases.
Consider for simplicity rotations about the 3 (or z) axis – J3 is diagonal in our
representation. Then
» ¨ ˛fi ¨ ´iθ ˛
1 0 0 e 0 0
i
U pθk̂q “ expp´ θJ3 q “ exp ´iθ 0 0 0
– ˝ ‚ fl “ ˝ 0 1 0‚. (8.3.19)
~
0 0 ´1 0 0 eiθ
8 TRANSFORMATIONS AND SYMMETRIES 63
Deduce that the states behave as the (spherical) components of a vector. More
familiar if we compare with same rotation on coordinates in spherical basis (bear in
mind for later):
~
J“ σ. (8.3.22)
2
The property that pn ¨ σq2 “ I2 allows explicit computation of rotation operator for
any θ.
ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙
i iθ
U pθq “ exp ´ θn ¨ J “ exp ´ n ¨ σ
~ 2
8
ÿ 1 ˆ ˙ p
iθ
“ ´ pn ¨ σqp
p“0
p! 2
θ θ
“ cos ´ i n ¨ σ sin . (8.3.23)
2 2
The effect of a rotation on a general state is
ˆ ˙
θ θ
|χy ÞÑ U pθq|χy “ cos ´ i n ¨ σ sin |χy . (8.3.24)
2 2
But note the appearance of θ{2 in final result. Under any rotation by 2π we have
We do not get exactly the same state vector after rotation by 2π, which may seem
surprising. However, |χy and ´|χy have same physical content. Change in sign can
be a real effect if e.g. have two particles and rotate just one; change in sign can make
the difference between constructive and destructive interference.
Under rotation by 4π get exactly the same state
Similar behaviour under 2π and 4π rotations for any states with half-integral spin.
8 TRANSFORMATIONS AND SYMMETRIES 64
P : x ÞÑ ´ x . (8.4.1)
This is not part of a continuous family of isometries connected to the identity (un-
like e.g., rotations). Any reflection in a plane can be achieved by composing P with
rotations.
The corresponding unitary operator acts on position eigenstates as
U |xy “ | ´ xy
so U2 “ 1
ñ U : “ U ´1 “ U . (8.4.2)
U x̂ U “ ´x̂
U p̂ U “ ´p̂
U LU “ L pL “ x̂ ^ p̂q
USU “ S
UJU “ J. (8.4.5)
UHU “ H, (8.4.6)
which are thus states of definite parity. Note that for two-particle system P inter-
changes the spatial positions and so its eigenvalue determines the spatial symmetry
of the state: symmetric ηψ “ 1, anti-symmetric ηψ “ ´1.
8 TRANSFORMATIONS AND SYMMETRIES 65
x
a
p -p
‚ This is a strong interaction process – total angular momentum, J , and parity con-
served.
‚ π d system:
Orbital ang. mom. l “ 0 (given), total spin S “ 1
ñ total ang. mom. j “ 1. (8.4.18)
Note that l “ 0 is the dominant state for low energy scattering (See AQM course).
‚ n n system:
Orbital ang. mom. l unknown to begin with but symmetry of spatial wavefunction
p´1ql . Total spin S “ 0 or 1.
‹ S “ 0 ñ antisymmetric spin state, so Fermi statistics requires l even. But since
S “ 0 have that j “ l, and so process forbidden since j “ 1 from J conservation.
‹ S “ 1 ñ symmetric spin state, so Fermi statistics requires l odd. But j “
l ´ 1, l, l ` 1 and have j “ 1 by J conservation and so deduce
j “ l “ S “ 1. (8.4.19)
H “ H0 ` V ptq , (9.1)
where H0 is time-independent with known eigenstates and eigenvalues and V ptq small in
some sense (remember perturbation theory earlier). I have suppressed the dependence
of V ptq on space coordinates.
‹ Our aim: to calculate the effect of V ptq order-by-order (actually stop at first order)
and, in particular, calculate probabilities for transitions between eigenstates of H0 as
functions of time. This is a dynamical question even if V is time-independent.
i t 1
ż
|ψptqy “ |ψp0qy ´ dt V pt1 q |ψpt1 qy , (9.1.4)
~ 0
which is well suited to solving for |ψptqy as a power series in V . For instance, we can
iterate this equation to deduce
˙2 ż t ż t1
i t 1
ż ˆ
i 1
|ψptqy “ |ψp0qy ´ dt V pt q |ψp0qy ` ´
1 dt dt2 V pt1 q V pt2 q |ψpt2 qy .
~ 0 ~ 0 0
(9.1.5)
9 TIME-DEPENDENT PERTURBATION THEORY 68
The unknown state still appears on RHS but now in a term of order V 2 . We could
continue to any desired order in V (see AQM course) but will stop here:
i t 1
ż
|ψptqy “ |ψp0qy ´ dt V pt1 q |ψp0qy ` OpV 2 q . (9.1.6)
~ 0
Let |iy and |f y be eigenstates of H0 , eigenvalues Ei and Ef , and assume xf |iy “ 0. A
transition from the state
|ψp0qy “ |ψp0qy “ |iy (9.1.7)
at time t “ 0 (when S-picture and I-picture coincide) to a state |f y at time t occurs
with probability
|xf |ψptqy|2 “ |xf |ψptqy|2 (9.1.8)
since
xf |ψptqy “ xf | e´iH0 t{~ |ψptqy “ e´iEf t{~ xf |ψptqy . (9.1.9)
To order V , the amplitude we need is therefore
żt
*0 i
dt1 xf | V pt1 q |iy
xf |iy ´
xf |ψptqy “
~ 0
i t 1
ż
1 1
“ ´ dt xf | eiH0 t {~ V pt1 q e´iH0 t {~ |iy
~ 0
An important special case is when V pt1 q is constant in time (at least for 0 ď t1 ď tq.
The amplitude above is then
i t iωt1
ż
1
´ e xf |V |iy dt1 “ p1 ´ eiωt q xf |V |iy , (9.1.12)
~ 0 ~ω
and the probability of transition to order V 2 is
ˆ ˙2
1 sin ωt{2
P ptq “ 2 |xf |V |iy|2 . (9.1.13)
~ ω{2
For fixed ω ‰ 0 have a periodic function of t.
t
4
tw2
ft(w)
2p 4p w
available states t t
Now
sin 2 x
ż8 ż8
lim ft pωq “ t , ft pωq dω “ 2 dx “ 2π . (9.2.2)
ωÑ0 ´8 ´8 x2
As t increases ft pωq is concentrated more and more around ω “ 0 and P ptq will be
non-negligible only when
2π 2π
´ ÀωÀ . (9.2.3)
t t
So for t large enough we have
ρpEf q∆E “ # states with specified parameters and energy in range pEf , Ef ` ∆Eq.
9 TIME-DEPENDENT PERTURBATION THEORY 70
Note, we are assuming that |xf |V |iy|2 only depends on Ef and does not depend on
other unspecified quantum numbers which distinguish the different states with energy
Ef . This assumption is easily relaxed by summing over them, too.
For t sufficiently large
and then
ż
t
P ptq “ 2 dEf ρpEf q 2π~ δpEf ´ Ei q |xf |V |iy|2
~ F
$
’
& 0 if Ef is not in F
ˇ
“ 2πt ˇ
2 ˇ (9.2.10)
% ~ ρpEi q|xf |V |iy| ˇ
’ if it is
Ef “Ei
‚ t not so large that 1st order perturbation theory breaks down: need P ptq ! 1.
‚ t large enough that the δ-function approximation is valid. This means changes in
ρpEf q|xf |V |iy|2 are small for changes in Ef of order ~{t (see diagram above).
P ptq 2π 2
t “ ~ ρpEi q |xf |V |iy| Fermi’s Golden Rule.
1 e e2 2
H“ pp̂ ´ eApx̂, tqq2 ` V pr̂q “ H0 ´ pp̂ ¨ A ` A ¨ p̂q ` A , (9.3.1)
2m 2m 2m
9 TIME-DEPENDENT PERTURBATION THEORY 71
where Apx̂, tq is the vector potential of the EM field and H0 is the hydrogen atom
Hamiltonian. We assume that the EM field is weak and so can ignore the last term –
it is certainly suppressed by an extra factor of e, anyway. We assume that A has some
definite frequency ω0 and wave-vector q. Then we write (using position representation)
Apx, tq “ ε cos pq ¨ x ´ ω0 tq , (9.3.2)
where ε is the polarization vector which is transverse to the direction of propagation
so that ε ¨ q “ 0 (this ensures that the EM wave has two polarizations K q). In this
case p̂ ¨ A “ A ¨ p̂ since
´i~∇ ¨ ε cos pq ¨ x ´ ω0 tq “ i~ q ¨ ε sin pq ¨ x ´ ω0 tq “ 0. (9.3.3)
The interesting interaction term is then
e
VI px̂, tq “ ´ p̂ ¨ ε cos pq ¨ x̂ ´ ω0 tq . (9.3.4)
m
There is no significance to cos rather than sin here. We are considering the decay of
an excited atom H ˚ Ñ H ` γ and the reverse, absorption, process and so the energy
of the photon is
1 ~
~ω0 “ |Ef ´ Ei | „ α2 mc2 with wavelength λ „ , (9.3.5)
α2 mc
where Ei and Ef are now the energies of initial and final atomic states, respectively.
Compare λ with the size of the atom given by the Bohr radius
1 ~
a0 „ . (9.3.6)
α mc
Have |q| “ 2π{λ and x is confined to the atomic interior so |x| À a0 . Thus,
a0 1
q¨x À „ α „ . (9.3.7)
λ 137
To lowest order we therefore neglect q ¨ x and consider the interaction to be
e
VI ptq “ ´ p̂ ¨ ε cos pω0 tq . (9.3.8)
m
We now note that
p̂
rx̂, H0 s “ i~ , (9.3.9)
m
and so
ie
VI ptq “ cos pω0 tqrx̂ ¨ ε, H0 s (9.3.10)
~
Now the first-order transition amplitude i Ñ f is
i t 1 ipEf ´Ei qt1 {~
ż
´ dt e xf |VI pt1 q|iy
~ 0
This is called the dipole approximation since the operator appearing in the matrix
element has the form ex̂ ¨ ε cos pω0 tq and may be interpreted as the interaction of the
electric dipole operator d̂ “ ´ex̂ with a classical electric field given by E 9 ε cos pω0 tq
of the form V ptq “ ´d̂ ¨ E. However, the derivation is from minimal substitution and
there are clearly corrections higher-order in q ¨ x. Can analyze formula in two parts.
(i) Time dependence. Separate cos into exponentials and integrate gives two terms
żt
1 1
dt1 eipEf ´Ei qt {~ e¯iω0 t . (9.3.12)
0
‹ Angular momentum.
First show that x̂i |n l my are like product states for addition of ang. mom. 1 to l.
Intuitively, x̂i is a vector and we know that l “ 1 states also behave like a vector
under rotations. Now
and define
1
X1 “ ´ ? px̂1 ` ix̂2 q
2
X0 “ x̂3
1
X´1 “ ? px̂1 ´ ix̂2 q . (9.3.21)
2
It is easy to check
rL3 , Xq s “ ~qXq
a
rL˘ , Xq s “ ~ p1 ¯ qqp1 ˘ q ` 1qXq˘1 , (9.3.22)
look back at (8.3.21). Compare with standard formulas in section 7.5 and Eqs.
(7.5.1) for action of L3 , L˘ on ang. mom. states |1, qy. These formulas match
exactly implying that with respect to angular momentum
Another indication that this is an exact parallel is that in the position represen-
tation using spherical polars coordinates
c c
1 4π 4π
X˘1 “ ¯ ? r sin θ e˘iφ “ r Y1 ˘1 pθ, φq , X0 “ r cos θ “ r Y1 0 pθ, φq ,
2 3 3
(9.3.24)
which are angular momentum wavefunctions for l “ 1:
corresponds exactly to
ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙
L |1, qy|l, my “ L|1, qy |l, my ` |1, qy L|l, my , (9.3.27)
which is the usual action on product states for addition of angular momentum
for two subsystems. Use the same strategy as before:
9 TIME-DEPENDENT PERTURBATION THEORY 74
˛ note that
ˆ ˙
L` X1 |n l ly “ 0
ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙
L3 X1 |n l ly “ ~pl ` 1q X1 |n l ly . (9.3.28)
˛ Find orthogonal state to |l ` 1, ly and take this as the next top state |l, ly.
˛ Repeat procedure as before.
Then we find that Xq |n l my has angular momentum q. numbers
l ` 1 or l or l ´ 1 for L2 and
(9.3.31)
m`q for L3
Summary: the possible atomic transitions for dipole radiation are given by
l1 “ l ˘ 1
m1 “ m if ε3 ‰ 0 (9.3.33)
m1 “ m ˘ 1 if ε1 or ε2 ‰ 0
one mode of frequency ω0 for simplicity. By comparison with results in section 4 (on
the oscillator) and 3 (on Schrödinger and Heisenberg pictures) the electric field has a
Heisenberg picture operator for each polarization of the form (c.f. Eqn. (3.3.15))
|iy “ |n l my|N y
|f y “ |n1 l1 m1 y|N 1 y (9.4.2)
where N, N 1 are the number of photons or the oscillator level in the quantum version
for the field intensity which is N ~ω0 (ignoring the oscillator zero-point energy). As
before have two possible processes corresponding to time-dependent factors
Thus for general atomic energy levels Ei ą Ej and EM radiation of frequency ω0 have
transitions when Ei ´ Ej “ ˘~ω0 .
10 QUANTUM BASICS 76
Ei
absorption emission
Ej
loAomoon `
iÑj BiÑj ¨ pintensityq
looooooooomooooooooon or B jÑi ¨ pintensityq
looooooooomooooooooon
spontaneous stimulated spontaneous (9.4.5)
The quantities above are called the Einstein A and B coefficients. (There is a nice
original treatment using thermal equilibrium, the Boltzmann distribution for atomic
excitations and the Bose-Einstein distribution appropriate for indistinguishable pho-
tons.) Always have BiÑj “ BjÑi . Also, with intensity measured in natural units of
photon number then have
AiÑj “ BiÑj “ BjÑi . (9.4.6)
Stimulated emission is the basis of operation of the laser.
‹ END OF NON-EXAMINABLE MATERIAL
10 Quantum Basics
There are many aspects of QM which still seem rather mysterious, particularly in
relation to measurements and how they have been axiomatized. For example,
The main aim of this last section is to see how such questions may be addressed, and we
will also look briefly at some loosely related topics to do with information in classical
and quantum systems.
10 QUANTUM BASICS 77
‚ In QM, s becomes an operator with eigenstates |0y and |1y corresponding to observed
values. The general normalized state of the system is
It would seem that a qubit contains vastly more information than a classical bit, but
we must beware: the information is not easily accessed.
‚ In QM, measuring s irrevocably changes |ψy since it is projected onto |0y or |1y in
the process. We could recover the values of |α|2 and |β|2 to some degree of accuracy
if we had a large number of copies of |ψy, by measuring s many times. This raises
the question of whether we can faithfully copy some given state |ψy in a quantum
system. It turns out that this is forbidden by the
No-cloning Theorem.
We must be careful about what we mean. I can prepare an ensemble of systems each of
which is in the given state |ψy. For example, use a Stern-Gerlach apparatus to produce
a beam (the ensemble) of spin- 12 particles each with eigenvalue of σz “ 1: a “spin up”
state. Then clearly I have a lot of systems (i.e. the particles) in state
|ψy “ | Òy , (10.1.2)
¨ ˛ evals
cos 2θ
| Ò θy “ cos 2θ | Òy ` sin 2θ | Óy ù ˝ ‚ `1
θ
sin 2
(10.1.4)
¨ ˛
´ sin 2θ
| Ó θy “ ´ sin 2θ | Òy ` cos 2θ | Óy ù ˝ ‚ ´1
θ
cos 2
10 QUANTUM BASICS 78
θ
|α|2 “ |xÒ θ| Òy|2 “ cos 2
2
2 2 2θ
|β| “ |xÓ θ| Òy| “ sin
2
θ θ
xσθ y “ cos 2 ´ sin 2 “ cos θ . (10.1.6)
2 2
So if I have an ensemble prepared in this way, there is no problem in interrogating the
ensemble to find detailed properties of the state |ψy. However, this is the only way I
can do it – I need an ensemble over which to average.
Suppose now that have access to just one system prepared in the state |ψy. For example,
I have one particle taken from my original ensemble. Can I now clone this state and
generate an ensemble like the one we just discussed? Can I take one particle from the
Stern-Gerlach apparatus, clone it many times and then deduce properties of |ψy from
the resulting ensemble? The no-cloning theorem states that this is not possible.
There are various versions of the theorem depending on assumptions and we will look
at the simplest. Suppose we have a quantum copier; a machine that can copy any
given state |ψy onto a ‘blank state’ |by. We assume all states are normalized and that
the copying is implemented by a linear, unitary, operator, U . Note that U must be
independent of |ψy since it must be able to copy any state.
U
|ψy b |by ÝÑ |ψy b |ψy . (10.1.7)
U
|φy b |by ÝÑ |φy b |φy . (10.1.8)
xφ|ψyxb|by “ xφ|ψyxφ|ψy
ñ xφ|ψy “ 0 or 1 . (10.1.9)
This shows that copying can never work for general states in a space with dimen-
sion ą 1. This is a vital result for the success of the quantum encryption algorithm
where it is central to the idea that the encryption key for a classical algorithm can
be transmitted in such a way that a spy cannot intercept the message and decode it.
Interception irrevocably destroys the information and the interception is known to the
sender/receiver.
10 QUANTUM BASICS 79
These results clearly depend on the angle between k̂ and n defined earlier. Also, for a
component along a new direction φ we have
ˆ ˙
2 2 2 θ´φ
|xÒ θ| Ò φy| “ |xÓ θ| Ó φy| “ cos
2
ˆ ˙
2 2 2 θ´φ
|xÒ θ| Ó φy| “ |xÓ θ| Ò φy| “ sin . (10.2.4)
2
Now return to the two particle system |ψy and note that the spin-0 state is
ˆ ˙
1
|ψy “ ? | Òy| Óy ´ | Óy| Òy
2
ˆ ˙
1
“ ? | Ò θy| Ó θy ´ | Ó θy| Ò θy . (10.2.5)
2
This can be checked directly but also follows because spin-0 is a rotationally invariant
state – it cannot depend on the choice of the z-axis.
We want to consider probabilities for various outcomes when
E.g.,
Also, know components along same direction are exactly anticorrelated. So, e.g.
sA A A
z , sθ , sφ and sB B B
z , sθ , sφ (10.2.10)
for each particle, all taking values ˘1 according to some probability distribution, with
values assigned as the particles are created (c.f. the classical red and green ball discus-
sion), yet still reproducing the QM results?
10 QUANTUM BASICS 81
‚ Then, summing over variables that are not specified, we can write
P psA A
θ “ `1,sφ “ ´1q
“ P psA A
z “ `1, sθ “ `1q ` P psA A
z “ ´1, sφ “ ´1q (10.2.11)
‚ Specifying outcomes in terms of one measurement for A and one for B instead (using
exact anticorrelation) we get
P psA B A B A B
θ “ `1, sφ “ `1q ď P psz “ `1, sθ “ ´1q ` P psz “ ´1, sφ “ `1q . (10.2.12)
‚ Can such a probability distribution reproduce the results of QM? If so, then the
expressions derived for the QM probabilities above must satisfy Bell’s inequality.
This means ˆ ˙
2 θ´φ θ φ
sin ď cos 2 ` cos 2 (10.2.13)
2 2 2
for any θ and φ. But this is false. E.g., θ “ 3π{4, φ “ 3π{2 with this inequality
would imply
ˆ ˙
2 3π 2 3π 3π
´ cos ´ sin ď cos 2
8 8
looooooooooooomooooooooooooon 4
cos 3π{4
1 1
ñ ? ď FALSE! (10.2.14)
2 2
The fact that this approach cannot reproduce QM means that we can distinguish these
alternatives experimentally, and it is QM which is correct. With these assumptions,
the indeterminate nature of the quantum state (no definite values of observables until
measurement is made) seems inescapable. There is a non-locality to the notion of
collapse of the wavefunction.
‚ Need a general formalism to handle this. Useful in e.g., statistical mechanics where
‘hidden’ degrees of freedom are all the fine details of the system which are not of
interest. I.e., we care about pressure, temperature etc. but not the dynamics of
individual particles.
V “ U b W (10.3.1)
where U is observed but W is the hidden/unobserved sector. The general state is then
ÿ
|Ψy “ αia |ψi y b |φa y , (10.3.2)
ia
with t|ψi yu and t|φa yu orthonormal bases for U and W , respectively. Assume
ÿ
k|Ψyk2 “ |αia |2 “ 1. (10.3.3)
ia
What we really mean by distinction between U and W is that observables Q act just
on U , i.e. Q acts on V as the operator Q b I. Then
ÿÿ
˚
xQyΨ “ αjb αia xψj |Q|ψi y loomoon
xφb |φa y
ia j b
δab
ÿ
“ βij xψj |Q|ψi y . (10.3.4)
ij
ÿ
˚
The matrix βij “ αia αja is hermitian and positive-definite, and
a
ÿ ÿ
βii “ Trpβq “ |αia |2 “ 1 : trace or sum of eigenvalues . (10.3.5)
i ia
‚ Working just with U , the effect of the hidden sector W is to produce a probability
distribution tpi u for a particular set of states |χi y in the observed sector.
‚ If there is only one non-zero probability we say we have a pure state for U and |Ψy
can then be written as a single tensor product
‚ If there is more than one non-zero probability we say we have a mixed state for U ,
and |Ψy cannot be written as a single tensor product. In this case we also say that
we have an entangled state of the subsystems U and W .
We can express all aspects of measurements in terms of traces of operators rather than
inner-products of states. So, with notation as before,
on V “ U b W
define ρ “ |ΨyxΨ| , the density operator corresponding to |Ψy .
(10.3.11)
Then
ÿ ÿ ˆ ˙
xQyΨ “ xΨ|Q|Ψy “ xΨ|nyxn|Q|Ψy “ xn| Q|ΨyxΨ| |ny “ Tr V pQ ρq (10.3.12)
n n
To show this choose t|nyu “ t|χi yu as the basis to evaluate the trace. Then
ÿ ÿ
Tr U pQ ρ̄q “ xχj |Q|χi y looomooon
xχi |ρ̄|χj y “ pi x|Q|yχi “ xQy . (10.3.15)
i,j i
pi δij
‚ Provided the states |χi y obey the time-dependent Schrödinger equation with Hamil-
tonian H, the EoM for ρptq is (see Q4.8(a))
d
i~ ρ “ rH, ρs . (10.3.16)
dt