J.J.Sakurai
RevisedEdition
/./. Sakurai
University
Reading,Massachusetts MenloPark, California New York DonMills,Ontario Wokingham, England Amsterdam Bonn Sydney SingaporeTokyo Madrid San Juan Milan Paris
\342\200\242 \342\200\242 \342\200\242 \342\200\242 \342\200\242 \342\200\242 \342\200\242 \342\200\242 \342\200\242 \342\200\242 \342\200\242
Willcutt
Manager:Roy Logan
Library
of Congress CataloginginPublication
Data
J.J.
J.J.
; San
Fu Tuan,
editor.\342\200\224
and index. Includes bibliographical references ISBN 0201539292 Quantum theory. Tuan, San Fu, 1932
1994 QC174.12.S25
530.1'2\342\200\224dc20
1.
I.
. II. itle. T
9317803
CIP
\302\251
1994 by
AddisonWesley Publishing
Company,
stored in publication may system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America.
Inc. be reproduced,
5 6 7 8 9 1OMA9695
Foreword
welcomeguest here at CERN,for he was one of those rare theorists to whom the experimental facts are even more interesting than the theoretical game itself. Nevertheless, he delighted in theoretical physicsand in its teaching, a subject on which he held strong opinions.He thought that much theoretical physicsteaching was both too narrow and too remote from application: \"...we a number of sophistisee yet uneducated, theoreticians who are conversant in the LSZ forformalism of the Heisenberg field operators, ut do not know why an excited b atom radiates, or are ignorant of the quantum theoretic derivation of Rayleigh's law that accounts for the bluenessof the sky.\" And he insisted that the student must be able to usewhat has beentaught: \"Thereaderwho h has read the book but cannot do the exercises as learned nothing.\" Heput these principles work in his fine book Advanced Quantum to Mechanics A967) and in Invariance Principles and Elementary Particles A964), both of which have beenvery much usedin the CERNlibrary. This new book, Modern Quantum Mechanics,should be used even more, by a larger and less specialized group. The book combinesbreadth of interest with a thorough practicality. Its readerswill find here what they need to know, with a sustained and successfuleffort to make it intelligible. J.J. Sakurai'ssuddendeath on November 1982 this book left unfinished. Reinhold Bertlmann and I helped Mrs. Sakurai sort out her husband'spapers at CERN.Among them we found a rough, handwritten version of most of the bookand a large collectionof exercises. Though only three chaptershad beencompletelyfinished, it was clear that the bulk of the creative work had beendone.It was also clear that much work remained to fill in gaps,polishthe writing, and put the manuscript in order. That the bookis now finished is due to the determinationof Noriko Sakurai and the dedication of San Fu Tuan. Upon her husband'sdeath, Mrs. Sakurai resolved immediately that his last effort should not go to waste.With great courage and dignity shebecamethe driving force behind the project, overcoming all obstacles and setting the high standards to be maintained. San Fu Tuan willingly gave his time and energy to the editing to work. Perhaps only others close the hectic and completion of Sakurai's field of highenergy theoretical physicscan fully appreciate the sacrifice involved. For me personally, J.J. had long been far more than just a particuIt distinguished colleague. saddensme that we will never again laugh at physicsand physicists and life in general, and that he will not together seethe successf his last work. But I am happy that it has beenbrought to o
sophisticated,
1,
particularly
fruition.
for
this
i projects to
text.
a number of texts on quantum mechanics in this country. Professor RogerNewton of Indiana University contributed refinements on lifetime broadeningin Stark effect, additional explanations of phase shifts at resT a resonances, the optical theorem, nd on nonnormalizablestate. hese appear P note\" in the revised edition. roas \"remarks by the editor\" or \"editor's Thomas Fulton of the JohnsHopkinsUniversity reworkedhis CouProfessor so 7.13) that it now appears as a Scattering contribution (Section w shortertext portion emphasizingthe physics, ith the mathematical details to relegated AppendixC. Though not a major part of the text, some additions were deemed in necessaryto take into account developments quantum mechanics that To have becomerominent since November 1982. this end, two supp I are includedat the end of the text.Supplement is on adiabatic supplements and geometrical phase (popularized M. V. Berry since 1983) by change and is actually an English translation of the supplementon this subject version of Modern written by ProfessorAkio Sakurai for the Japanese Mechanicscopyright YoshiokaShotenublishing of Kyoto). Quantum P ( II h Supplement is on nonexponential decayswritten by my colleague ere, ProfessorXerxesTata, and read over by ProfessorE.C.G.Sudarshanof the University of Texast Austin. Though nonexponential decayshave a a long history theoretically, experimental work on transition rates that tests Introduction of additional indirectly such decayswas done only in 1990. material is of coursea subjective matter on the part of the Editor; the w Thanks to Proreadersill evaluate for themselves its appropriateness. Akio Sakurai,the revisededition has been \"finely toothcombed\" Professor for misprint errors the first ten printings of the original edition. My of ProfessorSandipPakvasa, provided overall guidance and encolleague, this process revision. of encouragement to me throughout
Coulomb
1,
\302\251
IV
Preface
computer graphic assisThe Department of Physics and Astronomy and particularly the High Energy PhysicsGroupof the University of Hawaii at Manoa provided again both the facilities and a conducive atmospherefor me to carry out I wish to express y gratitude to Physics (and my editorial task. Finally m SeniorEditor, Stuart Johnson,and his Editorial Assistant, sponsoring) P Jennifer Duggan,as well as Senior roduction Coordinator Amy Willcutt, of AddisonWesleyfor their encouragement and optimism that the revised edition will indeed materialize.
term
assistance.
In addition to the acknowledgments above, my former studentsLi Shi Xiaohong,and Yasunaga Suzuki provided the sounding board Ping, for ideas on the revisededition when taking my graduate quantum methe spring of Suzuki mechanics course the University of Hawaii during at of the initial translation from Japanese Supplement as a course provided
1992. I
J.J. Sakurai19331982
VI
In Memoriam
Jun
John Sakuraiwas born in 1933 Tokyo and came to the United States in as a high schoolstudent in 1949. studied at Harvard and at Cornell, He i where he received his Ph.D.n 1958. was then appointed assistant He of Physics at the University of Chicago, and became a full professor when he moved to the He professorin 1964. stayed at Chicago until 1970 of California at LosAngeles,where he remained until his death. University of a During his lifetimehe wrote 119rticles in theoreticalphysics elementary as well as several books and monographs on both quantum and particles particle theory. The disciplineof theoretical physicshas as its principal aim the formulation of theoreticaldescriptionsf the physicalworld that are at once o conciseand comprehensive. Becausenature is subtle and complex, the pursuit of theoretical physics requiresbold and enthusiastic ventures to the frontiers of newly discoveredphenomena. This is an area in which Sakurai reigned supremewith his uncanny physical insight and intuition and also his ability to explain these phenomena in illuminating physical terms to the One on unsophisticated. has but to read his very lucid textbooks Invariance and Elementary Particles and Advanced Quantum Mechanicsas Principles well as his reviewsand summer schoollectures to appreciate this. Without I could say that much of what I did understand in particle exaggeration physicscame from these and from his articles and private tutoring. When Sakurai was still a graduate student, he proposed what is now known as the VA theory of weak interactions, independently of (and simultaneously with) Richard Feynman, Murray GellMann, Robert in I he S Marshak,and George udarshan.n 1960 published Annals of Physics a propheticpaper,probably his singlemost important one.It was concerned with the first seriousattempt to construct a theory of strong interactions based on Abelian and nonAbelian (YangMills)gauge invariance. This seminal work inducedtheorists to attempt an understanding of the mechaof massgeneration for gauge(vector)fields,now realizedas the Higgs mechanism.Above all it stimulated the search for a realistic unification of forces under the gauge principle, now crowned with successin the celcelebrated GlashowWeinbergSalam of weak and electromagnetic unification forces. On the phenomenological side, Sakurai pursued and vigorously advocated the vector mesons dominancemodel of hadron dynamics.He was the first to discussthe mixing of o) and meson states.Indeed,he made numerous important contributions to particle physics phenomenologyin a
mechanisms
<f>
Vll
Vlll
In Memoriam
activities.
I knew Jun John for more than 25 years, and I had the greatest admiration not only for his immense powersas a theoretical physicist but also for the warmth and generosityof his spirit.Though a graduate student himself at Cornellduring 19571958, time from his own pioneering he took researchin Knucleon dispersion relations to help me (via extensivecorreB with my Ph.D.thesis on the same subject at Berkeley. oth correspondence) with one of his last Sandip Pakvasa and I were privilegedto be associated once more his papers on weak couplings of heavy quarks, which displayed infectious and intuitive style of doing physics. t is of coursegratifying to us I in retrospect that Jun John counted this paper among the score of his publishedworksthat he particularly enjoyed. The physicscommunity suffered a great loss at Jun John Sakurai's I death. The personal senseof loss is a severe one for me.Hence am to edit and complete his manuscript thankful for the opportunity profoundly for on Modern Quantum Mechanics publication.In my faith no greater gift can be given me than an opportunity to show my respectand love for Jun John through meaningful service.
San Fu
Tuan
Contents
Foreword Preface In Memoriam
iii
iv
vii
1 FUNDAMENTALCONCEPTS
1.1The SternGerlach xperiment E 1.2 Kets,Bras,and Operators 1.3BaseKetsand Matrix Representations 1.4 Measurements, and Observables, the Uncertainty Relations 1.5Change of Basis
1.6 Position, Momentum,
1.7 Wave
Problems
and Translation Functions in Positionand Momentum Space
1 10
2
17
23 36
41
60 68 68 80 89
51
2 QUANTUM DYNAMICS 2.1 Time Evolution and the SchrodingerEquation P 2.2 The Schrodinger Versus the Heisenberg icture 2.3 SimpleHarmonicOscillator
109 123
143
97
3 THEORYOF ANGULAR MOMENTUM Rotations and Angular Momentum Commutation Relations 3.2 Spin1/2Systemsand Finite Rotations 3.3 SOC), UB),nd Euler Rotations a S 3.4 Density Operatorsand Pure VersusMixedEnsembles 3.5 Eigenvaluesand Eigenstatesof Angular Momentum 3.6 Orbital Angular Momentum 3.7 Addition of Angular Momenta 3.8 Schwinger's scillatorModelof Angular Momentum O 3.9 SpinCorrelationMeasurementsand BelPsInequality
3.1
168
187
203
195
217
223 232 242 248 248
4 SYMMETRY QUANTUMMECHANICS IN 4.1 Symmetries,ConservationLaws,and Degeneracies 4.2 Discrete Symmetries,Parity, or SpaceInversion 4.3 Lattice Translation as a Discrete Symmetry 4.4 The TimeReversalDiscrete Symmetry
251
266 282
IX
261
Problems
Contents
5 APPROXIMATION METHODS
5.1TimeIndependent Perturbation
C Nondegenerate ase Perturbation Theory: TimeIndependent The Degenerate ase C A Hydrogenlike toms: Fine Structure and the Zeeman Effect Variational Methods Potentials:The Interaction Picture TimeDependent Perturbation Theory TimeDependent to Interactions with the Classical Applications Radiation Field
Energy
Shift
313 316
325 335
5.8
Problems
341
345 357 357
PARTICLES 6 IDENTICAL 6.1 Permutation Symmetry 6.2 Symmetrization Postulate 6.3 TwoElectronSystem 6.4 The Helium Atom 6.5 Permutation Symmetry and Problems
7
361
363 366 370
377
Young
Tableaux
SCATTERING THEORY
The Born Approximation OpticalTheorem Eikonal Approximation FreeParticle Plane Waves Versus Spherical aves States: W Methodof Partial Waves LowEnergyScatteringand Bound States Resonance Scattering IdenticalParticlesand Scattering 7.10 in Symmetry Considerations Scattering 7.11 Formulation of Scattering TimeDependent 7.12 InelasticElectronAtomScattering 7.13 Coulomb Scattering
410 418
421
422 424 429 434
Problems
441
446 456 458 464
Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C SupplementI Adiabatic Change and Geometrical Phase SupplementIINonExponential Decays Bibliography
481
487
Index
491
Modern QuantumMechanics
CHAPTER1
FundamentalConcepts
The revolutionary change in our understanding of microscopichenomena p the first 27 years of the twentieth century is that took place during in Not unprecedented the history of natural sciences. only did we witness severe limitations in the validity of classicalphysics, but we found the alternative theory that replacedthe classicalphysical theories to be far richer in scopend far richer in its range of applicability. a The most traditional way to begin a study of quantum mechanicsis radiation law, the Einsteinto follow the historical developments\342\200\224Planck's matter waves, Debye theory of specificheats, the Bohr atom, de Broglie's with careful analyses of some key experimentssuch and so forth\342\200\224together as the Compton effect, the FranckHertz experiment, and the Davissonexperirtient. In that way we may come to appreciate how GermerThompson the physicistsin the first quarter of the twentieth century were forced to of abandon, little by little, the cherishedconcepts classical hysicsand how, p despiteearlier false starts and wrong turns, the great masters\342\200\224Heisenberg, in a succeeded formulating Schrodinger, nd Dirac, among quantum mechanicsas we know it today. However, we do not follow the historical approach in this book. Instead,we start with an example that illustrates, perhapsmore than any other example,the inadequacy of classical oncepts a fundamental way. in c We hope that by exposing reader to a \"shock the treatment\" at the onset, he
others\342\200\224finally
Fundamental
Concepts
or she may be attuned to what we might call the \"quantummechanical ay w of thinking\" at a very early stage.
which
atoms are heated in an oven.The ovenhas a small hole through which some of the silver atoms escape. shown in Figure As the beam goesthrough a collimator and is then subjectedto an inhomogeneous magnetic field o producedby a pair of polepieces, ne of which has a very sharp edge. We must now work out the effectof the magnetic field on the silver atoms. For our purposethe following oversimplifiedmodel of the silver atom suffices.The silver atom is made up of a nucleus and 47 electrons, where 46 out of the 47 electronscan be visualizedas forming a spherically symmetrical electroncloud with no net angular momentum. If we ignore the nuclear spin,which is irrelevant to our discussion, see we that the atom as a whole does have an angular momentum, which is due solely to the intrinsic as opposedto orbital\342\200\224angular momentum of the single 47th Es) electron. 47 electrons are attached to the nucleus, which is ~ 2x105 The times heavier than the electron; as a result, the heavy atom as a whole possessesa magnetic moment equal to the spin magnetic moment of the I 47th electron.n other words, the magnetic moment of the atom is
of Description the Experiment We now presenta brief discussion the SternGerlachxperiment, of e is discussed almost any bookon modern physics.* in First, silver (Ag)
1.1,
spin\342\200\224
i
* For an
elementary
but enlightening
seeFrench
43238).
Experiment
zaxis
Beam direction
Oven
To detector
B field
Shaped .
magnet
Collimating Slit
FIGURE
(polepieces)
A.1.1)
preciseroportionalityfactor turns out to be e/mec(e < 0 in this p book)to an accuracy of about 0.2%. Becausethe interaction energy of the magnetic moment with the t magnetic field is just iB,he zcomponent of the force experiencedy b the atom is given by
\342\200\224
A.1.2)
where we have ignored the components of B in directions other than the zdirection. ecausethe atom as a whole is very heavy, we expectthat the B classical onceptof trajectorycan be legitimately applied,a point which can c be justified using the Heisenberg uncertainty principle to be derived later. With the arrangement of Figure 1.1, ju,z > 0 (Sz< 0) atom experiences a the downward force, while the ju,z < 0 (Sz>0)tom experiences n upward a a force. The beam is then expected get split according to the values of ju,z. to In other words,the SG (SternGerlach) apparatus \"measures\" the zcompozcomponent
of or, equivalently, the zcomponent of S up to a proportionality factor. The atoms in the oven are randomly oriented; there is no preferred direction for the orientation of p,. If the electron were like a classical spinning object,we would expectall valuesof ju,z to be realizedbetween T and x. his would lead us to expecta continuous bundle of beams out of the SG apparatus, as shown in Figure 1.2a. Instead,what we coming
\342\200\224
i
i
Fundamental
Concepts
Screen
Screen
FIGURE
B 1.2. eams
(a)
from
(b)
from
is actually observed.
In other experimentally observe is more like the situation in Figure words,the SG apparatus splitsthe original silver beam from the oven into two distinct components, a phenomenon referred to in the early days of To the extent that can be quantum theory as \"spacequantization.\" identified within a proportionality factor with the electron spin S, only two possiblevalues of the zcomponentof S are observed to be possible,Sz up and Sz down, which we call Sz + and Sz The two possiblevalues of Sz are multiples of somefundamental unit of angular momentum; numerically it turns out that Sz = h /2 and h /2,where 27 h= 1.0546X10
1.2b. i
\342\200\224.
\342\200\224
*\"ergs
A.1.3)
of the electron spin angular momentum is the first feature we deducefrom the SternGerlachxperiment. important e t Of course,here is nothing sacredabout the updown directionor the zaxis. e could just as well have applied an inhomogeneous field in a W in horizontal direction, say in the jcdirection, ith the beam proceeding the w I the ^direction. n this manner we could have separated beam from the oven into an Sx + component and an S component.
\342\200\224
Sequential SternGerlachExperiments Let us now considera sequential SternGerlachxperiment. By this e we mean that the atomicbeam goesthrough two or more SG apparatusesn i The sequence. first arrangement we consideris relatively straightforward. We subjectthe beam coming out of the oven to the arrangement shown in where SGz stands for an apparatus with the inhomogeneous Figure 1.3a, magnetic field in the zdirection,as usual. We then blockthe Sz compo\342\200\224
Experiment
S2+comp. S2comp.
(a)
S2+comp. No S2comp.
S2+beam.
Oven
SGz
V\\
SGx
Sx+beam.
 beam.
(b)
Sxbeam.
Sz+beam.
Oven
Sx+beam.
SGz Szbeam.
FIGURE
Sz+beam. Szbeam.
Sxbeam.
(c)
SternGerlach experiments.
1.3.equential S
first
the Sz + one beam component coming out of the second This is perhapsnot so surprising; after all if the atom spinsare component.
apparatus\342\200\224just
remaining
there is only
that
Sz +
spinsbetweenthe first and the secondSGzapparatuses. A little more interesting is the arrangement shown in Figure 1.3b. Herethe first SGapparatus is the same as before but the secondone (SGx) has an inhomogeneous magnetic field in the ^direction.The Sz + beam that entersthe second i apparatus (SGx)s now split into two components,an + componentand an Sx component, with equal intensities.How can Sx we explain this? Does mean that 50% of the atoms in the Sz + beam it out of the first apparatus (SGz)are made up of atoms characterized coming by both Sz + and Sx +,while the remaining 50%have both Sz + and Sx ? It turns out that such a picture runs into difficulty, as will be shown below. We now considera third step, the arrangement shown in Figure
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
up, the
they
any
external field
rotates
which 1.3(c), most dramatically illustrates the peculiarities of quantummechanical systems.This time we add to the arrangement of Figure 1.3b yet a third apparatus, of the SGz type. It is observed experimentallythat two componentsemerge from the third apparatus, not one; the emerging beams are seento have both an Sz + component and an Sz component. This is a completesurprisebecauseafter the atoms emerged from the first
\342\200\224
Fundamental
Concepts
apparatus, we made sure that the Sz component was completelyblocked. Howis it possible the Sz componentwhich, we thought, weeliminated that earlier reappears? The model in which the atoms entering the third apparaare visualizedto have both Sz + and Sx + is clearly unsatisfactory. This example is often used to illustrate that in quantum mechanics we cannot determineboth Sz and Sx simultaneously.Moreprecisely, can we say that the selectionof the Sx+ beam by the secondapparatus (SGx) completely destroysany previous information about Sz. It is amusing to compare this situation with that of a spinning top in classicalmechanics, where the angular momentum
\342\200\224
apparatus
L = /co
A.1.4)
can be measuredby determining the components of the angularvelocity vector to. By observinghow fast the object is spinning in which directionwe can determine cox, coy, and coz simultaneously. The moment of inertia / is computable if we know the mass density and the geometric shape of the spinning top, so there is no difficulty in specifyingboth Lz and Lx in this classicalsituation. It is to be clearly understood that the limitation we have encountered in determining Sz and Sx is not due to the incompetence of the experiexperimentalist. By improving the experimentaltechniques we cannot make the disappear.The Sz component out of the third apparatus in Figure 1.3c us by the experiment of quantum mechanicsare imposed upon peculiarities itself. The limitation is, in fact, inherent in microscopichenomena. p
\342\200\224
Analogy
with
Polarizationof Light
Becausethis situation looksso novel, some analogy with a familiar classicalsituation may be helpful here.To this end we now digressto considerthe polarization of light waves. Considera monochromaticlight wave propagating in the zdirection.
A linearly
the .xdirection,which we call for short an xpolarizedlight, has a spacetime field dependentelectric oscillatingin the ^direction
with
a polarization vector in
E = E0xcos(kzcot).
A.1.5
Likewise,we may considera ^polarizedlight, also propagating in the zdirection, E = Eoy cos( z k
 cot).
90\302\260
A.1.6
Polarized light beamsof type A.1.5) r A.1.6) an be obtained by letting an c o unpolarized light beam go through a Polaroid filter. We call a filter that selectsonly beams polarized in the xdirection an xfilter. An jcfilter, of b a about the propagation (z) course, ecomes yfilter when rotated by
Experiment
No
beam
No light
x filter
/filter (a)
100%
x filter
D5\302\260
y filter
FIGURE
1.4. Light
filters.
direction.t is well known that when we let a light beam go through an I xfilter and subsequently let it impinge on a j>filter, no light beam comes out provided,of course,we are dealing with 100% efficient Polaroids;see Figure 1.4a. The situation is evenmore interesting if we insert between the xfilter and the jyfilter yet another Polaroid that selectsonly a beam polarized in makesan angle of the direction\342\200\224which we call the x 'direction\342\200\224that in This 1.4b. time, there is a with the xdirection the xy plane; see Figure beam coming out of the j>filter despitethe fact that right after the light beam went through the jcfilter it did not have any polarization component in the ^direction. other words,once the x'filter intervenesand selects In the .x'polarized beam, it is immaterial whether the beam was previously The selectionof the x'polarized beam by the secondPolaroid xpolarized. information on light polarization. Notice that this destroys any previous situation is quite analogousto the situation that we encounteredearlier with the SG arrangement of Figure 1.3b, provided that the following correspon45\302\260 correspondence
is made:
Sz
\302\261
A.1.7)
Sx\302\261
where the x'and the j>'axesre definedas in Figure a Let us examine how we can quantitatively describethe behavior of beams(x'and y 'polarized 45\302\260polarized beams)within the framework of
1.5.
Fundamental
Concepts
\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\
\\ \\ \\ \\
FIGURE
1.5.Orientations
of the
xf and
y'axes.
1.5 obtain we
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
\342\200\224
v2
cot)
\342\200\224
E0y'cos(kzcot) = Eo
\342\200\224
v/2
xcos(kz cot)+=rycos(kz
cot)
A.1.8
1.4b
In the triplefilter arrangement of Figure the beam coming out of the first Polaroid is an xpolarized beam, which can be regardedas a linear combination of an x'polarized beam.The second beam and a y 'polarized Polaroid selectsthe x 'polarized beam, which can in turn be regardedas a linear combination of an xpolarized and a ^polarized beam.And finally, the third Polaroid selects ypolarizedcomponent. the from the sequential SternGerlach A Applying correspondence .1.7) to the triplefilter experiment of Figure experiment of Figure that suggests we might be able to represent the spin state of a silver atom by some kind of vector in a new kind of twodimensionalvector space, an abstract vector space not to be confused with the usual twodimensional Just a (xy) space. as x and y in A.1.8) re the basevectors usedto decompose the polarization vector of the x'polarizedlight, it is reasonableto represent the Sx + state by a vector, which we call a ket in the Dirac notation to be developedfully in the next section. e denote this vector by W
1.3c,
1.4b
x'
Experiment
+) and write it as a linear combination of two base vectors, + ) and \\SZ; ), which correspond the Sz + and the Sz states, respectively. to So we may conjecture
\\SZ\\
\342\200\224
The next question of immediate concern is, How are we going to representthe Sy states? Symmetry arguments suggest that if we observe an Sz beam going in the xdirection and subject it to an SGyapparatus, the resulting situation will be very similar to the casewhere an Sz beam is to T going in the ^direction subjected an SGxapparatus. he ketsfor Sv shouldthen be regardedas a linear combination of \\SZ; ), but it appears that from A.1.9) we have already used up the available possibilities in How can our vector space formalism distinguish writing states from SY + states? An analogy with polarized light again rescues here. his time we us T consider a circularly polarized beam of light, which can be obtained by letting a linearly polarized light passthrough a quarterwaveplate.When we pass such a circularly polarized light through an jcfilter or a j>filter, we beam or a jypolarizedbeam of equal again obtain either an xpolarized intensity. Yet everybody knows that the circularlypolarized light is totally different from the 45\302\260linearly polarized (x'polarizedy 'polarized) or light. Mathematically, how do we representa circularlypolarized light? A right circularly polarized light is nothing more than a linear combinationof an xpolarizedlight and a j>polarizedlight, where the oscillation of the electric for the j>polarized field out of phasewith that of component is
\302\261 \302\261 \302\261 \302\261 \302\261
from emerge
analogy with using the general formalism of quantum mechanics. Thus the unblocked component coming out of the second(SGJc) is of apparatus of Figure 1.3c to be regardedas a superposition Sz + and in the sense of A.1.9a). for this reason that two components It is Sz
\342\200\224
in
A.1.9a) j=r\\Sz;+)+j= j\\Sz;+)+j=r\\Sz;) A.1.9b) \"> = > +>+ j=\\Sz\\ Later A.1.8). we will show how to obtain these expressions
\\SX\\
^;
the
third
(SGz)apparatus.
1^;+).
Sv\302\261
90\302\260
the
xpolarized component:*
\342\200\224
xcos(kz
\342\200\224=ycos
kz
\342\200\224
cot
\342\200\224
V \\
\342\202\254
Re(\342\202\254)
= E/Eo.
in the definition
A.1.11
of right versus left circularly
10
Fundamental
Concepts
Fora right
write
* i(kzut)
v/2
A.1.12
atoms:
Sv + atom Sv
Applying
\342\200\224
<>
right
atom
<>
A.1.13
we see this analogy to A.1.12), that if we are allowed to make the coefficientspreceding basekets complex,there is no difficulty in accommothe Sv atoms in our vector spaceformalism:
accommodating
\302\261
A.1.14
are obviously different from A.1.9). thus seethat the twodimenWe vector spaceneededto describethe spin states of silver atoms must be a complex vector space;an arbitrary vector in the vector spaceis written as a linear combinationof the basevectors \\SZ; + ) with, in general,complex coefficients.The fact that the necessity of complex numbers is already apparent in such an elementaryexample is rather remarkable. The reader must have noted by this time that we have deliberately avoided talking about photons.In other words, we have completelyignored the quantum aspectof light; nowheredid we mention the polarization states of individual photons.The analogy we worked out is between kets in an abstract vector spacethat describeshe spin states of individual atoms with t the polarization vectors of the classical lectromagneticield. Actually we e f could have made the analogy even more vivid by introducing the photon conceptand talking about the probability of finding a circularly polarized photon in a linearly polarized state, and so forth; however, that is not neededhere.Without doing so,we have already accomplished main goal the of this section:o introduce the idea that quantummechanicalstates are to t be represented vectorsin an abstract complexvector space.* by
which
twodimensional
1.2. KETS,BRAS,AND
In the
OPERATORS
precedingsection we showed how analyses of the SternGerlach I experiment lead us to considera complex vector space.n this and the
*The reader
careful
study
who is interested in grasping the basic concepts of quantum mechanics through of photon polarization may find Chapter 1 of Baym A969) extremely
illuminating.
11
following section we formulate the basic mathematics of vector spacesas used in quantum mechanics.Our notation throughout this book is the bra and ket notation developedby P.A. M. Dirac.The theory of linear vector had, of course,been known to mathematiciansprior to the birth of spaces has many quantum mechanics,but Dirac'say of introducing vector spaces w from the physicist's oint of view. advantages,especially p
Ket Space
We consider complexvector spacewhosedimensionality is specified a according to the nature of a physical system under consideration. In SternGerlachtypexperiments where the only quantummechanicaldee degree of freedom is the spin of an atom, the dimensionality is determined by the number of alternative paths the atoms can follow when subjected a to SG apparatus; in the case of the silver atoms of the previous section, the to values Sz can dimensionality is just two, corresponding the two possible assume.* Later, in Section 1.6, e consider the case of continuous w example, the position (coordinate) or momentum of a particle the number of alternatives is nondenumerably infinite, in which case the vector space in question is known as a Hilbert space after D. Hilbert, who studiedvector spacesin infinite dimensions. In quantum mechanicsa physical state, for example, a silver atom with a definite spin orientation, is represented a state vector in a complex by vector space. Following Dirac, we call such a vector a ket and denote it by This state ket is postulated to contain complete information about the physical state; everything we are allowed to ask about the state is contained in the ket. Two kets can be added:
spectra\342\200\224for
\342\200\224where
a).
A2.1)
The sum y) is just another ket. If we multiply \\a) by a complexnumber c, the resulting product c\\a) is another ket. The number c can stand on the left or on the right of a ket; it makesno difference:
c\\a)
In
= \\a)c.
A2.2)
the particular casewhere c is zero, the resulting ket is said to be a null ket. One of the physics postulates is that \\a) and with c=?0, the same physical state. In other words, only the \"direction\" in represent vectorspaceis of significance. athematiciansmay prefer to say that we are M here dealing with rays rather than vectors.
ca),
is *For many physical systems the dimension of the state space denumerably infinite. While t we will usually indicate a finite number of dimensions, /V, of the ket space,he results also hold infinite dimensions. for denumerably
12
An
Fundamental
Concepts
observable, such as momentum and spin components, can be by represented an operator, such as A, in the vector spacein question.Quite generally, an operator acts on a ket from the left,
A.2.3)
which
later.
multiplication
operations
In general, A\\a) is not a constant times However, there are o particular ketsof importance,known as eigenkets f operator A, denotedby
a).
\\a'),\\a\9\\a'\")9...")
with
A.2.4) A.2.5)
A
the property
the just reproduces same ket apart from a multiplicative number. The set of is more compactly denotedby {a'}, calledthe numbers {a\\a'\\ set of eigenvalues of operator A. When it becomesnecessaryto order a may be used in place eigenvaluesin a specificmanner, {a{l\\{2\\ a{3\\
...
A\\a')
= a'\\a')9A\\a\") = a\"\\a\9...")
to an eigenket
a'\",...},
of
The physical state corresponding an eigenket is called an eigento state. In the simplest aseof spin \\ systems,the eigenvalueeigenket c relation is as A.2.5) expressed
SZ\\SZ;
{a'9a\"9a'\"9...}.
...}
+) = f SZ; +>, z,
\\SZ'9
SZ\\SZ;
A.2.6)
where \\SZ; ) are eigenketsof operator Sz with eigenvalues Herewe + ) in conformity with the notation \\a'), couldhave usedjust \\h/2) for where an eigenket is labeledby its eigenvalue,but the notation \\SZ; +), already used in the previous section, is more convenient here becausewe alsoconsidereigenketsof Sx:
\302\261
\\S)
experiments.
A.2.7)
We remarked earlier that the dimensionality of the vector spaceis determined by the number of alternatives in SternGerlachtype xperie More formally, we are concernedwith an TVdimensional vector spacespannedby the TV eigenkets of observable A. Any arbitrary ket \\a) can be written as
a'
with
A.2.8)
a\\ up to a(N\\ where ca, is a complex coefficient.The question of the uniqueness f such an expansionwill be postponed o until we prove the of eigenkets. orthogonality
a\",...
13
The vector spacewe have been dealing with is a ket space. now We introduce the notion of a bra space,a vector space\"dual to\" the ket space. We postulate that correspondingto every ket \\a) there existsa bra, denoted in this dual, or bra, space. The bra spaceis spannedby eigenbras by There is a onetoone {(a'\\]which correspondto the eigenkets b correspondenceetweena ket spaceand a bra space:
(a,
{#')}.
DC
\\a)
<>
(a\\
~ \\a'),\\a\9...") (a%(a\"\\9...
DC
DC
A.2.9)
where DC standsfor dual correspondence. w Roughly speaking, e can regard the bra spaceas somekind of mirror image of the ket space. The bra dual to c\\a) is postulated to be c*(a,not c(a\\, which is a very important point. More generally,we have
DC
written
define the inner product of a bra and a ket.* The product is as a bra standing on the left and a ket standing on the right, for example,
We now
<j8a>=\302\253j8)(a\302\273.
A.2.11
This product is, in general, a complex number. Notice that in forming an inner productwe always take one vector from the bra spaceand one vector
from the ket space. We postulate two fundamental
(C\\a)= (a\\p)*.
A.2.12)
In other words, (P\\ot) and (a\\fi) are complex conjugates of each other. Notice that even though the inner product is, in some sense,analogous to the familiar scalarproduct ab,(fi\\a) must be clearly distinguished from (ol\\P); the analogous distinction is not neededin real vector spacebecause ab is equal to ba.UsingA.2.12) e can immediately deducethat (a\\a) w must be a real number. To prove this just let (/?> (a\\.
* In the literature an inner product is often referred to as a scalar product because it is in analogous to ab in Euclidean space; this book, however, we reserve the term scalar for a space. quantity invariant under rotations in the usual threedimensional
Fundamental
Concepts
<aa>>0,
A.2.13)
where the equality sign holds only if \\a) is a null ket. This is sometimes known as the postulate of positive definite metric. From a physicist's point of view, this postulate is essential for the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics,as will become apparent later.* Two kets a)and /?) are said to be orthogonal if
<\302\253j3>
= 0,
A.2.14)
even though in the definition of the inner product the bra (a\\ appears.The a orthogonality relation A.2.14)lso implies,via A.2.12), Given a ket where
which
a),
with
the property
(aa)=l.
a
A.2.17)
Quite generally, ]/(ot\\a) is known as the norm of analogous to the Because and magnitude of vector /aa = in Euclideanvector space. \\a) representthe same physical state, we might as well require that the kets c\\a) we use for physical states be normalized in the senseof A.2.17).*
a),
Operators
components
we remarked earlier, observableslike momentum and spin comare to be represented operators that can act on kets. We can by considera more general class of operators that act on kets; they will be denotedby X, 7, and so forth, while A, B, and so on will be used for a restrictive classof operators that correspond observables. to An operator acts on a ket from the left side,
As
= X(\\a)) X\\a),
and the resulting product is another ket. OperatorsX and equal,
Y
A.2.18)
are said to be
X=Y9
shall not
A.2.19)
*Attempts to abandon this postulate led to physical theories with \"indefinite metric.\" We be concerned with such theories in this book. f For eigenkets of observables with continuous spectra, different normalization conventions will be used; seeSection
1.6.
15
= Y\\a)
A.2.20)
is said to be
for an arbitrary ket in the ket spacein question. Operator X we have the null operator if, for any arbitrary ket
X\\a)
= 0.
a),
A.2.21)
A.2.21a A.2.21b
A.2.22)
side
in the single exception of the timereversaloperator to be considered Chapter 4, the operators that appearin this book are all linear, that is,
right
((a\\)X=(a\\X,
A.2.23)
(a\\X
and the resulting product is another bra. The ket X\\a) and the bra are, in general, not dual to each other. We define the symbol X^ as
X\\a)
\302\253
(a\\XK
A.2.24)
if
X=X\\
Multiplication
A.2.25)
OperatorsX and
in
general, noncommutative,
is, XY*YX.
A.2.26) A.2.27)
also have
X(Y\\a))
= (XY)\\a)= XY\\a),
Noticethat
16
Fundamental
Concepts
because
XY\\a)
A.2.30)
)8)
there other products we are allowed to form? Let us (a,in that order.The resulting product

A.2.31)
We will emphasizein a is known as the outer product of p) and henceit is fundais moment that p)(a to be regarded as an operator; which is just a number. different from the inner product (pa), fundamentally There are also \"illegal products.\" e have already mentioned that W an operator must stand on the left of a ket or on the right of a bra. In other words, \\a)X and X(a\\ are examples of illegal products.They are neither P kets, nor bras, nor operators;they are simply nonsensical. roducts like
(a.
\\a)
and
/?) ((a\\
and
(/?)are ket
As is clearrom A.2.27), f multiplication operations among operators are associative.Actually the associativeproperty is postulated to hold quite generally as long as we are dealing with \"legal\" multiplications among kets, bras, and operators.Dirac calls this important postulate the associative axiom of multiplication. To illustrate the power of this axiom let us first consideran outer productacting on a ket:
(j8><a).Y>.
A.2.32)
A233)
of Because the associativeaxiom, we can regard this equally well as where (cc\\y) is just a number. So the outer product acting on a ket is just can another ket; in other words, j8)(a be regarded an operator.Because as are A.2.32)and A.2.33) equal, we may as well omit the dots and let stand acting j8)(ay) for the operator j8)(a on y) or, equivalently, the number (ay) multiplying /?).(On the other hand, if A.2.33)s written as i we ((ay))/J), cannot afford to omit the dot and bracketsbecausethe
in the book we will encounter products like which are more appropriately vector and /?) always refer to kets from different but in such cases a)\302\256/?), For spaces. instance, the first ket belongs to the vector spacefor electron spin, the second ket to for the vector space electron orbital angular momentum; or the first ket lies in the vector space of particle the second ket in the vector space particle 2, and so forth. of written
* Later
as
a)
a)K),
1,
Representations
17
expressionwould look illegal.) Notice that the operator rotates y) into the directionof /?).It is easy to see that if
/?)(a
X=\\P)(al
then
A.2.34) A.2.35)
X*=\\aXP\\,
which that
\302\253i8).(Jfa\302\273
bra
ket
bra might
ket
A.2.36)
Becausethe
notation
two
sidesare equal, we
A.2.37)
to stand for either sideof A.2.36). Recall now dual to X\\a), so
that (a\\X^
A.2.38)
addition to the associative axiom, we used the fundamental where, For of the inner product A.2.12). a Hermitian X we have property
in
. 13.BASEKETSAND
MATRIX
A.2.39)
REPRESENTATIONS
operator
of Eigenkets an Observable Let us considerthe eigenketsand eigenvaluesof a Hermitian operA. We use the symbol A, reservedearlier for an observable,because in mechanics Hermitian operators of interest quite often turn out to begin by
stating
quantum
an important
theorem:
Theorem. The eigenvalues of a Hermitian operator A are real; to a eigenketsof A corresponding different eigenvalues re orthogonal Proof First, recall that
A\\a')
the
= a'\\a').
A.3.1)
18
A Because is Hermitian, we also have = a\"\\a'\\
Fundamental
Concepts
where are eigenvaluesof A. If we multiply b (a\"\\ on the left, both sidesof A.3.2) y \\a') on the obtain
a\\a\"...
and subtract, we
Now
choose them
a' and a\" can be taken to be either the same or different. Let us first
then
= 0. (tf'tf\"*)<tf>')
A.3.3)
first
a'=a'*, a'
\342\200\224
A.3.4)
wherewe have usedthe fact that \\a') is not a null ket. Let us now assume and a\" to be different. Because the justproved reality condition, the of difference i a\"* that appearsin A.3.3)s equal to a'\\ which cannot The inner product (a\"\\a') ust then vanish: m vanish, by assumption.
a'
a'
\342\200\224
= (a\"\\a') 0,
which
(a'*a\,")
A.3.5)
proves the
We
orthogonality
expecton physicalgrounds that an observablehas real eigenvalthat will becomeclearer in the next section,where measurein quantum mechanics will be discussed. he theorem just proved T the reality of eigenvalueswhenever the operator is Hermitian. guarantees in That is why we talk about Hermitian observables quantum mechanics. It is conventional to normalize \\a') so the {\\a')} form a orthonormal
eigenvalues,
a point
measurements
set:
= (a\"\\a') 8a,,a,.
We may
A.3.6)
logicallyask,Is this set of eigenketscomplete?Sincewe started our discussion asserting that the whole ket spaceis spannedby the eigenkets by of A, the eigenkets A must therefore form a complete set by construction of of our ket
space.*
as Eigenkets BaseKets We have seen that the normalized eigenkets A form a complete of A in orthonormal set. n arbitrary ket in the ket spacecan be expanded terms
already familiar with wave mechanics, may point out that the completeof eigenfunctions we use can be proved by applying the SturmLiouville theory to the Schrodinger wave equation. But to \"derive\" the Schrodinger wave equation from our fundapostulates, the completeness of the position eigenkets must be assumed.
fundamental
completeness
Representations
19
of the eigenkets A. In other words, the eigenketsof A are to be used as of baseketsin much the same way as a set of mutually orthogonal unit vectors is usedas base vectors in Euclidean space. Given an arbitrary ket \\a) in the ket spacespannedby the eigenkets of A, let us attempt to expand it as follows: a'
Multiplying (a\"\\ on the left and using the orthonormality we can immediately find the expansion coefficient,
A.3.7)
property A.3.6),
ca,=(a'\\a).
In other words,we have
A.3.8)
A39)
in
? a'
V=Ie,(e,.V),
which
A.3.10)
where {e,} form an orthogonal set of unit vectors. We now recall the associativeaxiom of multiplication: \\a')(a'\\a) an be regarded either as the c number (a'\\a) multiplying \\a') or, equivalently, as the operator \\a')(a'\\ Because\\a) in A.3.9)s an arbitrary ket, we must have i acting on
a).
a'
A.3.11
where the 1 on the righthand side is to be understood as the identity is known as the completeness relationor closure. operator.Equation A.3.11) Given It is difficult to oveiestimatethe usefulnessof A.3.11). a chain of kets, operators,or bras multiplied in legal orders,we can insert, in any place at our convenience, the identity operator written in form A.3.11 f Consider, or example (oc\\a); by inserting the identity operator between (a\\ and we obtain
a),
a a
A.3.12)
\\a)
A.3.13)
20
Fundamental
Concepts
Since Let us now look at \\a')(a'\\ that appearsin A.3.11). this is an outer product,it must be an operator.Let it operate on \\a):
= \\a')(a'\\a) ca\\a')= A.3.14) (')\302\273 We seethat \\a')(a'\\ selectsthat portion of the ket a)parallel to \\a'), so \\a')(a'\\ is known as the projectionoperator along the base ket \\a') and is denotedby A/
The completenesselation A.3.11) r
a a, = \\a')(a'\\. can now be written
A.3.15)
as
A.3.16)
Matrix Representations
Having specified the base kets, we now show how to representan twice, we write the operator,say X, by a square matrix. First, using X as operator
A.3.11)
a There are altogether N2 numbers of form (a\"\\X\\a')9 where N is the W dimensionality of the ket space. e may arrange them into an iVxiV squarematrix such that the column and row indicesappearas follows:
a\"
= L E \\a\{a\"\\X\\a'){a'\\.")
A.3.17)
(a\"\\X row
\\a')
column
A.3.18
Explicitly we may
write
the matrix as
X=
where the symbol
(aB)\\X\\a(l))
(aA)\\X\\aB))
A.3.19
A.3.20
At
has last, the Hermitian adjoint operation, originally defined by A.2.24), been related to the (perhapsmore familiar) concept of complexconjugate I transposed.f an operator B is Hermitian, we have
{a\"\\B\\a')
= {a'\\B\\a\*.
A.3.21
the equality sign here because the particular form of a matrix representation depends on the particular choice of basekets used. The operator is different from a representaof the operator just as the actress is different from a poster of the actress.
representation
* We do not use
Representations
21
into a square matrix is in conforway we arranged (a\"\\X\\af) the usual rule of matrix multiplication. To seethis just note that the matrix representation of the operator relation
with
Z= XY
reads
(a\"\\Z\\a')
A.3.22)
= (a\"\\XY\\a')
a
Z(a\"\\X\\a'\(a'\"\\Y\\a')
identity
A.3.23)
in form
Again, all
operator, written
A.3.24) y) = Xa> our base kets. The expansion coefficientsof y)
(a'\\
on the left:
(a'\\y) = (a'\\X\\a)
a
A.3.25)
But this can be seen as an application of the rule for multiplying a square matrix with a column matrix representingonce the expansion coefficients of and y) arrange themselvesto form column matricesas follows:
a)
Wl)\\y) W2)\\y)
A.3.26)
Likewise, given
A.3.27)
we can regard a
A.3.28)
e,...).
A.3.29)
Note the appearanceof complexconjugationwhen the elementsof the column matrix are written as in A.3.29). he inner product (pa) can be written as T
22
Fundamental
Concepts
matrix
(aw\\a) A.3.30)
If we
preceding
multiply
representing/?), then we obtain just the complexconjugate of the precedw expression, hich is consistent with the fundamental property of the inner product A.2.12). Finally, the matrix representation of the outer product \\fi)(a\\ *s easily seento be
with
'
(aA)\\p)(aB)\\a)*
A.3.31
The matrix representation of an observable A becomes particularly of simpleif the eigenkets A themselvesare usedas the basekets. First, we have
A.3.32) A.3.33)
squarematrix
(a\"\\A\\a')
{a\"\\A\\a')
so
a a
A.3.34)
Spin \\ Systems It is here instructive to considerthe specialcase spin \\ systems. of The basekets used are which we denote,for brevity, as  + ).The simplestoperatorin the ket spacespanned by  + ) is the identity operator, to can which, according A.3.11), be written as 1=  + ><++ A.3.35) to A.3.34), must be able to write Sz as we According
\\SZ\\
\302\261),
\342\200\224><\342\200\224
.
A.3.36)
1.4.Measurements,
Relations
23
=
\302\261)
\302\261{h/2)\\\302\261)
A.3.37)
immediately follows from the orthonormality property of It is also instructive to look at two other operators,
+).
A.3.38)
= h\\ + >(,
which
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
S_ = h\\)(+l
are both seen to be nonHermitian.The operator S+, acting on the spindown ket  ), turns ) into the spinup ket +) multiplied by h. On a the other hand, the spinup ket when acted upon by S+, becomes null ket. So the physical interpretation of S+ is that it raises the spin component by one unit of h\\ if the spin component cannot be raisedany S_ further, we automatically get a null state. Likewise, can be interpreted as an operator that lowers the spin component by one unit of h. Later we will show that S x can be written as Sv + iSv. , x y In constructing the matrix representationsof the angular momentum operators,it is customary to label the column (row) indicesin descending order of angular momentum components,that is, the first entry corresponds to the maximum angular momentum component, the second, the next highest, and so forth. In our particular caseof spin \\ systems,we have
+),
\342\200\224
(i339a)
A.3.39b)
We
will come back to these explicit expressions hen we discuss w the Pauli twocomponentformalism in Chapter 3.
Having developed the mathematicsof ket spaces,we are now in a This position to discussthe quantum theory of measurement processes. is not a particularly easy subject for beginners,so we first turn to the wordsof the great master, P. A. M. Dirac, for guidance (Dirac 1958, 6): \"A 3 measurement always causesthe system to jump into an eigenstate of the dynamical variable that is being measured.\"What does all this mean? We w interpret Dirac's ords as follows:Beforea measurementof observableA is
24
Fundamental
Concepts
a
into\"
A.4.1)
one of
the
measurement is performed, the system is \"thrown s eigenstates,ay \\a') of observableA. In other words,
,
A measurement
\\a)
\\a').
..
A.4.2)
,. .
_x
with
an
SGz.Thus a measurement usually when the state is already in one of the eigenstates of the observable being i measured,n which case
with further. When the measurement causes certainty, as will be discussed to change into \\a'), it is said that A is measured to be It is in this sensethat the result of a measurementyields one of the eigenvaluesof the
+) or
SZ;
\342\200\224
when
arbitrary
a)
a'.
observable beingmeasured. Given A.4.1), hich is the state ket of a physical system before the w measurement, we do not know in advance into which of the various fl')'s the system will be thrown as the result of the measurement. We do postulate,however, that the probability for jumping into some particular \\a') is given by
Probabilityfor a'=<tf'a>2, A.4.4) provided that a)is normalized. we have been talking about a single physical system, to Although determine probability A.4.4)empirically,we must considera great number of measurements performed on an is, a identically preparedphysicalsystems,all characterizedby the same ket \\a). Such an ensemble known as a pure ensemble.We will say more about is ( ensemblesin Chapter 3.) As an example, a beam of silver atoms which with the Sz survive the first SGz apparatus of Figure component blockedis an example of a pure ensemble becauseevery member atom of + ). is the ensemble characterizedby The probabilisticnterpretation A.4.4)for the squaredinner product i is (tf'a)2one of the fundamental postulates of quantum mechanics,so it cannot be proven. Let us note, however,that it makes goodsensein extreme cases. upposethe state ket is \\a') itself even before a measurement is S more made; then according to A.4.4),the probability for getting for being thrown into the result of the measurement is precisely, predictedto be which isjust what we expect. measuring A once again, By
ensemble\342\200\224that collection\342\200\224of
1.3
\342\200\224
\\SZ\\
a'\342\200\224or,
1,
\\a')\342\200\224as
1.4.Measurements,
Relations
25
we, of course, et \\a') only; quite generally,repeatedmeasurementsof the g in same observable successionield the same result.* If, on the other hand, y we are interestedin the probability for the system initially characterizedby \\a') to be thrown into some other eigenket \\a\") with an'?=a\\ then A.4.4) between \\a') and \\a\.") From the gives zero becauseof the orthogonality of view of measurementtheory, orthogonal kets correspond mututo point exclusivealternatives; for example,if a spin \\ system is in \\SZ; + ), it is not in > with certainty. Quite generally, the probability for anything must be nonnegative. m Furthermore, the probabilities for the various alternative possibilities ust add up to unity. Both of these expectations are met by our probability postulate A.4.4). We define the expectationvalue of A taken with respectto state \\a) as
mutually
\342\200\224
\\S2\\
A.4.5)
the notation (A)a is To make sure that we are referring to state sometimesused.Equation A.4.5)is a definition; however,it agreeswith our it intuitive notion of averagemeasuredvalue because can be written as
a),
a' a'
a\"
a'
I
\\<a'\\\302\253)
measured
value
a'
probability
for obtaining
a'
It is very important not to confuse eigenvalueswith expectation values.For example,the expectationvalue of Sz for spin \\ systemscan assume any real in value between h/2and + h/2, ay 0.273/i; contrast, the eigenvalueof s only two values, h/2 and h/2. Sz assumes To clarify further the meaning of measurements in quantum meIn mechanics we introduce the notion of a selectivemeasurement,or filtration. Section we considered SternGerlach arrangement where we let only a one of the spin components pass out of the apparatus while we completely blockedthe other component. More generally,we imagine a measurement processwith a device that selectsonly one of the eigenketsof A, say and rejectsall others; seeFigure This is what we mean by a selective measurement; it is also called filtration because only one of the A eigenkets the ordeal.Mathematically we can say that such a selective filters through
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
1.1
1.6.
a'),
* Heresuccessive measurements must be carried out immediately afterward. This point becomeclear when we discuss the time evolution of a state ket in Chapter 2.
will
26
Fundamental
Concepts
\\a>
Measurement
FIGURE
1.6.elective measurement. S
A.4.7)
based on a thorough examination of selectivemeasurements.Heintroduces a measurement symbol M(a') in the beginning, which is identical to Aa, or in our notation, and deduces number of properties M(a')(and a of also of M(b\\a') which amount to \\b')(a'\\) by studying the outcome of various SternGerlachtypexperiments. this way he motivates the entire In e mathematics of kets,bras, and operators.In this book we do not follow Schwinger'spath; the interested reader may consult Gottfried'sbook.
J. Schwinger has
mechanics
a')(a'
(Gottfried
1966, 1929).
A.4.8)
We can therefore construct the
Sr + ket as follows:
&
with dx
A.4.9)

\302\273
1.4.Measurements,
Relations
27
of  + ) can be chosento be real and positive by convention.The Sx ket must be orthogonal to the Sx + ket becausethe Sx + alternative and Sx alternative are mutually exclusive.This orthogonality requirement leads to
\342\200\224
A4.10)
where we have, again, chosenthe coefficientof  + ) to be real and positive by convention. We can now construct the operator Sx using A.3.34)as follows:
+ \\){\\Sx; j[{\\Sx;+)(Sx
must
Noticethat the Sx we have constructed is Hermitian, just as it similar argument with Sx replaced S leadsto by
be.A
1' '
\302\246
A.4.12)
A.4.13) Is there any way of determining 5X and S2?Actually there is one wehave a beam of spin \\ of information we have not yet used.Suppose piece a atoms moving in the zdirection.We can consider sequentialSternGerlach experiment with SGJcfollowedby SG>\\ The results of such an experiment are completely analogous to the earlier caseleading to A.4.8):
A.4.14)
which
is not surprising in view of the invarianceof physical systems under we into rotations. Inserting A.4.10)nd A.4.12) A.4.14), obtain a
v2
A.4.15)
which
is satisfied only if
A.4.16) tt/2 or tt/2* I We thus see that the matrix elementsof Sx and Sv cannot all be real. f the Sx matrix elements are real, the Sy matrix elements must be purely imagin(and vice versa).Just from this extremelysimpleexample, the introducof complexnumbers is seen to be an essential feature in quantum mechanics.t is convenient to take the Sx matrix elements to be real* and I
imaginary introduction
). be
always be done by adjusting arbitrary phase factors in the definition of  + ) and This point will become clearer in Chapter 3, where the behavior of under rotations will discussed.
\302\261)
* This can
28
Fundamental
Concepts
the positive jcaxiswould be oriented direction.The secondphaseangle 52 must then be 77/2 or opposite tt/2.The fact that there is still an ambiguity of this kind is not surprising. We have not yet specifiedwhether the coordinate system we are using is righthanded or lefthanded; given the x and the zaxesthere is still a twofold ambiguity in the choiceof the positive >>axis. Later we will discuss angular momentum as a generator of rotations using the righthanded coordinatesystem; it can then be shown that 82 = 77/2 is the correct choice. To summarize,we have
set 8X
in
the
^ ^
and
??
\302\261
A.4.17a) A.4.17b)
A.4.18a
\302\261 \302\261
A.4.18b
The Sx and Sy eigenketsgiven here are seen to be in agreement with a based our earlier guesses A.1.9)nd A.1.14) on an analogy with linearly and in this comparison, that only the relative circularly polarizedlight. (Note, components is of physical significance.) phase between the +) and  c Furthermore, the nonHermitian S operatorsdefined by A.3.38)an now
\342\200\224)
be written as
= Sx\302\261iSv.
x\302\261iSv
A.4.19)
A.4.20)
The operators Sx and Sv, together with Sz given earlier, can be readily shown to satisfy the commutation relations ] and the anticommutation relations
!
,
A.4.21)
A.4.22a) [AyB]= ABBAy =AB + BA. A.4.22b) {A,B} The commutation relations in A.4.20)will be recognized as the simplest
significance
anticommutation
realization of the angular momentum commutation relations, whose signifiIn in will be discussed detail in Chapter 3. contrast, the anticommutain A.4.21) turn out to be a special relations property of spin \\ systems.
1.4.Measurements,
We
Relations
29
A.4.23)
operator
We
obviously have
S2=()/i2. [S2,S,]=0.
Chapter 3, for
A.4.24) A.4.25)
longer a
As will
be shown
in
multiple of the
identity
CompatibleObservables
now to the general formalism, we will discuss compatible Returning A versus incompatible observables. Observables and B are defined to be compatiblewhen the correspondingperators commute, o
[A9B]= 09
and incompatiblewhen
[A9B]\302\2610,
A.4.26) A.4.27)
For example,S2 and Sz are compatible observables, while Sx and Sz are observables. incompatible Let us first considerhe case compatible observablesA and B.As of t usual, we assumethat the ket spaceis spannedby the eigenketsof A. We may also regard the same ket spaceas being spanned by the eigenketsof B. We now ask, How are the A eigenkets related to the B eigenketswhen A and B are compatible observables? Before answering this question we must touch upon a very important point we have bypassed conceptof degeneracy.Supposethere are two (or more) linearly independent eigenkets of A having the same eigenvalue; then the eigenvalues of the two eigenkets are said to be In degenerate. such a case the notation \\a') that labelsthe eigenket by its f eigenvaluealone doesnot give a completedescription;urthermore, we may recall that our earlier theorem on the orthogonality of different eigenkets Even worse, the whole was proved under the assumption of no degeneracy.
earlier\342\200\224the
concept that the ket space is spanned by {\\a')}appears to run into difficulty when the dimensionality of the ket spaceis larger than the number
of distinct eigenvaluesof A. Fortunately,
quantum
practical applications in quansuch a situation the eigenvalues observable, say B, can be used to label the
in in
degenerate eigenkets.
30
Fundamental
Concepts
Now we are ready to state an important theorem. Theorem. Suppose A and B are compatibleobservables,and the that eigenvaluesof A are nondegenerate.Then the matrix elements(a\"\\B\\af) are all diagonal. (Recall ere that the matrix elementsof A are alreadydiagonalif h are usedas the basekets.) Proof The proof of this important theorem is extremely simple. we of Usingthe definition A.4.26) compatible observables, observe that
(a\"\\[A9
A.4.28)
So{a\"\\B\\a')
We
must vanish
A.4.29) Soboth A and B can be represented diagonal matrices with the same set by of basekets. UsingA.3.17)nd A.4.29)we can write B as a
= E \\<*\(<*\"\\B\\<*\"){<*\"{")
a\"
A.4.30)
Supposethat
this
= E \\a\(a\"\\B\\a\")(a\"\\a')")
other
than
= ((a'\\B\\a'))\\a'). A.4.31)
B
is nothing
eigenvalue
b'={a'\\B\\a').
simultaneous
A.4.32)
The ket \\a') is therefore a simultaneous eigenketof A and B.Just to be w impartial to both operators, e may use \\a\\b') to characterizethis simulta
eigenkets.
eigenket. We have seen that compatible observables ave simultaneouseigenh Even though the proof given is for the case where the A eigenkets re a the statement holds even if there is an nondegenerate, degeneracy, that is,
\302\253fold
A\\a'(i))
A.4.33)
where \\a'(l)) are n mutually orthonormal eigenkets f A, all with the same o To seethis, all we need to do is construct appropriate linear eigenvalue combinations of <z'(z)) that diagonalize the B operator by following the in to diagonalization procedure be discussed Section
a'.
1.5.
1.4.Measurements,
A
Relations
31
simultaneous eigenket of
and
B, denotedby
\\a\\b')9
has the
property
a\\b')= a'\\a\\b')>
= B\\a\\b') b'\\a\\b').
When
it
A.4.34a) A.4.34b)
there is no degeneracy,this notation is somewhatsuperfluousbecause f that is clearrom A.4.32) if we specifya\\ we necessarilyknow the b' that T appearsin \\a'9b'). he notation \\a\\b') is much more powerful when there A are degeneracies. simpleexample may be used to illustrate this point. of Even though a complete discussion orbital angular momentum will not appear in this book until Chapter 3, the reader may be familiar
from his
or her earlier training in elementary wave mechanics that the eigenvaluesof L2 (orbital angular momentum squared)and L, (the zcomponent of orbital angular momentum) are h 1A + 1)and m/ft, respectively, with / an integerand m/= + /. To characterize an orbital i to momentum state completely,t is necessary specify both I and angular For example, we just say /=1, mz value can still be 0, if the or mh if we just say m/= / can be 2,3,4, and so on. Only by specifying both I and mz do we succeed uniquely in characterizing the orbital angular momentum state in question.Quite often a collective index K' is used to stand for (a\\ br), so that
\342\200\224/,
\342\200\224/+1,...,
1;
1,
1,
+1,
X\">
= <i',fc'>.
A.4.35)
We can obviously generalizeour considerations a situation where to there are several (more than two) mutually compatible observables, namely,
A.4.36)
that we have found a maximal set of commuting observables; that we cannot add any more observables our list without violating A.4.36). to is, The eigenvaluesof individual operatorsA, may have degeneracies, but if we specify a combination @', then the corresponding simultaneous eigenket of A, B, is uniquely specified. can again use We a collectiveindex K' to stand for (a\\b\\c\\...). orthonormality relaThe
Assume
C,...
6',c',...),
B,C,...
relation
for
') = \\a\\b\\c\\...)
reads
t,
A.4.37)
...,
A.4.38)
while the
K'
c'
'\\<t',b\\c\\...Xa\\b\\c\\...\\=l. A.4.39)
32
Fundamental
Concepts
compatible
Subsequently,
follows from our measurement formalism that the third measurement algives with certainty, that is, the second(B) measurementdoes not destroy the previous information obtained in the first (A) measurement. This is rather obvious when the eigenvaluesof A are nondegenerate:
always
We now consider measurementsof A and B when they are compatiobservables. upposewe measure A first and obtain result a\\ SubseS we may measure B and get result b'. inally we measureA again. It F
a'
A measurement,
,
\\a',
b')
/v
B measurement,
, , /x
~\\a\\
b')
measurement, , ~\\a\\
, b').
/v
A.4.40)
first
When there is degeneracy,the argument goes as follows: After the (A) measurement, which yields a\\ the system is thrown into some
n
linear combination
A.4.41)
where n is the degreeof degeneracyand the kets \\a\\ b(l))all have the same The eigenvalue as far as operator A is concerned. second(B) measureselectust one of the terms in the linear combination A.4.41), say, may j the third (A) measurement applied to it still yields \\a\\ 6G)), but Whether or not there is degeneracy,A measurementsand B measurements do not interfere. The term compatibleis indeeddeemedappropriate.
a'
measurement
a'.
IncompatibleObservables
We now turn to incompatibleobservables, which are more nontrivial. The first point to be emphasized is that incompatible observables o not d have a completeset of simultaneouseigenkets. o show this let us assume T the converse to be true. There would then exist a set of simultaneous with property A.4.34a) nd A.4.34b). learly, a eigenkets C
AB\\a\\
b').
A.4.42) A.4.43)
A.4.44)
Likewise,
BA\\a\\
hence,
AB\\a\\
contradiction to the assumption. So in general, does not make sensefor incompatible observables. There is, how\\a\\ b') an interestingexception;it may happen that there existsa subspace of the ket spacesuch that A.4.44) holdsfor all elementsof this subspace, ven e though A and B are incompatible.An example from the theory of orbital and
thus in
however,
= [A,B] 0
1.4.Measurements,
Relations
33
an we S angular momentum may be helpful here. uppose consider / = 0 state do not commute, this state is a simultaE (sstate). ven though Lx and Lz eigenstate of Lx and Lz (with eigenvaluezero for both operators).
simultaneous
in The subspace this caseis onedimensional. with We already encountered some of the peculiarities associated SternGerlachexobservables when we discussed sequential incompatible We now give a more general discussionof experiments in Section of the experiments of that type. Consider sequence selectivemeasurements some particular \\a') and The shown in Figure 1.7(a). first (A) filter selects second(B) filter selectssome particular \\b') and rejects all others, the rejects all others, and the third (C) filter selects some particular \\c') and rejectsall others.We are interested in the probability of obtaining c'> when the beam coming out of the first filter is normalized to unity. Because a the probabilities re multiplicative, we obviously have
1.1.
A.4.45) <c'Z>'>2<Z>V>2. the Now let us sum over b' to consider total probability for going through all possible b' routes. Operationally this means that we first record the probability of obtaining c'with all but the first b' route blocked,then we a with all but the secondb' blocked, nd so on; then we repeat the procedure at sum the probabilities the end and obtain A.4.46)
b'
We now
filter
compare this
with
different
\\b'>
(a) b'
\\C'>
(b)
FIGURE
1.7.Sequential
selective measurements.
34
Fundamental
Concepts
just
which (c'tf')2,
A.4.47)
Notice that expressions .4.46)and A.4.47)are different! This is remarkA in because both casesthe pure \\a') beam coming out of the first (A) filter can be regardedas being made up of the B eigenkets
remarkable
IO = X>'><^K>,
b'
A.4.48)
where the sum is over all possible valuesof The crucial point to be noted is that the result coming out of the C filter dependson whether or not B measurements have actually been carried out. In the first case we experiascertain which of the B eigenvaluesare actually realized; in the w secondcase, e merely imagine \\a') to be built up of the various ft')'s in the senseof A.4.48). in another way, actually recording the probabilities Put of going through the various b' routes makes all the differenceeven though we sum over b' afterwards. Herelies the heart of quantum mechanics. Under what conditions do the two expressions ecomeequal? It is b for left as an exercise the reader to show that for this to happen, in the of it absence degeneracy, is sufficient that
experimentally
b'.
= [A,B] 0
In other
or
= [5,C] 0.
A.4.49)
= A (A),
A.4.50)
where the expectation value is to be taken for a certain physical state under consideration. expectationvalue of (&AJ is known as the dispersion The of A. Because have we
the
dispersion.Sometimes the terms variance and mean square deviation are vanishes when the state used for the same quantity. Clearly, the dispersion t of in question is an eigenstate of A. Roughly speaking, he dispersion an observable characterizes \"fuzziness.\" For example, for the Sz + state of a
= + <(A^J> = <(^22^(^><^>2)> </J2><^>2, A.4.51 last line of A.4.51) of may be taken as an alternative definition
1.4.Measurements,
spin
Relations
35
A.4.52)
sharp\"\342\200\224a Sz\342\200\224while
In contrast the dispersion (ASZJ)obviously vanishesfor the Sz + state. So, for for the Sz + state, Sz is \" vanishing dispersion Sx
We now state the uncertainty relation, which is the generalizationof in Let the wellknown xp uncertainty relation to be discussed Section A and B be observables. Then for any state we must have the following
is fuzzy.
1.6.
inequality:
({bAf)({UiJ)>\\\\([A,B])\\2.
To prove this we first state three lemmas. Lemma
which
A.4.53)
1.TheSchwarzinequality
<aa></3/?>><\302\253/?>2,
A.4.54) A.4.55)
is analogousto
a2b2>ab2
in
real Euclidian
space.
+ X/?>)>0, a+X*</?).(a>
A.4.56)
X
is
A.4.57)
real.
2. The expectationvalue
trivial\342\200\224just
of a Hermitian operator is
purely
useA.3.21).
?
operator, de
by
C = C+, is purely
\342\200\224
imaginary.
?
A.4.58)
uncertainty
Armed with these lemmas, we are in a position to prove the uncerrelation A.4.53). UsingLemma 1with
36
Fundamental
Concepts
where the blank ket  ) emphasizesthe fact that our consideration may be appliedto any ket, we obtain
A.4.59)
where the Hermiticity of A A and w righthand side of A.4.59), e note
AZ?
^
where the commutator [A^4,AZ?], antiHermitian
which
A.4.60)
([A,B])f = (AB
=
\\
BA)f
= BA
AB
= [A, ]. B
A.4.61
A.4.62)
is obviously Hermitian, so
purely real
becomes
sideof A.4.59)ow n
A.4.63)
The proof of A.4.53)s now complete becausethe omission of the second i c (the anticommutator) term of A.4.63)an only make the inequality relation Applications of the uncertainty relation to spin \\ systemswill be left as exercises. come back to this topic when we discussthe fundamental We commutation relation in Section 1.6. xp
* stronger.
*In
written
the literature
as &A AS > \\\\([A, B])\\. In this not A.4.50)], numbers. operators [see
most authors use hA for our y ((A4) ) so the uncertainty relation is book, however, A A and AS are to be understood as
37
set of base kets is referred to as a change of basis or a change of is representation. The basisin which the base eigenketsare given by {\\a')} called the A representation or, sometimes, the A diagonal representation to becausethe squarematrix corresponding A is diagonal in this basis. Our basic task is to construct a transformation operator that conthe old orthonormal set {\\a')} and the new orthonormal set To this end, we first show the following.
connects
{?')}.
Theorem. Given
two
satisfying
orthonormality
A.5.1)
By
unitary
the conditions
A.5.2)
as well as = 1/1/* 1.
Proof We prove
that this
A.5.3)
the
operator
A.5.4)
will
this
U to
#(/)).Clearly, A.5.5)
Furthermore, {tf')}\342\200\224
of
U
\342\200\224
is unitary:
2^\\a k
)\\a
1*
vi.^.oj
where we have used the orthonormality of {\\b')} the completeness and of We i {\\a')}. obtain relation A.5.3)n an analogousmanner. TransformationMatrix
in
the
matrix
L/u /
\342\200\224
\\u
>,
yi
/ .J.J
which
is obvious from A.5.5). other words, the matrix elementsof the U In operator are built up of the inner productsof old basebras and new base kets.We recall that the rotation matrix in three dimensionsthat changesone set of unit base vectors (x,y,z)into another set (x^y^z')can be written as
Fundamental
Concepts
xy /
A A
xz/
A A
AA/ AA/ zx
yy
yz /
A A
zy
AA/
AA/ zz
A.5.8)
Given an
known in the
old basis,
arbitrary
(b'\\a),the expansion coefficientsin the new basis?The A.5.9)(with a' replacedby a(/) to multiply
A.5.10)
basis can be obtained just by matrix in the old basis:
In matrix notation, A.5.10)tates that the column matrix for \\a) in the new s applying the square matrix ?/* to the column
(New) = (t/+)(old). A.5.11 The relationships between the old matrix elements and the new matrix elements are also easy to obtain:
(bik)\\X\\b(i))
? =?
=
m m
^(bik)\\aim))(aim)\\X\\ain))(ain)\\b(l))
n
Y,Wk)\\U^\\a{m))(a(m)\\X\\a{n))(a{n)\\U\\a{l))
n
A.5.12)
This is simply the wellknown formula for a matrix algebra,
similarity
transformation
in
' = U*XU.
A.5.13)
elements:
A.5.14)
definition,
Even though
39
out to
= L{\"'\\X\\a')
a
I Z Z<aW)(b>\\X\\b\(b\"\\a')
a'
W
b\"
=V
b' b'
b\"
= Z<b'\\X\\b').
We
A.5.15)
tr(XY) = tr(YX),
tr(\\a')(a\"\\)
= 8aW,,
Diagonalization So far we have not discussedhow to find the eigenvalues and basis of eigenkets an operator B whose matrix elements in the old {tf')} are assumedto be known. This problem turns out to be equivalent to that of finding the unitary matrix that diagonalizesB.Even though the readermay in already be familiar with the diagonalizationprocedure matrix algebra, it is worth working out this problem using the Diracbraket notation. We are interested in obtaining the eigenvalue b' and the eigenket with the property \\b')
B\\b')
= b'\\b').
A.5.17)
A.5.18
eigenketof operator B, we can write
(Bu Bu u
B2l B22
with
Bu
c2(/)
A.5.19
A.5.20a)
and
C{/)=(\302\253(A:)/>(/>>,
A.5.20b)
As space.
where i,
j,k run
up to
iV,
we know
40 from linear
Fundamental
Concepts
characteristic equation
if
the
det(? XI)
=0
A.5.21
is satisfied.This is an Nth order algebraicequation for X, and the TV roots obtained are to be identified with the various />(/)'swe are trying to determine. nowing />(/) we can solve for the corresponding (k!)'s to an up K C overall constant to be determined from the normalizationcondition. Comwe w A.5.20b) ith A.5.7), see that the Cfci)9s are just the elementsof Comparing ~* the unitary matrix involved in the change of basis {\\a')} {\\b')}. For this procedure Hermiticity of B is important. For example, the T o consider S+ defined by A.3.38) r A.4.19). his operator is obviously nonHermitian. The corresponding atrix, which readsin the Sz basisas m
cannot be diagonalized by any unitary matrix. In Chapter 2 we will encounter eigenketsof a nonHermitian operator in connection with a coherent state of a simple harmonic oscillator. uch eigenkets, S however,are known not to form a completeorthonormal set, and the formalism we have in developed this sectioncannot be immediately applied.
Unitary Equivalent
Observables
We
unitary
transform of an
Theorem. Consideragain two sets of orthonormal basis{\\a')} and Knowing U, we may construct by {\\b')} connected the U operator a unitary transform of A, UA U~ then A and UA U~ are saidto be unitary
The equivalent observables. eigenvalueequationfor A,
A\\a^)
A.5.4).
= <i<V>>,
=
a(l)U\\a(l)).
A523)
A.5.24) A.5.25)
But
this
can be rewritten
as
{UAU~l)\\b{l))
= a(/)fe(/)>.
This deceptivelysimple result is quite profound. It tells us that the of are eigenkets UAU~l with exactly the same eigenvaluesas the A
and Translation
41
unitary definition,
equivalent
observableshave identical
satisfiesthe relationship
A.5.26)
we A.5.26), infer that B and UAU1aresimulA diagonalizable. natural questionis, is UAU1the sameas B itself?The answer quite often is yes in cases f physical interest. ake,or o T f and Sz.They are related by a unitary operator, example,Sx which, as we will discuss Chapter 3,is actually the rotation operator around the yaxis in it/2. In this case itself is the unitary transform of Sz.Because by angle Sx we know that Sx and Sz exhibit the same set of eigenvalues\342\200\224namely, + h/2 and see that our theorem holds in this particular a Comparing A.5.25)nd
simultaneously
h/2\342\200\224we
example.
TRANSLATION
Continuous Spectra
so c The observables onsidered far have all been assumed to exhibit discrete eigenvalue spectra. In quantum mechanics, however, there are w observables ith continuous eigenvalues.Take, for instance, pz, the zcomof momentum. In quantum mechanicsthis is again represented a by ponent
Hermitian In operator.
\342\200\224
contrast to Sz, however, the eigenvaluesof pz (in can assume any real value between oo and oc. appropriate units) The rigorous mathematics of a vector spacespannedby eigenkets that exhibit a continuous spectrum is rather treacherous.The dimensionality is of .sucha space obviously infinite. Fortunately, many of the results we worked out for a finitedimensionalvector spacewith discreteeigenvalues can immediatelybe generalized.In placeswhere straightforward generalizado not hold, we indicate danger signals. We start with the analogue of eigenvalueequation A.2.5), hich, in w i the continuousspectrumcase,s written as
generalizations
A.6.1
where ? is an operator and is simply a number. The ket is, in other words, an eigenket of operator ? with eigenvalue just as \\a') is an eigenketof operatorA with eigenvalue the In pursuing this analogywe replace Kronecker symbol by Dirac's 8f sum discrete over the eigenvalues by an integral over the
?'
a'.
?',
?')
unction\342\200\224a
{a'}
42
continuous
Fundamental
Concepts
variable
i~'\342\200\224so
(\,")
1,
\302\253>
A.6.2a) A.6.2b)
\302\253>
= E ifl'
=1
a
{a\"\\A\\a')
/#'<*'\302\253>2
A.6.2d)
= a'&a.a..
(l.6.2e
(t\"\\t\\V)
= S'8(t\"
?')\342\200\242
(l.6.2f)
a A.6.2c) nd A.6.2e).
x\\x')
are postulatedto form a complete set. Here x' is just a number with the dimension of length 0.23 for example,while x is an operator.The state cm, ket for an arbitrary physical state can be expanded terms of in
= x'\\x')
A.6.3)
A.6.4)
considera highly idealized selective measurement of the we observable. uppose placea very tiny detectorthat clicksonly S position at when the particle is precisely x' and nowhere else.mmediatelyafter the I detectorclicks,we can say that the state in question is represented \\x'). by In other words,when the detector clicks,\\<x) abruptly \"jumps into\" \\x') in much the same way as an arbitrary spin state jumpsinto the Sz + (or Sz state when subjected an SG apparatus of the Sz type. to In practicethe best the detectorcan do is to locate the particle within a narrow interval around x'.A realistic detector clickswhen a particle is observedto be located within some narrow range A/2,jc'+ A/2).
\342\200\224)
(jc'\342\200\224
and Translation
43
\\a)
\\
*
\342\200\236
\342\200\236
* o). A.6.5)
v
/%
c\\
\342\200\242'oo
Assuming that (x\"\\a) does not change interval, the probability for the detector to
\\(x'\\a)\\2dx\\
clickis given by
appreciably within
the narrow
A.6.6)
for where we have written dx' for A. This is analogous to (tf'a)2 the for \\a) to be thrown into \\a') when A is measured.The probability probability of recording the particle somewherebetween oc and oc is
\342\200\224
given by
/\342\200\242OO
/
\342\200\242'oo
dx'\\(x'\\a)\\\\
A.6.7)
which
is normalized to unity
if
\\a)
/\342\200\242OO
is normalized:
<aa>=l=> dx'(a\\x')(x'\\a)=l. /
\342\200\242'oo
A.6.8)
f The readeramiliar with wave mechanics may have recognized by time that (x'\\a) the wave function for the physical state represented is We will say more about this identification of the expansioncoefby with the jcrepresentation of the wave function in Section The notion of a position eigenket can be extendedto three dimenIt is assumedin nonrelativistic quantum mechanics that the position The are complete. state ket for a particle with internal degrees eigenkets of freedom, such as spin, ignored can therefore be expandedin terms of
this
I
a).
coefficient
1.7.
dimensions.
x')
a {x')}s follows:
A.6.9)
where x' stands for x\\ y\\ and z';in other words, x\") is a simultaneous x eigenketof the observables , y, and z in the senseof Section
1.4:
A.6.10a
y\\K')
= y'\\&')9
To be able to consider such a simultaneouseigenketat all, we are implicitly assuming that the three componentsof the position vector can be measured of simultaneously to arbitrary degrees accuracy; hence, we must have where xv
A.6.11
x2,and jc3 stand
for
x>
y, and z, respectively.
44
Fundamental
Concepts
Translation
We now introduce the very important concept of translation, or spatial displacement. upposewe start with a state that is well localized S an around x'.Let us consider operation that changes this state into another with everything else(for welllocalized state, this time around example,the spin direction)unchanged. Such an operation is defined to be an infinitesimal translation by dx\\ and the operator that does the job is
x'+dx'
denotedby
T(dx'):
= 3T(dx')\\x') \\x'+
where a possiblearbitrary
that with
infinitesimal
dx'),
A.6.12
phasefactor is set to unity by convention.Notice is sideof A.6.12) again a position eigenket,but this time is O eigenvaluex'+ dx'. bviously x') not an eigenket of the infinitesitranslation operator.
the righthand
By
expanding an
arbitrary
state ket
\\a)
in
= > ^(dx')\\a)
^(dx')jd3x'\\x')(x'\\a) jd3x'\\x'+dx')(x'\\a).
sideof A.6.13)s a
A.6.13
We
righthand
A.6.14
x' is just
an integration
variable.This showsthat the wave function of the translated state ^(dx')\\a) is obtained by substituting x' dx'for x' in There is an equivalent approach to translation that is often treated in the literature. Instead of considering an infinitesimal translation of the a physical system itself, we consider change in the coordinate system being used such that the origin is shifted in the opposite direction, dx'. Physically,in this alternative approach we are asking how the same state ket would look to another observer whose coordinate system is shifted by dx'.In this book we try not to use this approach.Obviously it is important that we do not mix the two approaches! We now list the properties the infinitesimal translation operator of The ^~{dx'). first property we demand is the unitarity property imposedby probability conservation. It is reasonable to require that if the ket \\a) is normalized to unity, the translated ket ^(dx')\\a) also be normalized to
(x'a).
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
unity,
so
(a\\a)= (a\\^{dx'KT{dx')\\a).
A.6.15
and Translation
45
A.6.16)
Quite generally, the norm of a ket is preserved under unitary transformawe t infinitesForthe secondproperty, suppose considerwo successive translations\342\200\224first by dx'and subsequently by dx'\\ where dx' and dx\" neednot be in the samedirection. We expectthe net result to be just a so single translation operation by the vector sum dx'+dx\", we demand
transformations. infinitesimal
that
= x\^(dx')")iT(dx'+dx\.")
A.6.17)
For the third property, supposewe considera translation in the opposite translation to be the same as the direction; we expectthe oppositedirection inverseof the original translation:
 dx')= y~\\dx').
lim
A.6.18)
translation
For the fourth property, we demand that as operation reduceto the identity operation
the dx'>0,
y~(dx')=l
identity
A.6.19)
operator be of first
translation
and
that
order in
dx'.
be
We now
operator to
^(Jx/)=1/KJx/,
A.6.20)
where the components of K, Kx9 Ky, and Kz, are Hermitian operators, then all the propertieslisted are satisfied. The first property, the unitarity of i ^(dx'),s checkedas follows:
= dx')^(dx') A + i?Jdx')(liKdx')
where terms of
secondorder in dx'have been ignored for an infinitesimal translation. The secondproperty [A.6.17)] also be proved as follows: can
1,
A.6.21)
A.6.22) The third and fourth properties obviously satisfiedby A.6.20). are t Accepting A.6.20)o be the correct form for 3T(dx'),we are in a
position to derive an extremely fundamental relation between the K oper
46
Fundamental
Concepts
A.6.23b) A.6.24)
is where the error made in writing the last line of A.6.24) of secondorder in a dx'.Now x')can be any position eigenket,and the position eigenkets re known to form a complete set. We must thereforehave an operator identity
[x,^(dx')]=dx\\
or
A.6.25) A.6.26)
 /xKdx'+ /Kdx'x=
dx\\
where on the righthand sidesof A.6.25)nd A.6.26) x'is understood to a d be the number dx' multiplied by the identity operator in the ket space spannedby x'). y choosing dx'in the direction of xy and forming the B scalarproductwith x,., e obtain w
[*\342\200\236*,]=
id,,,
identity
A.6.27)
operator.
J. Schwinger,lecturing on quantum mechanics,onceremarked, for fundamental propertieswe will borrow only names from classical physics.\"In the present case we would like to borrow from classical mechanics the notion that momentum is the generator of an infinitesimal translation. An infinitesimal translation in classicalmechanics can be reregarded as a canonical transformation,
Xnew
as a Generatorof Translation i Equation A.6.27)s the fundamental commutation relation between the positionoperatorsx, y, z and the K operatorsKx, K,Kz. Remember that so far the K operator is definedin terms of the infinitesimal translation What is the physicalsignificancewe can attach to K? operatorby A.6.20).
\"...
= X = X+ JX,
pnew
= P = p,
A.6.28)
395 1980, and 411) (Goldstein F(x,P)= xP+ pJx, A.6.29) where p and P refer to the corresponding omenta. m This equation has a striking similarity to the infinitesimal translation in operatorA.6.20) quantum mechanics,particularly if we recall that xPin
and Translation
47
i A.6.29)s the generating function for the identity transformation (X = x,P = p).We are thereforeled to speculate that the operator K is in some sense
related to the momentum operator in quantum mechanics. Can the K operator be identified with the momentum operator itself? Unfortunately the dimensionis all wrong; the K operator has the dimension But of I/lengthbecauseK*dx' ust be dimensionless. it appearslegitimate m
to
set
K=
'
A.6.30)
From the fundamental postulates of quantum mechanicsthere is no way to determine the actual numerical value of the universal constant. Rather, this constant is neededhere because, istorically, classical hysicswas developed h p before quantum mechanics using units convenient for describing macrocircumferenceof the earth, the mass of 1ccof water, quantities\342\200\224the the duration of a mean solar day, and so forth. Had microscopic hysics p been formulated before macroscopic physics,the physicists would have almost certainly chosen the basic units in such a way that the universal constant appearing in A.6.30) would be unity. T An analogy from electrostaticsmay be helpful here. he interaction energy between two particles of charge e separatedat a distance r is proportional to e2/r\\ in unrationalizedGaussianunits, the proportionality factor isjust but in rationalizedmks units, which may be moreconvenient for electrical engineers,he proportionality factor is \\/Atneo. t The universal constant that appearsin A.6.30)urns out to be the t same as the constant h that appearsin L. de Broglie's relation, written in
macroscopic
1,
1924,
>
A.6.31
where X is the wavelength of a \"particle wave.\" In other words, the K t operator is the quantum mechanicaloperator that correspondso the wave is, 277 times the reciprocalwavelength, usually denotedby k. With this identification the infinitesimal translation operator ^~(dx')reads
number\342\200\224that
f(dx')=liydx'/h9
where p is the momentum operator. The commutation
becomes
= [x,,pJ] ih8lJ.
px
impossible
The commutation relations A.6.33) imply, for example, that x and It (but not x and pv) are incompatibleobservables. is therefore impossito find simultaneous eigenkets of x and px. The general formalism of
48
Fundamental
Concepts
relation of W.
Heisenberg:
A.6.34)
Someapplications of A.6.34) appear in Section1.7. will Sofar we have concerned ourselveswith infinitesimal translations. A finite translation\342\200\224that is, a spatial displacement by a finite be obtainedby successively compoundinginfinitesimal translations. Let us considera finite translation in the jodirection by an amount Ax':
amount\342\200\224can
= ^(Ajc'x)x'> x'+Ajc'x).
AT
A.6.35)
By compounding infinitesimal translations, each of which is characterized a by a spatial displacement kx'/N in the ^direction, nd letting AT >oo, we
obtain
Urn
\342\200\224
Nh
= exp
h function
A.6.36)
of the operator px,
2!
in
A.6.37)
A fundamental property of translations is that successive translations different directions, ay in the xand ^directions, commute.We see this s in shifting from A and B it does not matter whether clearly in Figure we go via C or via D.Mathematically,
1.8;
A y'y)
=
B
A.6.3o)
Ay'y
Ax'*
FIGURE
1.8.uccessive translations S
in different directions.
and Translation
49
This point is not so trivial as it may appear;we will show in Chapter 3 that rotations about different axesdo not commute.Treating Ajc' and Ay' up to secondorder, we obtain
ipyAy' h
P2y(Ay')
(Ax')(Ay')[Py,Px]
h2
A.6.39) A.6.40)
A>>'
are arbitrary,
or requirement A.6.38),
immediately
leads to
A.6.41)
or, more generally,
A.6.42)
This commutation relation is a direct consequencef the fact that translao in different directionscommute.Whenever the generators of transforcommute, the corresponding group is said to be Abelian. The translation group in three dimensionsis Abelian. Equation A.6.42) implies that px, py, and pz are mutually compatiW observables. e can therefore conceiveof a simultaneous eigenket of
translations
transformations
compatible
Px>Py>Pz>
namely,
A.6.43a)
Pz\\p'y
= A'Ip')
A.6.43b)
effect of
o ?T{dx') n
such a momentum
/
\\
1
We
\342\200\224
z'p#</xM h
A6.44)
seethat the momentum eigenketremains the sameeven though it suffers a slight phase change, so unlike xr),p') is an eigenket of ^(dxf), which we anticipated because
=0. [pt&idx')]
A.6.45)
50
Fundamental
Concepts
though
unitary,
is not
relations we inferred by
studying
the
propertiesof translation:
= [x,,xj]0,
[/>\342\200\236
Pj]
= 0,
[xi9Pj] = ihStJ.
A.6.46)
These relations form the cornerstone of quantum mechanics; in his book, P. A. M. Dirac calls them the \"fundamental quantum conditions.\"More
often they are known as the canonicalcommutation relations, or the fundacommutation relations. showed that the who, in 1925, Historically it was W. Heisenberg combination rule for atomic transition lines known at that time could best be understoodif one associated arrays of numbers obeying certain multiplirules with these frequencies.Immediatelyafterward M. Born and P. Jordan pointed out that Heisenberg's ultiplication rules are essentially m those of matrix algebra, and a theory was developed based on the matrix which is now known as matrix mechanics.* analogues of A.6.46), Also in 1925, A. M. Dirac observed that the various quantumP. mechanical relations can be obtained from the corresponding classical relations just by replacing classicalPoissonbracketsby commutators, as follows:
fundamental
multiplication
[ , ]
classical
ih
A.6.47)
where we may recall that the classicalPoissonbracketsare defined for functions of q 'sand p 'sas
[A(q,p),B(q,p)] = y
classical
i>
'
8A
8B
3A
3B . A.6.48) dqs)
A.6.49)
which
in quantum
and quantummechanicalcommutators satisfy similar algebraic properIn particular, the following relations can be proved regardlessof whether [ , ] is understood as a classical oisson P bracket or as a quantumbrackets properties.
Appropriately, pq
\342\200\224
1.7.Wave
Functions
Space
51
mechanicalcommutator:
=0
A.6.50a) A.6.50b)
(c isjust
a number)
A.6.50c) = [A9C]+ [B,C] A.6.50d) = + [A,BC] [A,B]C B[A,C] A.6.50e) + + [A9[B9C]] [B9[C9A]] [C9[A9B]]=09 A.6.50f)
where the last relation is known as the Jacobiidentity.* However,there are P bracket important differences.First, the dimensionof the classical oisson differs from that of the quantummechanicalcommutator becauseof the differentiations with respect to q and p appearing in A.6.48). econd, S the Poissonbracketof real functions of and is purely real, while the commutator of two Hermitian operators antiHermitian (seeLemma 3 of is To take care of these differencesthe factor ih is inserted in Section
q's
p's
A.6.47).
the
1.4).
We have deliberatelyavoided exploitingDirac'snalogy in obtaining a canonical commutation relations. Our approach to the commutation relations is based solely on A) the propertiesof translations and B) the identification of the generator of translation with the momentum operator modulo a universal constant with the dimensionof action. We believe that this approachis more powerful because can be generalizedto situations it where observables ave no classical nalogues. or example, the spinanguh F a we encounteredin Section 1.4 spinangularmomentum having nothing to components do with the and q'sof classicalmechanics; yet, as we will show in Chapter 3, the spinangularmomentum commutation relations can be dederived using the propertiesof rotations just as we derived the canonical commutation relations using the properties translations. of
p's
W 1.7. AVE
In this section we present a systematic study of the propertiesof For functions in both position and momentum space. simplicity let us The to the onedimensionalcase. baseketsusedare the position kets
mechanics is much easier to prove than
*It is amusing that the Jacobi identity in quantum its classical analogue.
52 satisfying
Fundamental
Concepts
that
A.7.1)
A.7.2)
have already remarked that the ket representing a physical state can be expandedin terms of jc'),
a) = fdx'\\x')(x'\\a)9
and
that
A.7.3)
way that
A.7.4)
is the probability for the particle to be found
in a narrow interval dx' around In our formalism the inner product (x'\\a) is what is usually referred to as the wave function 4>a(x')or state \\a): f
x'.
coefficient
In elementary wave mechanics the probabilistic interpretations for = (a'\\a))and for the wave function i/'aC*') the expansioncoefficientca* ( are often presentedas separate postulates.One of the major (= of our formalism, originally due to Dirac,is that the two kinds advantages of probabilistic interpretations are unified; \\pa(x') is an expansion coeffiin [see A.7.3)] much the same way as ca* By following the footsteps of Dirac we come to appreciate the unity of quantum mechanics. Considerthe inner product o Usingthe completenessf
(jc'a))
is.
we have
(j8a).
jc'),
jdx'((S\\x')(x'\\a)
A.7.6)
two wave functions. Note as the overlap integral; the identification of defining (fi\\a) w postulate for (/?a)ith the overlap integral follows from our completeness The more general interpretation of (fi\\ct), independent of representa\\x'). is that it representshe probability amplitude for state \\a) to be found t in state \\fi). This time let us interpret the expansion that
representations,
la) = 2* \\a
)\\a la>
multiply
A7.7)
both sidesof A.7.7)
1.7. ave W
by
Functions
Space
53
the
is recognizedas
a':
with
eigenvalue
ua,(x')= (x'\\a').
Let us now examine how (fi\\A\\a) can functions for \\a) and /3).Clearly, we have
(P\\A\\a)
A.7.9)
be written
using
the wave
= =
(P\\x')(x'\\A\\x\(x\"\\a) jdx'jdx\"
A.7.10) jdx'jdx\"mx')(x'\\A\\x\^a{*\")'")
So to be able to evaluate (fi\\A\\a)9 we must know the matrix element which is, in general, a function of the two variables x' and x\". (x'\\A\\x\,") An enormous simplification takes placeif observableA is a function of the positionoperator x. In particular, consider
A which
oscillator
= x2,
A.7.11)
actually appearsin the Hamiltonian for the simple harmonic oscillain problemto be discussed Chapter 2.We have
= ((x'\\)(x\022\\x\=x'2S(x'x\9") A.7.12)
where we have used A.7.1) nd A.7.2). he doubleintegral A.7.10)s now a i T reducedto a single integral:
(P\\x2\\a)
jdx'(f}\\x')x'2(x'\\a)
A.7.13)
In general,
jdx'+$(x')f{x')+a(x').
A.7.14)
Note that the f(x) on the lefthand sideof A.7.14) an operator, while the is on the righthand sideis not an operator. f(x')
54
Momentum
Fundamental
Concepts
jcbasis\342\200\224that
Operator in the Position Basis We now examine how the momentum operator may look in the is, in the representationwhere the position eigenketsare used as base kets. Our starting point is the definition of momentum as the generator of infinitesimal translations:
1ipkx'
\\
= = = =
fdx'\\x'+Lx')(x'\\a)
fdx'\\x')(x'bx'\\a)
J
/\"rfx/jc/>(<jc/a>\342\200\224
\\
Ajc/^<Jc/a>).A.7.15) dx' I
fdx'\\x')
ih
dx
A.7.16)
A.7.17)
or
(x'\\p\\a)
= ih\342\200\224(x'\\a),
dx
where we have used the orthogonality property A.7.2).For the matrix element p in the jcrepresentation, e obtain w
OX
A.7.18)
(P\\p\\a)=
d ihdx')
\\
A.7.19)
In our formalism A.7.19)s not a postulate; rather, it has been derived i using the basic propertiesof momentum. By repeatedly applying A.7.17),
dx
n
A.7.20)
1.7. ave W
Functions
Space
55
MomentumSpaceWave Function So far we have worked exclusivelyin the xbasis.There is actually a from occasional minus signs complete symmetry between x and we can infer from the canonicalcommutation relations.Let us now work in the /?basis,hat is, in the momentum representation. t The For simplicity we continue working in onespace. baseeigenkets in the /?basis specify
p\342\200\224apart \342\200\224which
A722)
and
A.7.23)
The momentum eigenkets {\\p')} span the ket spacein much the same way as the positioneigenkets An arbitrary state ket \\a) can therefore be expandedas follows:
(x')}.
=
jdp'\\p')(P'\\a).
A.7.24)
We
can give a probabilistic interpretation for the expansion coefficient (p'\\a)\\ the probability that a measurementof p gives eigenvalue within a narrow interval dp' is \\{p'\\a)\\2dp'. It is customary to call (p'\\ot) the wave function; the notation 4>a(p')is often used: momentumspace
p'
If
j?
and the
A726)
Let us now establish the connection between the ^representation We ^representation. recall that in the caseof the discretespectra, the change of basis from the old set {fl')} the new set {\\b')} to is characterizedby the transformation matrix A.5.7). ikewise, expectthat we L the desiredinformation is contained in (x'\\p'), hich is a function of x' w and usually called the transformation function from the ^representation to the /^representation.To derive the explicit form of (x'\\p'), irst recall f we A.7.17); letting \\a) be the momentum eigenket /?'), obtain
p',
or
ax
56
Fundamental
Concepts
The solution to
this differential
ip'x'^
h
A.7.29)
where N is the normalization constant to be determined in a moment. Even is though the transformation function {x'\\pf) a function of two variables, x' and p\\ we can temporarily regard it as a function of x' with fixed.It can then be viewedas the probability amplitude for the momentum eigenstate specifiedby /?' to be found at position x';in other words, it is just the wave function for the momentum eigenstate /?'),ften referred to as the o momentum eigenfunction(still in the xspace). A.7.29)imply says that So s the wave function of a momentum eigenstateis a plane wave. It is amusing that we have obtained this planewave solution without solving the Schrodinger quation (which we have not yet written down). e To get the normalization constant N let us first consider
p'
jdp'(x'\\p')(p'\\x\.
righthand
A.7.30)
The lefthand sideis just 8(x' x\;")the using the explicit form of {x'\\p')\\
\342\200\224
= 27rh\\N\\28{x'x\.
= <*'!/>'>
A.7.31)
A.7.32)
exp
ip'x'
h
We can now demonstrate how the positionspace ave function is w related to the momentumspacewave function. All we have to do is rewrite
=
and
jdp'(x'\\p')(p'\\cL)
A.7.33a) A.7.33b)
=
as
*\302\253(*')
jdx'(p'\\x')(x'\\a)
exp
ip x
=
=
A.7.34a)
and
*\302\253(/>')
I Jx'exp
ip'x\"
+\302\253(*')
A.7.34b)
1.7. ave W
Functions
Space
57
inversion This pair of equations is just what one expectsfrom Fourier's theorem.Apparently the mathematicswe have developedsomehow\" knows\" w Fourier's ork on integral transforms.
exp ikx'
\342\200\224
Id
A.7.35)
This is a planewave with wave number k modulated by a Gaussianprofile centeredon the origin. he probability of observing the particle vanishes T ver rapidly for \\x'\\ > d; more quantitatively, the probability density a)2 a Gaussianshapewith width d. 2 has We now compute the expectation values of x, x2, p, and p2. The expectation value of x is clearly zero by symmetry: /OOdx'(a\\x')x'(x'\\a)\\ oo For x2 we obtain '2 2)= (x2)= oodx'x'2\\(x'\\a)\\ ( I 00
/\342\200\242OO
0. dx'\\(x'\\a)\\2x'= A.7.36)
\342\200\242'oo
r
2
\342\200\224
1'
A.7.37)
which
leads to
A.7.38) 2 T for the dispersion the position operator. he expectationvaluesof p and of can alsobe computed as follows: p2
(p)= hk
Id
which
A.7.39a) A.7.39b)
Id
A.7.40)
58 Armed
with
Fundamental
Concepts
in relation A.6.34);
casethe
uncertainty
product is given by
2
4~'
equality this
A.7.41)
For
relation rather than the more general inequality relation A.6.34). reason a Gaussian wave packetis often called a minimum uncer
uncertainty
wave
packet.
now
We
integration\342\200\224just
l
exp
/2
/j
\\
2d2) A.7.42)
(p'hkfd
This momentumspace wave function provides an alternative method for w obtaining (/?) and (p2), hich is also left as an exercise. is The probability of finding the particle with momentum Gaussian(in momentum space)centered on hk, just as the probability of (in position space)centered on zero. finding the particle at x' is Gaussian are Furthermore, the widths of the two Gaussians inversely proportional to eachother, which is just another way of expressing constancy of the the T uncertainty product ((AjcJ)(A/?J) explicitly computed in A.7.41). he wider the spreadin the /?space, narrower the spreadin the xspace, the and vice versa. As an extreme example, supposewe let d>oo. positionspace The wave function A.7.35) becomes plane wave extending over all space; then a the probability of finding the particle is just constant, independent of In contrast, the momentumspace wave function is 5functionlike and is extreme,by letting d > 0, we obtain a sharply peakedat hk. In the opposite w positionspace ave function localizedlike the 5function, but the momenwave function A.7.42) just constant, independent of is momentumspace We have seenthat an extremelywell localized(in the xspace) state is to be regardedas a superpositionof momentum eigenstateswith all possible values of momenta. Even those momentum eigenstateswhose momenta are m Howcomparableto or exceed e must be included in the superposition. at such high valuesof momentum, a description basedon nonrelativistic quantum mechanics is bound to break down.*Despitethis limitation
p'
x'.
p'.
However,
*It
more intricate
1967,
11819).
turns out that the concept of a localized state in relativistic quantum mechanics is far because the possibility of \"negative energy states,\" or pair creation (Sakurai of
1.7. ave W
Functions
Space
59
of our formalism, based on the existence the position eigenket wide domain of applicability. Generalizationto Three Dimensions
has jc'), a
for section we have worked exclusivelyin onespace if we have donecan be generalizedto threespace, the necessary changes are made. The basekets to be used can be taken as either the positioneigenketssatisfying
in this
So far
= xx/> x/x/>
or the momentum eigenketssatisfying
A.7.43)
A7.44)
Pp'>= P'lP'>.
They obey the normalization conditions
= <x'x\"> 63(x'x\")
and
<P'P\">
A.7.45a) A.7.45b)
= S3(p'p\,")
= 8(x'x\8(y'y\")8(z'z\").") A.7.46)
The completenesselationsread r
J</Vx'><x'=l
and
A.7.47a)
/</Vp'><p'=l,
which
A.7.47b)
arbitrary
state ket:
jd\\'\\x')(x'\\a),
A.7.48a) A.7.48b)
The expansioncoefficients(x'a) and (p'a)re identified with the wave a functions ^a(x') and </>a(p') in position and momentum space,respectively. The momentum operator, when taken between \\fi) and a>, ecomes b
A.7.49)
60
Fundamental
Concepts
i analogous to A.7.32)s
1
3/2
exp
A.7.50)
so that
Bnh)
and
3/2
exp
A.7.51a)
/p'xM
i
3/2
I d3x' xp e
*ft(x'). A.7.51b)
It is interesting to check the dimension of the wave functions. In onedimensional roblemsthe normalization requirement A.6.8)implies p that (jc'a)2 the dimension of inverse length, so the wave function has
itself must have the dimension of (length) ~1/2.In contrast, the wave function in threedimensional problems must have the dimension of integrated over all spatial volume must be (length)~3/2 because (x'a)2
unity
(dimensionless).
Problems
1.Prove
[ AB, CD] = AC{D,B } + A { C, } D C{ A } + { C,^ } 2)B. 2. Supposea 2x2matrix X (not necessarily Hermitian, nor unitary) is written as Y n i a a = a0 A rfna, where a0 and tfli2,3 are numbers. a. How are a0 and ak (k = 1,2,3) to tr(X) and tr(a^X)? related b. Obtain an and 0. in terms of the matrix elements 3. Show that the determinant of a 2x2matrix a*a is invariant under
i), ?
I,
= exp
cvaexp
Find a'k in terms of ak when h is in the positive zdirection and interpret your result. 4. Usingthe rules of braket algebra,prove or evaluate the following: a. tr(XY) = tr(YX), where X and Y are operators; b.(XY)^= Y^X*, where X and Y are operators; = c. exp[//(^4)] ? in ketbra form, where A is a Hermitian operator whose eigenvaluesare known;
dV .
/\\
/\\
)\">
\\
/\"
\\
Problems
form a where \\a'), set of base kets. Find the matrix representation of the complete
known,
(a\"/?),...
are all
fl\,...")
6.
7. Considera
answer. of spacespanned by the eigenkets (fl')} a Hermitian A. There is no degeneracy. operator a. Prove that
your
= \\a) and /?) be \\sz down explicitly the square matrix \\sx in the usual (sz diagonal) basis. that corresponds to and \\j) are eigenkets of some Hermitian operator A. Suppose /) that Underwhat conditioncan we conclude /) + \\j) is also an eigenket
b.We
in operator a)(/? that basis. now consider spin \\ system and let a
and
= h/2),espectively.Write r
h/2)
a)(/?
of A! Justify
ket
b.What
is the
null
is the significanceof
operator,
(Aa\
.// a\"*
8.Usingthe orthonormality
where
of
\\
system.
where h is characterizedby the angles shown in the figure. Express your answer as a linear combinationof +) and  ). [Note: The answer is
\342\200\224
cos
But do not just verify that this answer satisfies the above eigenvalue eigenvalue equation. Rather, treat the problem as a straightforward
62
Fundamental
Concepts
problem.Also do not use rotation operators,which we will introduce later in this book.] 10. he Hamiltonian operator for a twostate system is given by T
where a is a number with the dimension of energy. Find the energy ( eigenvaluesand the correspondingnergy eigenketsas linear combinae of and 2)). A twostate system is characterizedby the Hamiltonian
combinations
11.
1)
1)
(#//).
proof:
(Sft)ft;+>= ft;
with
h;
+ ) given by
where ft and a are the polar and azimuthal angles, respectively,that characterize ft.) 12. spin \\ system is known to be in an eigenstateof S*ft with eigenvalue A h /2,where ft is a unit vector lying in the xzplane that makes an angle y with the positive zaxis.
Problems
63
Sx,that is,
(For your
A 13.
beam of spin \\ atoms goes through a seriesof SternGerlachtype measurementsas follows: a. The first measurementacceptssz = h/2atoms and rejectssz = h/2
own
peace of
tt.)
mind
atoms, where sn is the eigenvalueof the operator S h, with h making an angle /? in the xzplane with respectto the zaxis. c.The third measurement acceptssz = h/2atoms and rejectssz =
\342\200\242 \342\200\224
h/2
rejectssn =
we orient the secondmeasuring apparatus if we are to maximize the of the final sz = h/2beam? intensity A 14. certain observablein quantum mechanicshas a 3 X 3 matrix represenas follows:
\342\200\224
beam when the sz = intensity of the final sz beam surviving the first measurementis normalizedto unity? How must
What
h/2atoms.
is the
\342\200\224
h/2
h/2
representation
v/2
/0 1 0\\ 1 0 1 [0 1 0,
this
a. Find
eigenvalues.Is there any degeneracy? corresponding b.Give a physicalexamplewhere all this is relevant. 15. et A and B be observables. L the Suppose simultaneouseigenketsof A and B {\\a\\ b')} form a completeorthonormal set of basekets. Can we always concludethat
If your answer is yes, prove the assertion. f I counterexample.
corre
your
16. wo Hermitian operators anticommute: T {A,B}=AB Isit possibleto have a simultaneous(that is, common) eigenket of A and BlProve or illustrate your assertion.
17.Two observables Ax
known not
and A2,
which
do not
are
to commute,
64 yet we alsoknow
that Ax
Fundamental
Concepts
and
A2
[Al9H]= 0,
[A29H]=
Are Prove that the energyeigenstatesare, in general, degenerate. there As an example,you may think of the centralforceproblem exceptions? H = p2/2m+ K(r),with Ax > L2,A2 > Lx. 18. . The simplestway to derive the Schwarz inequality goesas follows. a First, observe
X choose
for
any
complex number
the
\\;
then
in
such a
way that
the
b. Show that
with that
X
reducesto the Schwarzinequality, equality sign in the generalized uncertainty state in question satisfies
relation
purely imaginary.
the usual rules of wave mechanics show for a Gaussian wave packetgiven by
exp
\302\253p)x'
Ad
uncertainty
relation
=h
\"
2*
= (imaginary number)(.x'A/?a)
19.a. Compute
where the expectation value is taken for the Sz + state. Usingyour result, checkthe generalizeduncertainty relation
(b).
b.Check the uncertainty relation with A > Sx,B > S for the Sx + state. 20.Find the linear combinationof  + ) and  ) kets that maximizesthe
\342\200\224
with
Problems
65
uncertainty product
explicitly that for the linear combination you found, the uncer relation for Sx and S is not violated. 21. valuate the xp uncertainty product ((AjcJ)((A/?J) for a one E dimensional particle confinedbetween two rigid walls
Verify tainty
oo
forO , otherwise.
order of magnitude of the length of time that an ice can be balancedon its point if the only limitation is that set by the pick uncertainty Heisenberg principle.Assume that the point is sharp and that the point and the surfaceon which it restsare hard.You may make approximations which do not alter the general order of magnitude of the result.Assume reasonablevalues for the dimensions and weight of it the icepick. Obtain an approximate numerical result and express in
If 23.Considera threedimensionalket space. a certain set of orthonormal usedas the basekets,the operators A 2), 1>, and
kets\342\200\224say, 3)\342\200\224are
seconds.
A= 0
with
Z>
0 ib 0 \\0 a and both real. a. Obviously^4 exhibits a degeneratespectrum. DoesB also exhibit a degenerate spectrum? b. Show that A and commute. c. Find a new set of orthonormal ketswhich are simultaneouseigenkets of both A and B.Specifythe eigenvaluesof A and B for each of the three eigenkets. oes your specificationof eigenvaluescompletely D characterizeeach eigenket? 24. a. Prove that (l/vT)(l + iox) acting on a twocomponentspinor can be regardedas the matrix representation of the rotation operator about the xaxisy angle tt/2. (The minus sign signifies that the rotation b
a
a)
0 0
b
7
0 o
0 0
ib
\342\200\224
representation of Sz when the eigenkets of S are usedas basevectors. 25.Someauthors define an operator to be real when every member of its matrix elements (b'\\A\\b\") is real in some representation({\\b')} asisin b this case). this concept representation independent, that is, do the Is
is clockwise.)
66
matrix
Fundamental
Concepts
is elements remain real even if some basis other than (/>')} familiar operatorssuch as Sv and Sz
matrix that
27. a. Supposethat f(A) is a function of a Hermitian operator A with the property A a')= a'\\a').Evaluate (b\"\\f(A)\\b') when the transforma\\
b.
r is your expressionas far as you can. Note that + y2 + z2,where x9 y, and z are operators. ]jx2 28.a. Let x and px be the coordinate and linear momentum in one P bracket dimension. valuate the classical oisson E
Simplify
classical [x>F(px)\\
*
b. Let x and
this
px
;c,expiPxa\\ i. h
corresponding
eigenvalue?
bracket[*2, Jp2]classical.
Problems
67
exp
I 31.n the main text we discussed effectof 3T(dx')on the position and the momentum eigenketsand on a more general state ket a). e can also W
changesunder translation.
(i) (ii)
dp
(p\\x\\a)
=
dp
where <t>a(p') = (p'\\ol) and <t>p(p')= (p'\\fi) are momentumspace wave functions, b.What is the physicalsignificanceof
expf
where x is the position operator and H is some number dimension of momentum? Justify your answer.
with
the
CHAPTER2
QuantumDynamics
how So far we have not discussed physicalsystemschange with time. This chapter is devoted exclusivelyto the dynamic development of state kets and/or observables.In other words, we are concernedhere with the or quantum mechanical analogue of Newton's (or Lagrange's Hamilton's) equations of motion.
The first important point we should keep in mind is that time is just a parameter in quantum mechanics,not an operator.In particular, time is not in an observable the language of the previous chapter.It is nonsensical to talk about the time operator in the same senseas we talk about the position Ironically, in the historical developmentof wave mechanicsboth operator. L. de Broglie and E. Schrodinger were guided by a kind of covariant analogy between energy and time on the one hand and momentum and position (spatial coordinate) on the other. Yet when we now look at quantum mechanics in its finished form, there is no trace of a symmetrical The treatment between time and space. relativistic quantum theory of fields doestreat the time and spacecoordinateson the same footing, but it doesso only at the expenseof demoting position from the status of being an observable to that of being just a parameter.
68
69
Operator Our basic concern in this section is, How does a state ket change with time? Supposewe have a physical system whose state ket at t0 is At later times, we do not, in general, expectthe system by represented to to remain in the same state \\a). Let us denote the ket corresponding the state at somelater time by
Time Evolution
a).
<M0;/>,(t>to)9
B.1.1)
wherewe have written a, t0 to remind ourselvesthat the system used to be in state a)at someearlierreferencetime /0.Because time is assumed be to a continuous parameter, we expect
lim
= \\a9t0;t) \\a)
B.1.2)
and we may
as well use a shorthand notation, = B.1.3) l<Mo;'o> l<Mo>> for this. Our basic task is to study the time evolution of a state ket:
time evolution
Put in another way, we are interested in asking how the state ket changes under a time displacement t0 * /. As in the case translation, the two kets are related by an operator of which we call the timeevolution operator /0):
\302\260U(t,
>
,
.x B.1.4)
//H
_
= a,/0;/>^(/,/0)a,/0>.
What
timeevolution
B.1.5)
are someof the properties would like to ascribeto the timeevoluwe operator? The first important property is the unitary requirement for ^(/, /0) that follows from probability conservation.Supposethat at t0 the state ket is expandedin terms of the eigenketsof some observableA: a'
at Likewise, somelater time, we have a
B.1.6)
>
individual
B.1.7)
expansion
In general, we do not expect the modulus of the coefficientto remain the same:*
.
For instance, considera spin
* We later show, however,
equal to \\
B.1.8)
its spin magnetic moment
system
with
<v@is indeed
<v(fo).
70
Quantum
Dynamics
subjectedto a uniform magnetic field in the zdirection. To be specific, supposethat at t0 the spin is in the positive jcdirection;that is, the system is found in an eigenstate of Sx with eigenvalue h/2.As time goeson, the in spin precesses the xyplane, as will be quantitatively demonstrated later in this section. his means that the probability for observing Sx + is no T at t > /0; there is a finite probability for observing Sx as well. longer unity Yet the sum of the probabilities for Sx + and Sx remains unity at all we and times.Generally, in the notation of B.1.6) B.1.7), must have
\342\200\224
a'
a'
S for the individual expansioncoefficients. tated another way, despite if the state ket is initially normalizedto unity, it must remain normalized to unity at all later times:
B.1.8)
(a,to\\a9
As
/0> = =>
1 (a,/0; t\\a,
t0; t)
= 1.
B.1.10
in the translation case, this property is guaranteed if the timeevolution operatoris taken to be unitary. For this reason we take unitarity,
&(t9t0)V(t9t0)=l9
to
B.1.11
be one of the
coincidence that
property:
<%
> >o).
B.1.12
This equation says that if we are interested in obtaining time evolution from t0 to /2, then we can obtain the same result by first considering time evolution from t0 to tl9 then from tx to reasonable requirement.Note that we read B.1.12) right to left! from It also turns out to be advantageous to consideran infinitesimal timeevolutionoperator ^(/0 + dt, /0):
\\a9 to\\
t0
B.1.13
must
Because continuity [seeB.1.2)],infinitesimal timeevolutionoperator of the reduceto the identity operator as dt goesto zero, lim #(fo + <//,/o)=l, B.1.14
O
and as in the translation case,we expectthe differencebetween^(/0 + dt, t0) and 1to be of first order in dt. We assertthat all these requirementsare satisfiedby
,
i to)=lQdt9
B.1.15
71
^ = ?2.
the B.1.15)infinitesimal
B.1.16
composition
property
<%(t0
B.1.17
it differs from the identity operator by a term of order dt. The as property can alsobe checked follows: <&*(t0 + dt, to)V(to+ dt, t0) = A + i&dt)(l /Q A) ~*>
B.1.18
to the extent that terms of order or higher can be ignored. The operator fi has the dimension of frequency or inverse time. Is there any familiar observable with the dimension of frequency?We recall that in the old quantum theory, angular frequency co is postulated to be related to energy by the PlanckEinsteinrelation
{dtJ
E = ho>. B.1.19 Let us now borrow from classical echanicsthe idea that the Hamiltonian m is the generator of time evolution (Goldstein 1980, It is then natural 4078).
to relate
2 to the Hamiltonian
operator H\\
^.
n
B.1.20
as
,
infinitesimal
B.1.21
to where //, the Hamiltonian operator, is assumed be Hermitian.The reader ask whether the h introducedhere is the same as the h that appearsin may This question can be the expressionfor the translation operator A.6.32). answered by comparing the quantummechanicalequation of motion we derivelater with the classical quation of motion. It turns out that unless the e two /i's are taken to be the same, we are unable to obtain a relation like
^
dt
B.1.22
v y
The Schrodingerquation E
We are now in a position to derive the fundamental differential equation for the timeevolution operator ^(/, t0). We exploit the composiIf the fl
be evaluated
at t0.
72
Quantum
Dynamics
B.1.12):
letting
tl
\302\273t,
t2
+ dt
in
iHdt
B.1.23
where the time differencet
<%(t which
\342\200\224
+ dt, t0)
in
tn o
neednot be infinitesimal.
\302\260U{t,
We have
,'o)>
C2124)
can be written
B.1.25
This is the Schrodingerquation for the timeevolution operator. Everything e that has to do with time development follows from this fundamental equation. Equation B.1.25) immediately leadsto the Schrodingerequation for a state ket. Multiplying both sidesof B.1.25) /0) on the right, we by obtain
a,
9t0)\\a9t0)= H<&(t9t0)\\a9t0).
But \\ot,t0)
B.1.26
= 'a9t0;t) H\\a9t0;t)9
B.1.27)
where B.1.5) beenused. has If we are given t0) and, in addition, know how W(t, /0) acts on the initial state ket it is not necessary bother with the Schrodinger to /0), for the state ket B.1.27). we have to do is apply <%(t, t0) to All equation /0); in this manner we can obtain a state ket at any /. Our first task is therefore to derive formal solutionsto the Schrodingerequation for the time There evolution operator B.1.25). are three casesto be treated separately: Case The Hamiltonian operator is independent of time. By this we mean that even when the parameter / is changed, the H operator remains unchanged. The Hamiltonian for a spinmagnetic moment interwith a timeindependentmagnetic field is an example of this. The in such a caseis given by solution to B.1.25)
a,
\302\260U(t,
a,
1.
interacting
^C'o)
h
B.1.28
h
exp
iH(tt0) 1 M(tto) h
B.1.29
73
exp
H
2\\ h
obviously satisfies differential expressionB.1.28) reducesto the condition is also satisfiedbecause / > /0, B.1.28) as boundary An alternative way to obtain B.1.28)to compound is identity operator. infinitesimal timeevolutionoperators successively just as we did to obtain
1
//'s at
Case 2. The Hamiltonian operator H is timedependent but the different times commute. As an example, let us consider the to spinmagnetic moment subjected a magnetic field whose strength varies with time but whose direction is always unchanged. The formal solution to in B.1.25)this caseis
B.1.32
This can be proved in a similar way. We simply replaceH(t t0) in and B.1.30)jt[dt'H(t'). by
\342\200\224
B.1.29
The Z/'s at different times do not commute. Continuing Case the exampleinvolving spinmagnetic moment, we suppose,this time, the magnetic field direction also changes with time: at / = tx in the a at xdirection, t = t2 in the ^direction, nd so forth. Because and Sv do Sx d not commute, H(tx)and H(t2),which go like S*B, o not commuteeither. The formal solution in such a situation is given by
with that 00
3.
E
which
\342\200\224
n
\302\246 \302\246 \342\200\242 \302\246 \302\246 \302\246
a is sometimesknown as the Dyson series, fter F. J. Dyson, who developeda perturbation expansion of this form in quantum field theory. We do not prove B.1.33) becausethe proof is very similar to the one now presentedin Chapter 5 for the timeevolutionoperator in the interaction picture. In elementary applications,only case1is of practical interest. In the remaining part of this chapter we assume that the H operator is timeindetimeindependent.
We
will
74
Quantum
Dynamics
how
it
acts on the
base ketsused in expanding \\a). This is particularly baseketsused are eigenketsof A such that
straightforward
if the
= [A,H] 0;
B.1.34)
then the eigenkets A are also eigenkets of H, calledenergy eigenkets, of whose eigenvaluesare denoted by Ea>\\
= Ea,\\a').
We can now expand the timeevolution operator Taking t0 = 0 for simplicity, we obtain
in
B.1.35)
terms of \\a'){a'\\.
a' a'
a\"
The timeevolution operator written in this form enablesus to solve any initialvalueproblemonce the expansionof the initial ket in terms of {\\a')} is known. As an example,supposethat the initial ket expansion reads
\">
>o
=
a' a'
We then have
I^Y
==n./\\==exn
I2U_
1^ f = 0\\ = V
a7
/7'\\//7'/y
B.1.38)
In other words,the expansion coefficientchanges with time
as
= 0) > ca.{i)ca,(t= =
with
0)exp(
\342\200\224f^)
B.1.39)
componentsdo
different.
A
its modulus unchanged.Notice that the relative phasesamong various vary with time because the oscillation frequencies are
of
itself. {K>} We
B.1.40)
75
~Vr
\342\200\224
B.1.41
so if the system is initially a simultaneouseigenstateof A and H< it remains so at all times. The most that can happen is the phase modulation, exp( iEa4/h).It is in this sensethat an observable compatible with H is a [seeB.1.34)] constant of the motion. We will encounter this connection onceagain in a different form when we discussthe Heisenberg equation of
motion.
In the foregoing discussion basic task in quantum dynamics is the finding an observable that commutes with H and evaluating its eigenvalues. Once that is done, we expand the initial ket in terms of the o eigenkets f that observableand just apply the timeevolutionoperator.This last step merely amounts to changing the phase of each expansion coeffias indicatedby Even though we worked out the case where there is just one observA that commutes with //, our considerationsan easily be generalized c a when there are several mutually compatible observablesll also commuting
reducedto
coefficient,
B.1.39).
observable
with
H:
0 #]=...=.
=0,
B.1.42
B.1.43
where EK, is uniquely specifiedoncea\\b\\c\\...re specified.t is thereI a set of fundamental importance to find a complete of mutually compatible observablesthat also commute with H. Oncesuch a set is found, we express the initial ket as a superpositionof the simultaneouseigenkets f A, B, o and H.The final stepisjust to apply the timeevolutionoperator, written as In this B.1.43). manner we can solve the most general initialvalue problem a timeindependent H. with
therefore
C,...
is instructive to study how the expectation value of an observable that as a function of time. Suppose at t = 0 the initial state is one of changes the eigenstates an observableA that commuteswith H, as in B.1.40). of We now look at the expectation value of someother observable B, which need not commute with A nor with H. Because a later time we have at
It
B.1.44)
76
Quantum
Dynamic^
(B)is given
by
iE.t
= (a'\\B\\a')9
which
B.1.45)
is independent of t. So the expectation value of an observable taken with respect to an energy eigenstate does not change with time. For this reasonan energy eigenstateis often referred to as a stationary state. The situation is more interesting when the expectation value is taken with respect to a superposition of energy eigenstates, r a nonstationary o state. Supposethat initially we have
a
We
B.1.46
B
a
?
a
<Vexpl
\342\200\224
K>
i{Ea..Ea.)t
a'
a\"
B.1.47)
So this
time the expectation value consists of oscillating terms whose angular frequenciesare determined by N. Bohr'sfrequency condition
h
B.1.48
Spin Precession It is appropriate to treat an examplehere. e consider extremely W an simple system which, however, illustrates the basic formalism we have developed.
We start with
moment
a Hamiltonian of a spin
\\
B.1.49)
(e < 0
for the electron). Furthermore, we take B to be a static, uniform magnetic field in the zdirection.We can then write H as
eB )
mec,
multiplicative
B.1.50
constant,
they
obviously
77
commute. The Sz eigenstates are also energy eigenstates, and the energy eigenvaluesare corresponding
corre
^
=
2mec
forSz\302\261.
B.1.51
the differencein the
two
in
such a
way that
CO
mec as
We
can
then
rewrite the
H operator simply
H=uSz.
All
B.1.53)
z
the information
evolution
operator
(
~l\302\260t
B.1.54)
\342\200\224
We
apply this to the initial state. The basekets we must use in expanding ket are obviously the Sz eigenkets, and ), which are also that at / = 0 the system is characterized by energy eigenkets. uppose S
the
initial
+)
B.1.55) a> = c++ ) + c_>. we Upon applying B.1.54),see that the state ket at some later time is
c_exp
where we have used
>, B.1.56)
B.1.57)
Specifically,let us supposethat the initial ket \\a) representsthe spinup (or,more precisely, z +) state  + ), which means that S
c+=l,
At
c_ = 0.
B.1.58)
Next, let us supposethat initially the system is in the Sx + state. with we Comparing A.4.17a) B.1.55),seethat
a later time,
it
is still
in
.
It
B.1.59)
78
Quantum
Dynamics
in
the Sv
\302\261
t:
\\(Sx\302\261\\a,to
= 0;
2_
1)
'1
exp
I
fit exp
exp
COS sin'
'
iwt
\302\261exp
T'
2
\342\200\224
for
Sr +,
for Sx
.
B.1.60a B.1.60b
t Even though the spin is initially in the positive xdirection,he magnetic field in the zdirection causesit to rotate; as a result, we obtain a finite probability for finding Sx at some later time. The sum of the two is probabilities seento be unity at all times, in agreementwith the unitarity of the timeevolution operator. property w UsingA.4.6), e can write the expectation value of Sx as / h
\302\253n
2ICOS
B.1.61
so this
oscillates with an angular frequency corresponding the to quantity differenceof the two energyeigenvaluesdivided by h, in agreementwith our Similar exercises S and S show that with general formula B.1.47).
B.1.62a
and Physically this means that the spin precessesin the xyplane. We will comment further on spin precession when we discuss rotation operatorsin
B.1.62b
Chapter3.
Relation
this section by asking how state kets at different times We conclude are correlatedwith each other. Supposethe initial state ket at t = 0 of a W physical system is given by a>. ith time it changes into f0 which we obtain by applying the timeevolution operator.We are concerned
a,
\342\200\2240;f),
79
with the extent to which the state ket at a later time t is similar to the state ket at / = we thereforeconstruct the inner product between the two state kets at different times:
B.1.63
is known as the correlationamplitude. The modulus of C(t) provides measure of the \"resemblance\" between the state kets at different times. As an extreme example, considerthe very specialcase where the initial ket \\a) is an eigenketof H; we then have
which
a quantitative
iEa.t
h
B.1.64
times\342\200\224which
so the modulus of the correlation amplitude is unity at all not surprising a stationary state.In the more general situation for initial ket is represented a superpositionof as in by
a a
As
is
where the
we {tf')}, B.1.37),have a
h
? <>exp
a
h
B.1.65
we sum over many terms with oscillating time dependence different of frequencies, a strong cancellationis possiblefor moderatelylarge valuesof t. We expect the correlation amplitude that starts with unity at / = 0 to
in decrease magnitude with
time.
in To estimate B.1.65)a more concrete manner, let us supposethat the state ket can be regarded as a superpositionof so many energyeigenkets with similar energiesthat we can regard them as exhibiting essentially a It is then legitimate to replacethe sum by the quasicontinuous spectrum.
jdEP{E),
a
'a
B.1.66
jdE\\g(E)\\2p(E)expi h
iEt
B.1.67
jdE\\g(E)\\2p(E)=l.
B.1.68
Quantum
Dynamics
A?. Writing
as B.1.67)
l
\\g(E)\\2p(E) may
be peakedaround E = Eo
C(O= expf
\342\204\242u*
B.1.69
we seethat as t becomes large, the integrand oscillates very rapidly unless the energy interval \\E Eo\\ is small compared with h/t.If the interval for ~ h/t holds is much narrower than width of which \\E Eo\\ of get essentiallyno contribution to C(t) because strong \\g(E)\\2p(E)\342\200\224we cancellations. characteristic time at which the modulus of the correThe amplitude starts becomingappreciablydifferent from 1is given by h \342\200\224 \342\200\224
A?\342\200\224the
correlation
'
.70)
Even though this equation is obtained for a superposition state with a quasicontinuous energy spectrum, it also makes sense for a twolevel system; in the spinprecessionroblem consideredearlier, the state ket, p = which is initially \\SX + ), starts losing its identity after ~1/co /*/(?'+E _ ), as is evident from B.1.60). To summarize,as a result of time evolution the state ket of a physical to system ceases retain its original form after a time interval of order h/&E. In the literature this point is often said to illustrate the timeenergy unceruncertainty
relation
A/A?^/i.
B.1.71
However, it is to be clearly understood that this timeenergyuncertainty relation is of a very different nature from the uncertainty relation between In two incompatible observablesdiscussed Section in 1.4. Chapter 5 we will in comeback to B.1.71) connection with timedependent perturbation theory.
Operators
development
In the previous section we introduced the conceptof time developthe by considering timeevolution operator that affectsstate kets; that approachto quantum dynamics is known as the Schrodinger picture. There is another formulation of quantum dynamics where observables, rather than state kets,vary with time; this secondapproach is known as the Heisenberg the in picture. Before discussing differencesbetween the two approaches detail, we digressto make some general commentson unitary operators.
2.2.The
81
in Unitary operatorsare used for many different purposes quantum I a mechanics. n this book we introduced (Section1.5)n operator satisfying with the question the unitarity property.In that section we were concerned of how the baseketsin one representation are related to those in someother The representations. state kets themselvesare assumed not to change as we switch to a different set of baseketseven though the numericalvaluesof the expansioncoefficientsfor \\a) are, of course,different in different represenwe Subsequently introduced two unitary operatorsthat actually and the change the state kets, the translation operator of Section 1.6
representations.
timeevolutionoperator of Section
2.1. have We
B.2.1)
where U may stand for ^(dx) or ^/{t,t0). HereU\\a) is the state ket to corresponding a physical system that actually has undergone translation or time evolution. It is important to keepin mind that under a unitary transformation that changesthe state kets, the inner product of a state bra and a state ket remains unchanged:
B.2.2)
operators,we can infer
(P\\X\\a)
that
how (fi\\X\\a)
must
change:
\302\253i8l/t).JT.(I/a\302\273
= <j8l/t*l/a>.
B.2.3)
follows
We now make a very simple mathematicalobservation that from the associative axiom of multiplication:
= ((P\\Uf)X(U\\a))(P\\(U*XU)\\a).
B.2.4)
Is there any physicsin this observation?This mathematicalidentity suggests two approaches unitary transformations: to
Approach
1:
a)> U\\a)9 2:
X > U^XU,
with
B.2.5a)
Approach
with
B.2.5b)
In classicalphysics we do not introduce state kets, yet we talk about translation, time evolution, and the like. This is possiblebecausethese operations actually change quantities such as x and L, which are observconnection
ablesof classicalmechanics.We therefore conjecture that a closerconnecif with classical hysics may be established we follow approach 2. p A simpleexample may be helpful here. e go back to the infinitesiW in translation operator ^(dxf).The formalism presented Section 1.6 is based on approach 1; ^(dxf) affects the state kets, not the position
infinitesimal
82
Quantum
Dynamics
operator: x.
In contrast, if we follow approach 2, we obtain
B.2.6)
^x
=X + . ,
h
= x + dx'. We leave it as an exercise the reader to show that for to the same result for the expectationvalue of x:
B.2.7)
both approachesead l
B.2.8)
the
previous sectionwe examined how state kets evolvewith time. This means that we were following approach 1, nown as the Schrodinger k picture when to time evolution. Alternatively we may follow approach 2, known applied as the Heisenberg picture when appliedto time evolution. In the Schrodingerpicture the operators corresponding observto ableslike x, py, and Sz are fixed in time, while state kets vary with time, as indicatedin the previous section.In contrast, in the Heisenberg picture the to operatorscorresponding observablesvary with time; the state kets are fixed, frozen so to speak,at what they were at t0. It is convenientto set t0 in which is defined by /0) to zero for simplicity and work with
\302\260ll{t,
\302\260U(t,
t0). In
the
\302\260U(t\\
B.2.9)
observable by
Motivated by of B.2.5b) approach 2, we
A<H)(t)
= W*(t)A<s>W(t)9
B.2.10
where the superscriptsH and S stand for Heisenberg and Schrodinger, At / = 0, the Heisenberg observable and the correrespectively. picture corresponding Schrodinger icture observablecoincide: p
B.2.11
2.2.The
83
The state kets alsocoincide between the Heisenberg picture state ket is frozen to
two what
B.2.12
independent of t. This is in dramatic contrast state ket, the Schrodingerpicture
\302\260>\342\200\242
B.2.13
to
= 0>
B.2.14
picture.Assuming
A(S)
is the
differentiating
B.2.10)]
dt
in case
dA(H)
^r dt
in
A% + tyA
dt
in
in
r[A\\&Hty],
B.2.15
B.2.16a
i
at
\\^H. in
*
B.2.16b
{22.11
\302\260U
accordance with
B.2.9), and
\302\260lt
is given
B.2.18
so it is all
right
to
as B.2.15)
[A\\H].
B.2.19
84
Quantum
Dynamics
This equation is known as the Heisenberg equation of motion. Notice that of we have derived it using the properties the timeevolutionoperator and the defining equation for A(H\\ with It is instructive to compare B.2.19) the classicalequation of bracket form. In classical hysics,or a function A of q 's f motion in Poisson p and /?'s that does not involve time explicitly, we have (Goldstein1980
4056)
Again,
dA
\342\200\224
= [A, i/jdassical
B.2.20
we seethat Dirac'suantization rule A.6.47)leads to the correct q was equation in quantum mechanics. Indeed, historically B.2.19) first his characteristicmodesty\342\200\224called it written by P. A. M. Dirac, the Heisenberg equation of motion. It is worth noting, however,that B.2.19 makessensewhether or not A{H) has a classical nalogue. For example, the a spin operator in the Heisenberg icture satisfies p
who\342\200\224with
dt
ih
I,
B.2.21
argue that for
which can
p's.Rather than
the ansatz,
be used to discussspin precession, ut this equation has no b classicalcounterpart becauseSz cannot be written as a function of q 'sand classicalcounterparts, the correct classicalequation quantities possessing can be obtained from the correspondinguantummechanicalequation via q
*L
Jclassical
insisting
on
>
B.2.22
mechanics, but the
from quantum
FreeParticles;Ehrenfesfs Theorem
Whether we work in the Schrodingerpicture or in the Heisenberg picture, to be able to use the equations of motion we must first learn how to construct the appropriate Hamiltonian operator.For a physical system with classical nalogues,we assumethe Hamiltonian to be of the same form as in a classicalphysics; we merely replace the classicalx/s and /?/s by the W corresponding operators in quantum mechanics. ith this assumption we can reproduce correct classical quations in the classicalimit. Whenever the l e
this book we follow the order: the Schrodinger picture* the Heisenberg picture* the an enlightening treatment of the same subject in opposite order, classical and 109. the Schrodinger picture, see Finkelstein A973), 6870 Heisenberg picture
\342\200\224> \302\273
*In
F classical. or
2.2.The
85
an ambiguity arisesbecauseof noncommuting observables, attempt to we resolve it by requiring H to be Hermitian; for instance, we write the quantummechanical analogue of the classicalproduct xp as \\{xp + px). When the physicalsystem in question has no classical nalogues, we can a only guessthe structure of the Hamiltonian operator.We try various forms until we get the Hamiltonian that leads to results agreeing with empirical
observation. In practical applicationsit is often necessary evaluate the commuto of xt (or Pi) with functions of Xj and p.To this end the following formulas are found to be useful:
commutator
B.2.23a
and
B.2.23b
x
where F and G are functions that can be expandedin powersof pj'sand We 's,espectively. can easilyprove both formulas by repeatedly applying r
A.6.50e).
We are now in a position to apply the Heisenberg equation of motion to a free particle of massm. The Hamiltonian is taken to be of the same form as in classical echanics: m
\342\200\236
.?JjtgllH.
2m 2m
B.2.24
any function
We look at the observables and xi9 which are understood to be the pt momentum and the positionoperator in the Heisenberg icture even though p
we omit the
's,we have
of
Thus for a free particle, the momentum operator is a constant of the motion, which means that pt(t) is the same as pt@) at all times. Quite that generally, it is evident from the Heisenberg equation of motion B.2.19) whenever A{H) commutes with the Hamiltonian, A{H) is a constant of the motion. Next,
dxt dt
. ih[
1
1 1 11 ih 2m ih J
Pi
dp,
E pj
P,
@) mm
B.2.26
86
Quantum
Dynamics
t,
B.2.27
is reminiscent of the classicaltrajectory equation for a uniform rectilinear motion. It is important to note that even though we have
[x,@),*,@)]=0
at equal times, the commutator of the vanish; specifically,
B.2.28
times
jc/s at
different
does not
Pi@)t
m
Applying
iht
m
this
B.2.29
the
uncertainty
relation A.4.53)to
commutator, we obtain
2
h2t2
Among
'
B.2.30
other things, this relation implies that even if the particle is well localized at f = 0, its position becomes more and more uncertain with time, a conclusionwhich can also be obtained by studying the timeevolution behavior of freeparticlewave packetsin wave mechanics. We now add a potential V(x) to our earlier freeparticle Hamilto
nian:
2m
V(x).
of the
B.2.31
x, y, and
zoperators.
time, we obtain
dt
ihl
r'
dx V(x). El
m
B.2.32
It
still
dxl
B.2.33
holds because commutes with the newly added term V(x).We can jc, use the Heisenbergquation of motion onceagain to deduce e d2x
dt2
,1?
ih dt
L,H
ih
m dt
'
B.2.34
obtain in vectorial form
Combining this
with
we B.2.32),finally
d2x __ = _
B.2.35
2.2.The
87
This is the quantummechanical analogue of Newton'ssecond law. By taking the expectation values of both sides with respectto a Heisenberg state ket that does not move with time, we obtain
This is known as the Ehrenfesttheoremafter P.Ehrenfest, who derived it in 1927using the formalism of wave mechanics.When written in this expecform, its validity is independent of whether we are using the Heisenor the Schrodinger icture; after all, the expectation values are the p is meaningI same in the two pictures. n contrast, the operator form B.2.35) if we understand x and p to be Heisenbergpicture operators. only I the have completely disappeared.t is We note that in B.2.36) /i's therefore not surprising that the center of a wave packet moves like a to classical article subjected V(\\). p
expectation
Heisenberg meaningful
= a'\\a')
B.2.37
time? In the Schrodingerpicture, A doesnot change, so the basekets, obtained as the solutions to this eigenvalueequation at t = 0, for instance, must remain unchanged. Unlike state kets, the baseketsdo not change in the Schrodinger icture. p The whole situation is very different in the Heisenberg icture, where p the eigenvalueequation we must study is for the timedependentoperator
From
B.2.38
evaluated at t = 0, when the two pictures coincide, e deduce w B.2.37)
B.2.39
which
B.2.40
If we continue to maintain the view that the eigenketsof observablesform the base kets, then {W*\\a')} must be used as the basekets in the Heisen
88
Quantum
Dynamics
base bergpicture.As time goeson, the Heisenbergpicture kets,denotedby \\a',t)H9 move as follows:
\\a\\t)H
= ^\\a').
B.2.41)
\302\260ti
in B.2.41), the Because of the appearance of rather than basekets are seen to rotate oppositely when compared Heisenbergpicture satisfies the with the Schrodingerpicturestate kets; specifically, \\a\\t)H
\302\260ll^
\"
wrongsignSchrodingerequation\"
As
unchanged with time. This is consistent with the theorem on unitary in Notice also the following d equivalent observables iscussed Section for A^H\\t) in terms of the basekets and bras of the Heisenberg expansion
B.2.42) ihjt\\a\\t)H=H\\a\\t)H. that for the eigenvaluesthemselves,we seefrom B.2.40) they are
1.5.
picture:
a' a'
which
Heisenberg
B.2.43)
shows that everything is quite consistent provided that the Heisenbasekets change as in B.2.41). of We see that the expansion coefficients a state ket in terms of base kets are the same in both pictures:
base bra
state ket
B.2.44a)
<V(O = ((a'\\<&)
base bra
\342\200\242
a,t0 = 0>
state ket
Pictorially, we may say that the cosineof the angle between the state ket and the base ket is the same whether we rotate the state ket counterclockor the base ket clockwise. These considerationspply equally well to a base kets that exhibit a continuous spectrum; in particular, the wave function (x'a)can be regarded either as A) the inner product of the stationary position eigenbra with the moving state ket (the Schrodinger picture) or as B) the inner product of the moving position eigenbra with the stationary state ket (the Heisenberg picture).We will discussthe time of the wave function in Section 2.4, where we will derive the dependence celebratedwave equation of Schrodinger. To illustrate further the equivalencebetween the two pictures, we transition amplitudes, which will play a fundamental role in Section study
counterclockwise
2.3.Simple Harmonic
TABLE
Oscillator
89
Versus the Heisenberg Picture Heisenberg picture Stationary Moving: Moving oppositely:
State ket
Observable Baseket
Moving:
Stationary Stationary
B.1.5), B.1.27)
B.2.10), B.2.19)
B.2.41), B.2.42)
physical system prepared at t = 0 to be in an of observableA with eigenvalue At somelater time / we may eigenstate ask, What is the probability amplitude, known as the transition amplitude, for the system to be found in an eigenstateof observableB with eigenvalue A Here and B can be the same or different. In the Schrodingerpicture the state ket at t is given by W\\a')9 while the basekets \\a') and \\b') do not vary with time; so we have
a'.
b'l
base bra
state ket
transition amplitude. In contrast, in the Heisenberg icture the state p is stationary, that is, it remains as \\a') at all times, but the base kets S evolveoppositely. o the transition amplitude is for
this
ket
B.2.46)
base bra state ket
Obviously B.2.45)
In
and
(b'\\W(t,0)\\a').
someloose sensethis is the
transition
B.2.47)
\"going\" from
amplitude for
state
this To conclude sectionlet us summarize the differencesbetween the Table p Schrodinger picture and the Heisenbergicture; see
2.1.
Quantum
Dynamics
any
seriousstudent of
and Eigenkets Energy Eigenvalues We begin our discussionwith Dime's elegant operator method, which is based on the earlier work of M. Born and N. Wiener, to obtain the and energyeigenvaluesof the simple harmonic oscillator. energy eigenkets The basicHamiltonian is
H\022m+
where
co
p2
mu2x2
>
is the angular frequency of the classical scillator related to the o constant k in Hooke's via co = yjk/m. The operators jc and p law spring are, of course,Hermitian. It is convenient to define two nonHermitian
mco
V
operators,
I
\\
2n
ip x + mu
\\
) J
a+ =
V
mco
/
\\
2n
ip
\\
,_ ^
mu>)
known
commutation
as the annihilation operator and the creation operator, respectively, for reasonsthat will become evident shortly. Usingthe canonicalcommutawe readily obtain relations,
(i\\x d] + i[dx])=l
We
B 3 3)
N=ajfa,
which
B.3.4)
to show that
m 2u> 2 no)
= x
^,
2'
B.3.5)
v 7
so we have an important relation between the number operator and the Hamiltonian operator: + B.3.6) H=hu(N \\). BecauseH is just a linear function of N, N can be diagonalized simultawith H.We denote an energyeigenketof N by its eigenvaluen, so
simultaneously
We
n must
B.3.8)
2.3.Simple
which
Harmonic Oscillator
91
En=(n+ \\)hu.
To appreciatethe physical significanceof note that
B.3.9)
a, a\\
and
N9
let us
first
= = = + [N,a] [a*a9a] a*[a9a][a*9a]a a9 where we have usedB.3.3). we Likewise, can derive = [N9a*] a*.
As
B.3.10
B.3.11
a result, we have
= (n+l)a*\\n)
and
B.3.12a
= (nl)a\\n).
Theserelationsimply
eigenvalue
B.3.12b
o the B increased (decrease)f n (decreased) one. ecause increase oneamounts to the creation (annihilation) of onequantum unit of energy by h(o, the term creation operator(annihilation operator)for a*(a) is deemed
that a?\\n){a\\n)) by
appropriate.
a\\n)
and
\\n
up
to a
B.3.13 a/i>= c/il>, where c is a numericalconstant to be determined from the requirement that both \\n) and \\n be normalized.First, note that
1)
(n\\afa\\n)
= \\c\\2.
that
B.3.14
a^a is just the
We can number
operator,so
= c2.
obtain
B.3.15
a\\n)=}[n\\n\\).
Similarly, it
B.3.16
annihilation
B.3.17)
the
applying
operator a to
B.3.18
92
We
Quantum
Dynamics
can obtain numerical operator eigenkets with smaller and smaller n the sequence terminates, which is bound to happen wheneverwe start a positive integer n. One may argue that if we start with a noninteger will n, the sequence not terminate, leading to eigenketswith a negativevalue of n. But we also have the positivity requirement for the norm of a\\n)\\
until with n
= (n\\N\\n)
= ((n\\a*)(a\\n))0, >
B.3.19
which
implies that n can never be negative! So we conclude that the sequencemust terminate with n = 0 and that the allowed values of n are nonnegative integers. the value of n is zero, the ground state of Because smallestpossible
the harmonic oscillatorhas
B.3.20) E0 = %hu. the creation operator a* to the ground state We can now successively apply we U 0). singB.3.17),obtain
B.3.21
\\n)
In
and
En=(n+ \\)hu,
From
B.3.16), B.3.17),
0,1,2,3,...)
B.3.22
requirement for
B.3.23
x=
2mco (a
B.3.24
x and p operators:
B.3.25a
B.3.25b
2.3.Simple Harmonic
Oscillator
93
Notice that neither jc nor p is diagonal in the TVrepresentation we are using. This is not surprising becausex and /?, like a and a\\ do not commute with N. The operator method can also be used to obtain the energy eigenfunctions
in
with
B.3.26
which, in
B.3.27
w Recalling A.7.17), e can regard this as a differential equation for the wave function (x'\\0): groundstate
d x'+ x0 dx'
where we have introduced
Xq
\342\200\224
\\
B.3.28)
ma)
B.3.29)
which
sets the
solution to
is B.3.28)
length
1
0
We
evaluating
exp
I
jc,
B.3.30)
i
= (x'\\2)
' i
1
\302\253A<
*^
[y/2x0)
\\
dx')
B.3.31
In general, we obtain
1
x0
n X
\342\200\224
JC
dx'
exp
_1
x
0
B.3.32)
94 It
Quantum
Dynamics
is instructive to look at the expectationvaluesof x2 and p2 for the state. First, note that ground
x2 =
When we
x2,only
B.3.33) in B.3.33)
(P > =
It follows
that
~2~\342\200\242
B.3.35)
a energiesre, respectively,
2m
that
(M1 and
it follows and B.3.25a) B.3.25b),
B.3.37)
which
and we
see that
^,
B.3.38)
the
uncertainty
B.3.39)
This is not surprising becausethe groundstate wave function has a Gausshape. In contrast, the uncertainty productsfor the excited states are
Gaussian
larger:
= ((kxJ)((kpJ) (n + \\Jh2,
as the readermay easily verify.
Time Developmentof the Oscillator
B.3.40)
So far we have not discussed time evolution of oscillator state the kets nor of observablesike x and p.Everything we have doneis supposed l to hold at someinstant of time, say at t = 0;the operatorsjc, /?, a, and eft are to be regardedeither as Schrodingerpictureoperators(at all /) or as Heisenbergpicture operators at / = 0.In the remaining part of this section, we work exclusivelyin the Heisenberg picture, which means that x, p, a,
2.3.Simple Harmonic
Oscillator
95
and a* are all timedependent even though we do not explicitly write a x(H)(t), nd so forth. The Heisenberg equations of motion for p and x are, from B.2.32)
and
B.2.33),
\342\200\224
dt
mco
B.3.41a)
and dx
dt w
w
p
m
www
B.3.41b)
two
equations is equivalent to
\342\200\224
uncoupled
mco
icox I =
\342\200\224
icoa
B.3.42a)
da*
dt
B.3.42b)
Incidentally, these relations explicitly show that A^ and H are timeindepenp operatorseven in the Heisenberg icture, as they must be.In terms of x and /?, we can rewrite B.3.43) as
timeindependent
p(o)
mco
exp( iwt),
\342\200\224
P(O)
mco
B.3.44)
sidesseparately,
exp(icot).
x(t) =
and
p(o)
mco
sin cot
B.3.45a)
p(t)=
\342\200\224
p@)coscot.
B.3.45b)
Theselook the same as the classical quations of motion. We seethat the x e and p operators\"oscillate\"just like their classical nalogues. a For pedagogical reasonswe now presentan alternative derivation of Instead B.3.45a). of solving the Heisenbergquation of motion, we attempt e
to evaluate / iHt
\\
 iHt
\342\200\224\342\200\224
B.3.46)
96
Quantum
Dynamics
= exp(*G\\),4exp(/G\\) A + iX[G,A]+
\\
'ft?
2! [G,[G,A]] +
B.3.47)
ft!
.. [G\\G,[G, .
where G is a Hermitian operator and A is a real parameter. We leave the proof of this formula, known as the BakerHausdorfflemma as an exercise. we this formula to B.3.46),obtain Applying
exp
iHt\\ h
iHt
h
it_
i2t2
{2\\h righthand
\\
B.3.48)
B.3.49a)
and
[H,p@)]=ihma2x@)
Thus
B.3.49b)
exp
iHt\\ h
lx@)expi
iHt
h
P(O)
m
3!
in
tWp(o)
m
B.3.50)
(x) and (p) always oscillate with angular frequency to. However, this inference is not correct. Take any energy eigenstate characterized by a definite value of n\\ the expectation value (n\\x(t)\\n) vanishes becausethe and \\n) and \\n +1)are orthogooperatorsx@) and p@) change n by This point is alsoobvious from our earlier conclusion(seeSection2.1) that the expectation value of an observable taken with respectto a stastate doesnot vary with time. To observeoscillationsreminiscentof stationary the classical scillator,we must look at a superposition of energyeigenstates o such as
\302\2611 orthogonal.
B.3.45a).
B.3.51)
2.4.Schrodinger's
Wave Equation
97
p\342\200\224no
The expectation value of x(t) taken with respectto B.3.51) oscillate,as does the readermay readily verify. We have seen that an energy eigenstate does not behave like the the senseof oscillatingexpectation values for x and classical matter how large n may be.We may logically ask, How can we o construct a superpositionf energyeigenstatesthat most closelyimitates the classical scillator? In wavefunction language,we want a wave packetthat o bouncesback and forth without spreading in shape. It turns out that a coherentstate defined by the eigenvalueequation for the nonHermitian annihilation operator a,
oscillator\342\200\224in
B.3.52)
with, in
T job. he coherent general, a complexeigenvalueA doesthe desired state has many other remarkableproperties:
1.When
00
E/(\302\253)!\302\273>.
B3.53)
n
product relation at all times. A systematic study of coherent states, pioneered by R. Glauber, is very the readeris urged to work out an exercise this subject at the on rewarding; end of this chapter.*
WAVE 2.4. CHRODINGER'S S
/(n)2=(^)exp(n).
B.3.54)
EQUATION
TimeDependentWave
Equation
We now turn to the Schrodinger picture and examine the time I evolution of to\\ t) in the jcrepresentation. n other words, our task is to study the behavior of the wave function
a,
= iHx',0 <x'<M0;/>
as a function of time, where
\\a,to\\t)
B.4.1)
in
is a state ket
Scully, and Lamb
the Schrodinger
A974).
98
Quantum
Dynamics
picture at time t, and (x'is a timeindependentposition eigenbra with eigenvalue The Hamiltonian operator is taken to be
x'.
TJ
2m
in
B.4.2)
function of x'.Later in this book we will consider Hamiltonians\342\200\224a morecomplicated timedependent potential F(x,t)\\ a is nonlocal but separablepotential where the righthand side of B.4.3) a replacedby vl(x\v2(x');") momentumdependentinteraction of the form p A + A p, where A is the vector potential in electrodynamics,and so on. We now derive Schrodinger'simedependent wave equation. We t in the first write the Schrodinger equation for a state ket B.1.27) xrepresen\342\200\242 \342\200\242
= F(x')fi3(x'x''), <x\"K(x)x'>
B.4.3)
xrepresentation:
ih
dt
B.4.4)
in where we have used the fact that the position eigenbras the Schrodinger we picture do not change with time. UsingA.7.20), can write the kineticas energy contribution to the righthand sideof B.4.4)
= 1m a,to;t)
As for
V(\\),
 1m
/
h
/2
B.4.5)
we simply use
we
B.4.6)
where V(x')is no longer an operator.Combining everything,
( h2
\\
deduce
1m V '\\x'\\a,to;t)+
;'>,
B.4.7)
Schrodinger, usually
written
as
1m
wave
B.4.8)
The quantum mechanicsbasedon wave equation B.4.8)known as is mechanics.This equation is, in fact, the starting point of many on textbooks quantum mechanics.In our formalism, however,this isjust the Schrodinger quation for a state ket written explicitly in the xbasiswhen e the Hamiltonian operator is taken to be B.4.2).
2.4.Schrodinger's
Wave Equation
99
The TimeIndependentWave
We now
Equation
eigenfunctions. We
function
derive the partial differential equation satisfied by energy that the time dependence a showed in Section2.1 of us state is given by exp( iEa,t/h).This enables to write its wave stationary
as
ZlfLy
B.4.9)
where it is understood initially the system is preparedin a simultaneous that eigenstate of A and H with eigenvalues and Ea>, respectively.Let us now We substitute B.4.9) the timedependentSchrodingerequation B.4.7). into are then led to
a'
*M
2m
}
\342\200\242'
B.4.10
This partial differential equation is satisfied by the energy eigenfunction (x'\\a')with energy eigenvalueEa>. Actually, in wave mechanicswhere the it is Hamiltonian operator is given as a function of x and p, as in B.4.2), not to necessary refer explicitly to observableA that commuteswith H because A x we can always choose to be that function of the observables and p with H itself. We may therefore omit reference to and which coincides as the simply write B.4.10) partial differential equation to be satisfiedby the energy eigenfunction uE(x')\\
a'
h2
\\
This is the timeindependentwave equation of E. Schrodinger\342\200\224announced in the first of four monumental papers, all written in the first half of laid the foundations of wave mechanics.In the same paper he to derive the energyspectrum of the hydrogen immediately appliedB.4.11) atom. To solve B.4.11) boundary condition has to be imposed. some we with Suppose seeka solution to B.4.11)
1926\342\200\224that
E<
lim
00
F(x'),
x'> oo in
this
B.4.12
case is
any
where the inequality relation is to hold for appropriate boundary condition to be usedin
direction. The
B.4.13)
region of
We space.
means that the particle is bound or confined within a finite know from the theory of partial differential equations
100
that
Quantum
Dynamics
condition B.4.13) allows nontrivial solufor a discreteset of values of E. It is in this sense that the only timeindependent Schrodingerequation B.4.11) the quantization of yields is written, the energy levels.*Oncethe partial differential equation B.4.11) problemof finding the energy levelsof microscopic hysical systems is as p straightforward as that of finding the characteristicfrequenciesof vibrating I strings or membranes.n both caseswe solve boundaryvalueproblemsin mathematical physics. A short digression the history of quantum mechanicsis in order on here.The fact that exactly soluble eigenvalue problemsin the theory of partial differential equations can also be treated using matrix methods was already known to mathematicians in the first quarter of the twentieth century. Furthermore, theoretical physicists like M. Born frequently conconsulted great mathematicians of the Hilbert and H. Weyl, in it particular. Yet when matrix mechanicswas born in the summer of 1925, did not immediately occur to the theoreticalphysicists r to the mathematio to reformulate it using the language of partial differential equations. Six months after Heisenberg's ioneering paper, wave mechanicswas prop However,a close by Schrodinger. proposed inspection of his papersshows that he was not at all influencedby the earlier works of Heisenberg, Born, and Jordan.Instead, the train of reasoning that led Schrodinger to formulate wave mechanics has its roots in W. R. Hamilton'sanalogy between optics and mechanics,on which we will comment later, and the particlewave O hypothesis of L. de Broglie. nce wave mechanicswas formulated, many people,ncluding Schrodinger himself, showed the equivalence between i wave mechanicsand matrix mechanics. It is assumedthat the reader of this book has some experience in solving the timedependentand timeindependentwave equations. He or she should be familiar with the time evolution of a Gaussianwave packetin a forcefree region; should be able to solve onedimensionaltransmissionreflection problemsinvolving a rectangular potential barrier, and the like; should have seen derived some simple solutions of the timeindependent wave particle in a box, a particle in a squarewell, the simple harmonic oscillator, the hydrogen atom, and so should also be familiar with some general propertiesof the energy eigenfunctions and energy eigenvalues, such as A) the fact that the energy levels exhibit a discreteor continuous spectrum dependingon whether or not B.4.12) is satisfied and B) the property that the energy eigenfunction in one dimenis sinusoidalor damped depending whether E V(x')is positive or on In this book we will not cover these topics.A brief summary of negative. in elementary solutions to Schrodinger's equations is presented Appendix A.
solutions day\342\200\224D.
mathematicians
equation\342\200\224a
on\342\200\224and
dimension
*Schrodinger's paper
Eigenwertproblem
(Quantization
B.4.11)
entitled
Quantisierung
als
2.4.Schrodinger's
Wave Equation
101
Interpretations of the Wave Function o We now turn to discussions f the physical interpretations of the we wave function. In Section 1.7 commentedon the probabilisticnterpretai as that followsfrom the fact that (x'a, t) is to be regarded of /0; in terms of the position eigenkets an expansioncoefficientof t0; t) The quantity p(x', ) defined by /
interpretation
\\\\p\\2
{x')j.
a,
B.4.14)
is therefore regardedas the probability density in wave mechanics.Specifiwhen we use a detector that ascertains the presenceof the particle the probability of recording within a small volume element d3x'around a positive result at time t is given by In the remainder of this section we use x for becausethe position operator will not appear.UsingSchrodinger'simedependent wave equat it is straightforward to derive the continuity equation
Specifically,
p(x'9t)d3x'.
x',
x'
equation,
? ^
B.4.15)
j(x,t), known
as the
probability
\\\\p\\2
is given by
as before, and
B.4.16
The reality of the potential V (or the Hermiticity of the V operator) has played a crucial role in our obtaining this result. Conversely,a complex o account for the disappearance f a parpotential can phenomenologically such a potential is often used for nuclear reactions where incident particlesget absorbedby nuclei. We may intuitively expectthat the probability flux j is related to momentum. This is indeedthe case for j integrated over all space. rom F we obtain B.4.16)
particle;
B.4.17)
where (p), is the expectationvalue of the momentum operator at time t. is Equation B.4.15)reminiscentof the continuity equation in fluid that characterizesa hydrodynamic flow of a fluid in a sourcefree, dynamics sinkfree region. ndeed,historically Schrodingerwas first led to interpret I as the actual matter density, or as the actual electric charge If we adopt such a view, we are led to face some bizarre consedensity.
e\\\\p\\2
\\\\p\\2
consequences.
102
Quantum
Dynamics
An
A typical argument for a position measurementmight go as follows. atomic electron is to be regarded as a continuous distribution of matter filling up a finite region of spacearound the nucleus; yet, when a measureis made to make sure that the electron is at some particular point, this continuous distribution of matter suddenly shrinks to a pointlike particle of with no spatial extension. he more satisfactory statistical interpretation T \\^2 as the probability density was first given by M. Born. To understand the physical significanceof the wave function, let us write it as
measurement
'S(x'r)
h with
B.4.18
S real and p > 0, which can always be donefor any complexfunction of x and /. The meaning of p has already beengiven. What is the physical interpretation of SINoting
we can write the probability as [seeB.4.16)]
m We now
B.4.19)
flux
B.4.20)
\\p
2 there is more to the wave function than the fact that  2 is the probability density; the gradient of the phaseS contains a vital piece f o information. From B.4.20) see that the spatial variation of the phase of we the wave function characterizesthe probability flux; the stronger the phase variation, the more intense the flux. The direction of j at some point x is seento be normal to the surfaceof a constant phasethat goesthrough that point. In the particularly simple example of a plane wave (a momentum eigenfunction)
seethat
/ /px 0 a exp^^
x
iEt
\342\200\224
\\
J,
B.4.21
operator.All
this
,_
..
is
VS=p.
Moregenerally, it is tempting to regard vS/m as somekind of
m
\"
B.4.22)
velocity,\"
B.4.23)
continuity
as equation B.4.15)
B.4.24)
just as in
fluid
2.4.Schrodinger's
Wave Equation
103
against a too literal interpretation of j as p times the velocity defined at every point in space, becausea simultaneous precisionmeasurement of position and velocity would necessarilyviolate the uncertainty principle.
L The Classical imit We now discussthe substitute written in form wave equation. Straightforward
\\p
2m
X
= ih
dt
\\h
B.4.25)
So far everything has been exact. us supposenow that h can, in some Let sense,be regardedas a small quantity. The precisephysical meaning of this approximation, to which we will come backlater, is not evident now, but let us assume
, and so forth. We can then collect terms in B.4.25) do not explicitly that contain h to obtain a nonlinear partial differential equation for S:
2m
We
B.4.26)
B 4 21)
1 \\\\7S(x,
t)\\2
, + V(x)\\
\342\200\224\302\273
dS(x t) = 0
at
0 limit, classicalmechanics is function. So, ot surprisingly, in the h n interWe wave contained in Schrodinger's mechanics. have a semiclassical of the phase of the wave function: h times the phaseis equal to interpretation Hamilton'sprincipal function provided that h can be regardedas a small
quantity.
t e recognizehis to be the HamiltonJacobi quation in classicalmewhere S(x,t)standsfor Hamilton'sprincipal first written in 1836, mechanics,
S is separable:
Let us now look at a stationary state with time dependence This i iEt/h). time dependences anticipated from the fact that for a classical ystem with a constant Hamiltonian, Hamilton's s principal function
exp(\342\200\224
= S(x,t) W(x)Et,
B.4.28)
where W(x) is called Hamilton's characteristic function (Goldstein1980, A 44546). s time goeson, a surface of a constant S advances in much the
104
optics\342\200\224a
Quantum
Dynamics
\342\200\224advances.
\"wave front\" same way as a surfaceof a constant phasein wave H The momentum in the classical amiltonJacobitheory is given
by
w is consistent ith our earlier identification of vS/m with some kind m of velocity. In classical echanics the velocity vector is tangential to the particle trajectory, and as a result we can trace the trajectory by following continuously the direction of the velocity vector. The particle trajectory is like a ray in geometric opticsbecausethe VS that traces the trajectory is normal to the wave front definedby a constant S.In this sensegeometrical m opticsis to wave opticswhat classical echanicsis to wave mechanics. Onemight wonder, in hindsight, why this opticalmechanicalanalogy in was not fully exploited the nineteenth century. The reason is that there was no motivation for regarding Hamilton's principal function as the phase of some traveling wave; the wave nature of a material particle did not t become Besides,he basicunit of action /j, which apparent until the 1920s. w into B.4.18) dimensionalreasons, as missing in the physics for must enter of the nineteenth century. which
B.4.29)
Semiclassical (WKB)
Approximation
Let us now restrict ourselves to one dimension and obtain an w approximate stationarystate solution to Schrodinger's ave equation. This s can easily be accomplishedy noting that the correspondingolutionof the b classicalHamiltonJacobi equation is
=+
Et. dx'Jlm[EV(x')]
have
B.4.30)
dp o ot
=0,
m
(all jc),
B.4.31
equation [seeB.4.24)] ax
\\
ax
'
implies
dW
dx
B.4.33)
A
hence,
VP
r=
constant
T7*
[EV(x)]l/*
a 1
/
ft^
\342\200\242
,_ B.4.34)
2.4.Schrodinger's
Wave Equation
105
This makes good sensebecauseclassicallythe probability for finding the particle at a given point should be inversely proportional to the velocity. Combining everything, we obtain an approximate solution: constant
\\EV(x)V/A
Xexp \302\261(jt)fdx'j2m[EV(x')]
Brillouin.* Having obtained
iEt
B.4.35)
dx2
In terms of the to
dx
B.4.36)
2[EV(x)]
\\dV/dx\\
'2m[EV(x)]
B.4.37)
In other words, X must be small compared with the characteristicdistance t over which the potential varies appreciably. Roughly speaking,he potential must be essentially constant over many wavelengths.Thus we see that the semiclassical picture is reliable in the shortwavelength limit. has Solution B.4.35) been derived for the classicallyallowed region where E V(x) is positive. We now considerthe classically forbidden region where E V(x) is negative. The classicalHamiltonJacobi theory s does not make sense in this case, o our approximate solution B.4.35) > V, must therefore be modified. Fortunately an which is valid for E analogous solution existsin the E < V region; by direct substitution we can
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
checkthat
constant
[V(x)E]l/A
exp \302\261(j\\jXdx']/2m[v(x')E] h
 iEt
to
B.4.38)
*A similar technique was used earlier by JWKB solution in some English books.
H.Jeffreys;
this solution
is referred
as the
106
Quantum
Dynamics
satisfies the wave equation provided that E) is small comwith the characteristicdistance over which the potential varies. makes sensenear the classicalurning nor Neither B.4.35) B.4.38) t point defined by the value of x for which
h/]/2m(V\342\200\224 compared
B.4.39)
becauseX (or its purely
infinite at that point, imaginary analogue)becomes In leading to a violent violation of B.4.37). fact, it is a nontrivial task to match the two solutions acrossthe classicalturning point. The standard procedureis basedon the following steps:
1.Make a
2.
turning
linear approximation to the potential V(x) near the point jc0,defined by the root of Solve the differential equation
B.4.39).
d2u dx2
2m)
B.4.40)
f exactly to obtain a third solution involving the Besselunction of order + y, valid near x0. 3.Match this solution to the other two solutions by choosing apappropriately various constants of integration. in We do not discuss these stepsin detail, as they are discussed many for 26876, example).nstead,we content ourselvesto I places(Schiff 1968, present the resultsof such an analysis for a potential well, schematically
in Figure 2.1, with two turning points, xx and jc2.The wave function in in behave like B.4.35)region IIand like B.4.38)regions I and HI. The correct atching from region I into region II can be shown to be m
shown
must
II
III
FIGURE Schematic diagram for behavior of wave function with turning points xx and x2
2.1.
uE(x) in
potential
well V{x)
2.4.Schrodinger's
Wave Equation
107
that
1/4 [V(x)E]
exp (j)f*dx',l2m[V(x')E]
COS
lEV(x)]l/4
1
B.4.41)
f Likewise,rom region IIIinto region IIwe have
exp
/ fx \\t)\\ dx'
\\
')E]
[EV(x)}1/4
COS
B.4.42)
o The uniqueness f the wave function in region IIimplies that the arguments must differ at most by an integer and of the cosinein B.4.41) B.4.42) c the signs of both sidesof B.4.42) an be multiple of it [not of 2m, because I reversed].n this way we obtain a very interesting consistencycondition,
={n f 2dx]l2m[EV(x)] +
Apart from the
\\)<nh
(n =
0,1,2,3,...). B.4.43)
differencebetween n + \\ and n, this equation is simply the condition of the old quantum theory due to A. Sommerfeld quantization as and W. Wilson, originally written in 1915
(bpdq= nh,
B.4.44)
where h is Planck'sh, not Dirac's, and the integral is evaluatedover one h whole period of classical otion, from xx to x2 and back. m for c Equation B.4.43)an be usedto obtain approximate expressions the energy levels of a particle confined in a potential well. As an example, we considerthe energy spectrum of a ball bouncing up and down over a
is *A quick way to understand the appearance of tt/4 in B.4.41)as follows. The correctly a matched pair of solutions in region I and region II, of the form B.4.38)nd B.4.35), respectively, must be related to each other by analytic continuation in a complex xplane. An ^ excursion into the complex xplane enables us to change the sign of ~ xx) without going through the dangerous region with x xv We now (dV/dx)xwmXi(x observe that under such an analytic continuation, the picks E]l/4 factor in B.4.38)
V(x)E
up
a phase:[(dV/dx)x_Xi(x
 x^]1'4 >
[{dV/dx)x_Xl{xx
l/[V(x)~ 
Quantum
Dynamics
0,
B445)
where x stands for the height of the ball measured from the hard surface. One might be tempted to use B.4.43) irectly with d
x, = 0, 1
which that
x1= mg
\342\200\224,
B.4.46)
x=
problem is to considerthe
0\342\200\224of
are the classicalurning points of this problem.We note, however, t was B.4.43) derivedunder the assumptionthat the WKB wave function \"leaks into\" the x <xxregion, while in our problem the wave function must = 0.A much more satisfactory approach to this strictly vanish for x < xx
oddparity
solutions\342\200\224guaranteed
to vanish at
V(x)= mg\\x\\
whose turning points are
X1
B.4.47)
I ZnT.40 I
mg
mg
The energy spectrum of the oddparity states for this modified problem T must clearly be the same as that of the original problem. he quantization condition then becomes
E/mg
(nodd
=1,3,5,...
B.4.49)
or, equivalently,
I
E/mg
dx]J2m(E
\342\200\224
mgx)
= (n
\342\200\224
\\Orh,
(\302\253
=1,2,3,4,...).
B.4.50)
This integral is elementary,and we obtain
B.4.51
for the quantized energy levelsof the bouncing ball. It is known that this problem is solubleanalytically without any in approximation. The energy eigenvaluesturn out to be expressible terms the zerosof the Airy function of
Ai(\\n) = 0
B.4.52)
2.5.Propagators
109
Energies of
TABLE
a Bouncing
Ball
inUnitsof(mg2/t2/2I/3
n
Exact
2
3
2.320 4.082
5.517
2.338 4.088
5.521
4
5 6
7
10
as
8 9
11.008 11.935
12.828
10.040
12.829
11.009 11.936
\\
21/3 (mg2h2)
j
The two approaches compared numerically in are energy levels.We seethat agreement is excellenteven for small valuesof n and essentiallyexact for n ~ 10. The quantumtheoreticaltreatment of a bouncing ball may appearto have little to do with the real world. It turns out, however,that a potential of type B.4.45) actually of practical interest in studying the energy is spectrum of a quarkantiquark bound system, called quarkonium. To go from a bouncing ball to a quarkonium, the x in B.4.45)s replaced the i by quarkantiquark separation distance r. The analogue of the downward gravitational force mg is a constant (that is, rindependent) force believed to be operative between a quark and an antiquark. This force is empirically estimated to be in the neighborhoodof
1GeV/fm=1.6xl05 N, tons. This contrasts with which corresponds about 16 to N force of 0.98 on a ball of 0.1 kg. 2.5. ROPAGATORS AND P
FEYNMAN
B.4.54)
the gravitational
PATH INTEGRALS
Propagators in Wave Mechanics In Section 2.1 we showed how the most general timeevolution with a timeindependent Hamiltonian can be solved once we problem expand the initial ket in terms of the eigenkets of an observable that
110
commutes with
Quantum
Dynamics
W mechanics. e start
= a,fo;/>
a
Multiplying
iH{tt0)
B.5.1)
B.5.2)
which
is of the
0 = E <v(/0)iv(x')exp a
with
B.5.3)
with
eigenvalue
a'.Note also
the
B.5.4)
= fl1a,*0> Jd3x'(a'\\x')(x'\\a,t0),
which we recognize as the usual rule in wave mechanics for expansioncoefficientsof the initial state:
B.5.5)
getting
B.5.6)
All with
on the
wave function
and familiar. Now together of integral operator acting to yield the final wave function:
B.5.2)
B.5.7)
Herethe kernelof the integral operator, known as the propagator in wave i mechanics,s given by
a In
any
B.5.8)
given problem the propagator dependsonly on the potential and is independentof the initial wave function. It can be constructed oncethe energy eigenfunctionsand their eigenvaluesare given. Clearly, the time evolution of the wave function is completely predictedif K(x'\\t;x\\ t0) is known and \\^(\\\\ t0) is given initially. In this
2.5.Propagators
111
sense Schrodinger's mechanics is a perfectly causal theory. The time wave of a wave function subjected some potential is as \"determinto development as anything elsein classical echanics providedthat the system is left m undisturbed. The only peculiar feature, if any, is that when a measurement
\"deterministic\"
intervenes, the wave function changes abruptly, in an uncontrollable way, into one of the eigenfunctionsof the observablebeing measured. There are two propertiesof the propagator worth recording here. First, for t > f0, AT(x\", t\\x\\ t0) satisfiesSchrodinger's timedependentwave equation in the variablesx\" and t, with x'and t0 fixed.This is evident from because(x\"\\a')exp[ B.5.8) iEa,(t to)/h],being the wave function correto ty(t,to)\\a'), atisfiesthe wave equation. Second, s corresponding
\342\200\224
/> t(
which
= S3(x\"x'), lim#(xV;x\\/0)
\302\273f0,
B.5.9)
is also obvious; as t
of Because these two properties,he propagator B.5.8), t regardedas a at t of a particle which was x\", is simply the wave function localized precisely x' at some earlier time t0. Indeed,this interpretation at can follows,perhapsmore elegantly, from noting that B.5.8) also be written as
<\"\302\253<o)
,\342\200\236
B_5_10)
where the timeevolutionoperator acting on x') just the state ket at t of a is that was localizedpreciselyat x'at time tQ ( < t). If we wish to solve system a more general problem where the initial wave function extends over a finite of space,all we have to do is multiply ^(x',t0) by the propagator region I K(x'\\t\\ x',/0) and integrate over all space(that is, over x').n this manner we can add the various contributions from different positions(x'). his T situation is analogous to one in electrostatics;f we wish to find the i electrostatic potential due to a general charge distribution p(x'), we first solve the pointchargeproblem, multiply the pointcharge solution with the charge distribution, and integrate:
B.5.11
The reader familiar with the theory of the Green'sfunctions must have function recognizedby this time that the propagator is simply the Green's for the timedependent wave equation satisfying
h
^
~\"
1m
\"'
\"x
\"
d
dt
112
with
Quantum
Dynamics
The delta function side of B.5.12) K because varies discontinuouslyat / = t0. o The particular form of the propagator is, of course,dependent n the to which the particle is subjected.Consider,as an particular potential example,a free particle in one dimension. The obvious observable that commutes with H is momentum; \\p') is a simultaneous eigenket of the operatorsp and H:
\342\200\22410)
B.5.13)
/2
\\
2m
/>'>\302\246
B.5.14)
The momentum eigenf unction is just the transformation function of Section 1.7 A.7.32)] is of the planewaveform. Combiningeverything, we which [see have
dp'expip\\x\"x')ip'z(tt0) 2mh
The integral can be evaluated by completing the square in the exponent. Here simply recordthe result: we
B.5.15
im(x\"
\342\200\224
x') . B.5.16
This expression may be used,for example, to study how a Gaussianwave out as a function of time. packetspreads For the simple harmonic oscillator, where the wave function of an energy eigenstate is given by
un(x)exp
iEnt
\342\200\224
mcox
exp\342\200\224in
XHn
the
exp
 /col
\342\200\224
Ir
B.5.17)
propagatoris given by
T 27rihsin[co(tr to {(x\022
imco
in[co(r tQ)]
+ jc/2)cos[<o(/ tQ)]2x\"x'}
B.5.18
2.5.Propagators
113
exp
(W2)
B.5.19
which
is found
in
Notice that
I 786). t can alsobe obtained using the a, operator method (Saxon1968, 14445)or, alternatively, the pathintegral method to be describedlater.
a1*
particle initially localizedpreciselyat x' will return to its original position with certainty at 277/10 D77/10, nd so forth) later. a Certain spaceand time integrals derivablefrom K(x'\\ x',t0) are of considerablenterest. Without lossof generality we set t0 = 0 in the followi The first integral we consideris obtained by setting x// = x/ and over all space.We have integrating
t\\
following.
is a B.5.18)periodicfunction of / with angular frequencyco,the classicaloscillator frequency. This means, among other things, that a
jd*x'K(x\\t\\x'9O)
a a
 lka't
B.5.20
observethat setting x' = This result is anticipated;recalling B.5.10),we x\" and integrating are equivalent to taking the trace of the timeevolution But operator in the xrepresentation. the trace is independentof repreit can be evaluated more readily using the {\\a')} basis where representations; the timeevolution operator is diagonal,which immediately leads to the is just the \"sum over states,\" Now last line of B.5.20). we seethat B.5.20) In reminiscentof the partition function in statistical mechanics. fact, if we continue in the t variable and make t purely imaginary, with analytically P defined by =T
real and positive, we can identify
a
with B.5.20)
B5.21
the partition
function
itself:
B.5.22
For this reasonsomeof the techniquesencounteredin studying propagators in quantum mechanicsare also useful in statisticalmechanics.
114
Quantum
Dynamics
G(E)=
= i
i\\
Too
dtG(t)exp(iEt/h)/h
dt
2j exp(iEa't/h)exp(iEt/h)/h. B.5.23) a
The integrand here oscillates But we can make the integral indefinitely. meaningful by letting E acquire a small positive imaginary part:
E^E + ie.
We then
B.5.24)
Observenow that the completeenergyspectrum is exhibitedas simple poles If of G(E) in the complex ?plane. we wish to know the energyspectrum of of a physical system, it is sufficient to study the analytic properties G(E).
Propagator as a Transition Amplitude To gain further insight into the physical meaning of the propagator, we wish to relate it to the concept of transition amplitudes introduced in Section 2.2. ut first, recall that the wave function which is the inner B w productof the fixed position bra (x' ith the moving state ket f0; t) can alsobe regardedas the inner product of the Heisenbergpicture position bra r (x', , which moves \"oppositely\" with time, with the Heisenbergpicture state ket the f0), which is fixed in time. Likewise, propagator can also be written as
a,
a,
X\"
= <x\",fx',fo>,
where
t\\
B.5.26)
are to be understood as an eigenket and an \\x\\ t0) and (xr/, eigenbraof the position operator in the Heisenberg picture.In Section2.1 we showed that (b\\ t\\a'), in the Heisenbergpicture notation, is the probfor a system originally preparedto be an eigenstate of A amplitude with eigenvalue a' at some initial time tQ = 0 to be found at a later time t in an eigenstate of B with eigenvalue b\\ and we called it the transition there is nothing amplitude for going from state \\a') to state I&').Because about the choice of the time difference t tQ is special
probability
\342\200\224
t0\342\200\224only
2.5.Propagators
relevant\342\200\224we
115
can identify (x\", t\\x\\ t0) as the probability amplitude for the particle prepared at t0 with position eigenvaluex' to be found at a later time / at x\". Roughly speaking, (x\", fx',f0) is the amplitude for the particle to go from a spacetimepoint (x',t0) to another spacetime point is (x\", t), so the term transition amplitude for this expression quite apappropriate. This interpretation is, of course,in complete accord with the t;x\\ t0). interpretation we gave earlier for K(x'\\ Yet another way to interpret (x\", t\\x\\ t0) is as follows. As we emphasizedearlier, x',0) is the position eigenket at t0 with the eigenvalue t x' in the Heisenbergpicture. Becauseat any given time the Heisenbergof picture eigenkets an observablecan be chosenas basekets,we can regard (x\", t\\x\\ t0) as the transformation function that connects the two sets of basekets at different times. Soin the Heisenberg icture, time evolution can p be viewed as a unitary transformation, in the senseof changing bases,that connects one set of base kets formed by (x',0)} to another formed by / i p (x\", )}. his is reminiscentof classical hysics,n which the time developt T of a classicaldynamic variable such as x(t) is viewedas a canonical (or contact) transformation generated by the classical Hamiltonian
development
1980, (Goldstein 4078). It turns out to be convenient to use a notation that treats the space and time coordinates ore symmetrically. To this end we write (x\", t\"\\x\\ t') m in place of (x\",\\x\\t0). Because any given time the position kets in the at t form a complete set, it is legitimate to insert the identity picture Heisenberg
operator written as
jd3x\"\\x\",
r\"><x\",
t\"\\
=1
two
B.5.27
evolution from
f\";by
at any
, we have
(/',t'\")
t' to
and
into
parts, (t\\t\")
>t\">t').B.5.28
We call this the compositionproperty of the transition amplitude.*Clearly, we can divide the time interval into as many smaller subintervals as we wish. We
have
, t\"\"\\x\\ V)
jd3x
X
'\"
fd3x\"(x\"\"9 t\"\"\\x
'\"
,t
t\
<x\", t\"\\x\\
t')9
(t\"\"
B.5.29
in *The analogue of B.5.28) probability theory is known equation, and in diffusion theory, the Smoluchowsky equation.
ChapmanKolmogoroflT
116
infinitesimal
Quantum
Dynamics
and so on. If we somehowguessthe form of (x\", t\"\\x\\ t') for an infinitesitime interval (between V and t\" = t'+dt),weshould be able to obtain the amplitude (x\",\"\\x\\ t') for a finite time interval by compounding the t appropriatetransition amplitudesfor infinitesimal time intervals in a manner This analogous to B.5.29). kind of reasoning leads to an independent formulation of quantum mechanics due to R. P. Feynman, publishedin to 1948, which we now turn our attention. Path Integrals as the Sum Over Paths Without loss of generality we restrict ourselves to onedimensional like problems.Also, we avoid awkward expressions
N times
x'\"
the by using notation such as xN. With this notation we consider transition for a particle going from the initial spacetime amplitude point (xl9 tx) to The entire time interval between tY and the final spacetime point (xN, tN). equal parts: tN is divided into N
\342\200\224
(Nl)
Exploiting the compositionproperty, we obtain
\\xn> ^n\\xi>
B.5.30)
h) = I \"xniJdxN_2
J dx:
B.5.31
To visualize this pictorially, we considera spacetime plane, as shown in The 2.2. initial and final spacetimepoints are fixed to be (xl9 tY) and Figure (xN,tN), respectively.For each time segment, say between tn_x and tn, we are instructed to considerthe transition amplitude to go from (xn_l,tn_l) to (xn,tn); we then integrate over x2, xN_v This means that we must sum overall possible aths in the spacetimeplane with the end points fixed. p Before proceeding further, it is profitable to review here how paths appear in classicalmechanics. Supposewe have a particle subjectedto a force field derivable from a potential V(x).The classicalLagrangian is written as
x39...,
^classical(*>*)
\342\200\224
~ H*)
\342\200\242
B.5.32
Given this Lagrangian with the end points (xl9 tx) and (xN, tN) specified,we do not considerjust any path joining (xl9 tx) and (xN, tN) in classical t O mechanics. n the contrary, there existsa unique path that correspondso
2.5.Propagators
t
117
(XN,
tN)
f/V1
FIGURE
2.2.
Paths in
xfplane.
V(x) = mgx,
(xl9tx) =
(xN9 tN)
B.5.33)
where h may stand for the height of the Leaning Towerof Pisa, the classical path in the jc/planecan only be
x
which
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
'
B.5.34)
More generally, according to Hamilton's principle, the unique path is that minimizes the action, defined as the time integral of the classical
Lagrangian:
B.5.35)
from which
Feynman's Formulation The basic differencebetween classical echanicsand quantum mem mechanics should now be apparent. In classical echanicsa definite path in m the jcfplaneis associated with the particle's motion; in contrast, in quantum mechanics all possiblepaths must play rolesincluding those which do not bear any resemblanceo the classical ath. Yet we must somehowbe able to t p classical echanicsin a smooth manner in the limit h 0.How m reproduce are we to accomplish this?
\302\273
118
Quantum
Dynamics
As a young graduate student at Princeton University, R. P.Feynman I tried to attack this problem. n looking for a possible clue, he was said to be a mysterious remark in Dirac's ook which, in our notation, b intrigued by amounts to the following statement:
exp
A , t correspondso (x2,/2lx:i^
. h/\\
to\" Feynman attempted to make senseout of this remark. Is \"corresponds the same thing as \"is equal to\" or \"is proportional to\"? In so doing he was led to formulate a spacetimeapproach to quantum mechanics based on path integrals. In Feynman's formulation the classical ction plays a very important a role. or compactness, introduce a new notation: F we
B.5.36)
Because 1)is defined only after a ?ciassicai is a function of x and x, S(n,n definite path is specifiedalong which the integration is to be carried out. So is even though the path dependence not explicit in this notation, it is understood that we are considering a particular path in evaluating the integral. Imagine now that we are following some prescribedpath. We
(x\302\253i>
'\302\253)\342\200\242 \342\200\224
concentrate our attention on a small segmentalong that path, say between Ki)and (xn> Accordingto Dirac,we are instructed to associate l)/h]with that segment.Going along the definite path we are exp[/\\S(>7, n set to follow, we successively o multiply expressions f this type to obtain
n
contribution
iS(n,n 1) = exp h
\342\200\224
B.5.37)
This does not yet give (xN,tN\\xv
to
this equation is the contribuparticular path we have considered. We must still integrate over x2,x3,...,x/v_1. same time, exploiting At the the composition property, we let the time interval between tn_x and tn be for infinitesimally small.Thus our candidate expression (xN,tN\\xl9 tx) may be written, in someloosesense,as
tx)\\
(xN, tN\\xv
all paths
exP
B.5.38)
where the sum is to be taken over an innumerably infinite set of paths! Before presenting a more preciseformulation, let us see whether l considerations long this line make sensein the classicalimit. As h > 0, the a in B.5.38) oscillates so there is a tendency for very violently, exponential cancellation among various contributions from neighboring paths. This is
2.5.Propagators
119
f for becauseexp[iS/h] some definite path and exp[iS/h]or a slightly o different path have very different phasesbecauseof the smallness f h. So most paths do not contribute when h is regardedas a small quantity. However, there is an important exception. Supposethat we considera path that satisfies
= 8S(N,l) 09
B.5.39
where the change in S is due to a slight deformation of the path with the end points fixed.This is preciselythe classical ath by virtue of Hamilton's p W principle. e denotethe S that satisfiesB.5.39)Smin. We now attempt to by deform the path a little bit from the classical ath. The resulting S is still p equal to Smin to first order in deformation. This means that the phase of d exp[iS/h]oes not vary very much as we deviate slightly from the classical even if h is small. As a result, as long as we stay near the classical path I path, constructiveinterferencebetween neighboring paths is possible.n the h the major contributions must then arise from a very narrow limit, strip (ora tube in higher dimensions)containing the classical ath, as shown p in Figure 2.3. Our (or Feynman's) guessbasedon Dirac's ysterious remark m makes good sensebecausethe classical ath gets singled out in the h > 0 p
\302\2730
limit.
To formulate Feynman'sconjecturemore precisely, us go back to let where the time difference tn tn_l is assumed to be (xn,tn\\xn_l, tn_l), infinitesimally small. We write
\342\200\224
1
\\Xn> *n\\Xnl>
'\302\253!/
\342\200\224
exp
iS(n9nl)
h
B.5.40
where we evaluate S(n,n 1)in a moment in the A/ > 0 limit. Notice that we have inserted a weight factor, l/w(A/), which is assumedto depend only on the time interval tn tn_x and not on V(x).That such a factor is neededis clear from dimensional considerations; according to the way we
\342\200\224
(xN,
U) FIGURE
2.3.
Paths important
in the h
\342\200\224
0 limit.
120
Quantum
Dynamics
normalized our position eigenkets,(xn,tn\\xn_l,tn_l) must have the dimenof 1/length. We now look at the exponential in B.5.40). task is to evaluate Our the the A/ limit of S(n,n Because time interval is so small, it is legitimate to make a straightline approximation to the path joining and (xn,tn) as follows:
dimension
\302\2730
1).
n,nl)= dt\\^v(x)
I'\"
T
As an tion now B.5.40) becomes
Ar
w example, e considerspecificallythe
freeparticlecase, V
0.Equa
B.5.41
exp
B.5.42)
We seethat the exponent appearing here is completelyidentical to the one The readermay in the expression for the freeparticlepropagator work out a similar comparison for the simple harmonic oscillator. We remarked earlier that the weight factor l/w(Af) appearing in is assumedto be independent of V(x),so we may as well evaluate it for the free particle.Noting the orthonormality, in the senseof 6function, of Heisenbergpicture position eigenketsat equal times,
B.5.16).
B.5.40)
Xn\\)>
B.5.43)
we obtain
m
B.5.44)
B.5.45a
and
lim m
exp 2/iA/
This weight factor is, of course,anticipated from the expression the for freeparticlepropagator B.5.16). To summarize,as A/ we are led to
\302\2730,
exp
B.5.46
2.5.Propagators
121
amplitude
with
\342\200\224
transition
tN
tx finite
is
*i)
lim
m
N
x jdxN_ljdxN_2\"dx2 j
\302\273oo
exp
iS(n9nl)
h
B.5.47)
where the jV limit is taken with xN and tN fixed. It is customary here to define a new kind of multidimensional (in fact, infinitedimensional)
integral
operator
JfX\"9[x(t)] v
N2
jdx
B.5.48
and write
as B.5.47)
*n
dt
i. ^classical (x, x)
h
. B.5.49
This expression known as Feynman's path integral. Its meaning as the sum is over all possiblepaths should be apparent from B.5.47). Our steps leading to B.5.49) not meant to be a derivation. are Rather, we (or Feynman) have attempted a new formulation of quantum o mechanicsbasedon the concept f paths, motivated by Dirac's ysterious m remark.The only ideaswe borrowedfrom the conventional form of quanmechanicsare A) the superpositionprinciple (usedin summing the concontributions from various alternate paths),B) the compositionproperty of the in 0 limit. transition amplitude, and C) classicalcorrespondence the h Even though we obtained the same result as the conventional theory for the freeparticle case,it is now obvious, from what we have doneso far, that Feynman'sformulation is completelyequivalent to Schrodinger's ave w mechanics.We conclude section by proving that Feynman's expression this for (xN, tN\\xl9 tY) indeedsatisfiesSchrodinger's timedependentwave equain the variables xN9 tN, just as the propagator defined by B.5.8).
quantum
\342\200\224>
equation
We start with
J
00
i>
h)
h
lim\\
{xNxN_x) /FA/
A/
\\2h)
\\
Nl> '/V
B.5.50
Quantum
Dynamics
tN_Y
to
be infinitesimal. Introducing
= xn \" xn\\
letting xN
B.5.51
iVAt
\\
(x,t+ At\\xl,tl) = iJ
As
this
2hAt
B.5.52)
is evident from B.5.45b), the limit At > 0, the major contribution to in comes from the ? 0 region. It is therefore legitimate to integral expand (x ?, t\\xx, tx) in powersof ?.We also expand (x,t + At\\xv ?x and iVht/h) in powersof A/, so
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
exp(\342\200\224
(x,t\\x1, tx
lirihLt J_ oo exp
X
OO
2hAt
1
(x^lx^t^ + l
\\
B.5.53)
where we have dropped a term linear in $ becauseit vanishes when integrated with respectto The (x,t\\x^ ^) term on the lefthand sidejust side because of B.5.45a) matches the leading term on the righthand terms first order in Af, we obtain Collecting
?.
= Atj^(x,t\\xl,tl)
where we have used
lirihAt
ihAt\\3/2l d2 m 2 dx (x,t\\x1,tl)
\\)AtV(x,t\\xl,tl),
B.5.54)
B.5.55
In
this
obtainedby
differentiating
manner we
2m
dx
B.5.56
Thus we can conclude that (x,t\\xv tx) constructed according to Feynman's is wave prescription the sameas the propagator in Schrodinger's mechanics.
2.6.Potentials
123
Feynman'sspacetimeapproach based on path integrals is not too convenient for attacking practical problems in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. ven for the simple harmonic oscillator it is rather cumbersome E to evaluate explicitly the relevant path integral.* However,his approach is extremfely gratifying from a conceptual point of view. By imposing a certain set of sensiblerequirementson a physical theory, we are inevitably led to a formalism equivalent to the usual formulation of quantum mechanics. It makes us wonder whether it is at all possible to construct a sensible alternative theory that is equally successfulin accounting for microscopic phenomena. Methods based on path integrals have been found to be very s powerful in other branches of modern physics, uch as quantum field theory In and statistical mechanics. this book the pathintegral method will appear again when we discussthe AharonovBohmeffect.*
GAUGETRANSFORMATIONS
Constant Potentials
In classicalmechanics it is well known that the zero point of the potential energy is of no physical significance.The time development of dynamic variables such as x(/) and L(t) is independent of whether we use F(x)or V(x)+Vo with Vo constant both in spaceand time. The force that appears in Newton's second law depends only on the gradient of the potential; an additive constant is clearly irrelevant. What is the analogous situation in quantum mechanics? We look at the time evolution of a Schrodingerpicturestate ket subject to some potential. Let to;t)be a state ket in the presenceof s F(x),and f0; f), the correspondingtate ket appropriate for
a,
a,
= V(x)+V0.
B.6.1)
To be precise us agree that the initial conditions are such that both kets let coincide with \\<x) at / = t0. If they representhe same physical situation, this t can always be done by a suitable choice the phase. Recalling that the of state ket at / can be obtained by applying the timeevolution operator
reader is challenged to solve the simple harmonic oscillator problem using the path integral method in Problem 231. *The reader who is interested in the fundamentals and applications of path integrals may consult Feynman and Hibbs 1965.
The
Feynman
124
, t0) to the state ket at f0, we obtain
_^_
Quantum
Dynamics
2m
= exp
In other
B.6.2)
words, the ket computed under the influence of V has a time For d dependenceifferent only by a phase factor exp[to)/h]. iVQ(t with this means that if the time dependence computed stationary states, time dependence omc V(x) is exp[ iE(t to)/h\\ then the corresponding In other words,the use with V(x)+Vo is exp[ + V0)(t i(E computed to)/h]. of V in placeof V just amounts to the following change:
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
B.6.3
which the reader probably guessed immediately.Observableeffectssuch as the time evolution of expectation values of (x) and (S) always dependon the Bohr frequencies that characterize the energy differences[see sinusoidaltime dependence expectation values are the same whether we of use V(x) or V(x)+Vo. In general, there can be no differencein the expectai values of observablesf every state ket in the world is multiplied by a
B.1.47)];
expectation
common factor exp[iV0(t to)/h]. Trivial as it may seem, we see here the first example of a class of transformations known as gaugetransformations.The change in our convenfor the zeropoint energy of the potential
convention
B.6.4)
must
a,fo;f>>exp
Of course,his change implies the t
a,to;t).
B.6.5
following
B.6.6
but
Next we considerVo that is spatially uniform then easily seethat the analogue of B.6.5) is
rt dt h
dependenton time.
We
i M')
B.6.7)
Physically, the use of V(x)+V0(t) in place of F(x)simply means that we are choosinga new zero point of the energy scaleat each instant of time.
2.6.Potentials
125
Interference
\302\246
region
FIGURE
2.4.
Quantummechanical
interference
to detect
a potential
difference.
Even though the choice of the absolute scale of the potential is are arbitrary, potential differences of nontrivial physical significanceand, in can be detectedin a very striking way. To illustrate this point, let us fact, A beam of chargedparticles considerthe arrangement shown in Figure I is split into two parts, each of which enters a metallic cage.f we so desire, we can maintain a finite potential difference between the two cages by be visualizedas a turning on a switch, as shown.A particle in the beam can wave packet whose dimension is much smaller than the dimension of the S cage. upposewe switch on the potential difference only after the wave packetsenter the cagesand switch it off before the wave packetsleave the no T cages. he particle in the cage experiences force becauseinsidethe cage the potential is spatially uniform; hence no electric field is present.Now let the us recombine two beam componentsin such a way that they meet in the of of Because the existence the potential, interference region of Figure As each beam component suffers a phasechange, as indicated by B.6.7). a result, there is an observableinterference term in the beam intensity in the
2.4.
2.4.
cos(<>!
where
B.6.8)
B.6.9)
no the particle experiences force, there is an has observable effect that dependson whether V2(t)Vx(t) been applied. in the limit h > 0, the Noticethat this effect is purely quantum mechanical; interesting interferenceeffectgetswashed out becausethe oscillationof the
that
experiment
form
126
Gravity in Quantum
Quantum
Dynamics
Mechanics
There is an experiment that exhibits in a striking manner how a Before describing we it, gravitational effect appearsin quantum mechanics. first comment on the role of gravity in both classical nd quantum mechaa
mechanics.
falling
body:
grav
= mgz.
\342\200\224
B.6.10
The massterm dropsout; so in the absence air resistance, feather and a of a la Galileo\342\200\224under the influenceof stone would behave in the same of gravity. This is, of course,a direct consequence the equality of the the B gravitational and the inertial masses. ecause massdoes not appearin m the equation of a particle trajectory, gravity in classical echanics is often said to be a purely geometrictheory. The situation is rather different in quantum mechanics. In the wavemechanicalformulation, the analogue of B.6.10) is
way\342\200\224a f
\\
2m
grav
B.6.11
The massno longer cancels; instead it appearsin the combination h/m, so in a problemwhere h appears,m is alsoexpected appear.We can see to this also using the Feynman pathintegral formulation of a falling body point based on
dt
n 1
\342\200\224
\\mx}
\342\200\224
mgz)
\342\200\236/\342\200\236_!A/*0).
B.6.12
in Here that m appears the combination m/h. his is in sharp T again we see contrast with Hamilton's classical pproach, basedon a
8 fhdt
mx 2
\342\200\224
mgz
= 0,
B.6.13
where m can be eliminated in the very beginning. we Starting with the Schrodingerequation B.6.11),may derive the Ehrenfest theorem
dt
<x>
= gz.
B.6.14
appear\342\200\224in
a However, h doesnot appearhere, nor doesm. To see nontrivial quantummechanical effect of gravity, we must study effects in which h appears consequently where we expect the mass to contrast with purely gravitational phenomena in classical echanics. m
explicitly\342\200\224and
2.6.Potentials
Until
127
there the 1975, had beenno direct experiment that established of the w<I>grav term in B.6.11). be sure, a free fall of an To presence elementaryparticle had beenobserved,but the classical quation of motion e the Ehrenfest theorem B.6.14), h doesnot to where account for this. The famous \"weight of photon\" experiment of V. Pound and collaborators id not test gravity in the quantum domain either because d measureda frequencyshift where h doesnot explicitly appear. they On the microscopic scale,gravitational forces are too weak to be T observable. o appreciate the difficulty involved in seeinggravity in readily boundstateproblems,et us considerthe ground state of an electron and a l neutron bound by gravitational forces.This is the gravitational analogue of the hydrogen atom, where an electron and a proton are bound by Coulomb forces. the same distance, the gravitational force between the electron At and the neutron is weaker than the Coulombforce between the electron and the proton by a factor of ~ 2 X1039. The Bohr radius involved here can be
\342\200\224or
appear\342\200\224sufficed
obtainedsimply:
a0 =
\342\200\224
e me e
>
\342\200\224
\342\200\224,
GNmemn GNmAemn
B.6.15
where GN is Newton'sgravitational constant. If we substitute numbers in the equation, the Bohr radius of this gravitationally bound system turns out to be ~1031 or ~1013 years, which is larger than the estimated cm, light radius of the universe by a few ordersof magnitude! a We now discuss remarkablephenomenon known as gravityinduced interference. A nearly monoenergeticbeam of quantum practhermal split into two parts and then brought together as shown in Figure 2.5.n actual experiments the neutron beam is split and I bent by silicon crystals, but the details of this beautiful art of neutron the interferometry do not concern us here.Because size of the wave packet can be assumedto be much smaller than the macroscopicimensionof the d loop formed by the two alternate paths, we can apply the conceptof a classicaltrajectory. Let us first supposethat path A> B > D and path A* C D lie in a horizontal plane. Becausethe absolute zero of the potential due to gravity is of no significance,we can set V = 0 for any phenomenon that takes placein this plane;in other words,it is legitimate to ignore gravity altogether. The situation is very different if the plane formed by the two alternate paths is rotated around segment AC by angle 5.This time the potential at level BD is higher than that at level AC by mg/2sin5, which means that the state ket associated with path BD \"rotates faster.\" This leads to a gravityinduced phasedifferencebetween the amplitudes for the two wave packetsarriving at Z). Actually there is also a gravityinduced with phasechange associated AB and alsowith CD,but the effectscancelas we comparethe two alternate paths.The net result is that the wave packet
particles\342\200\224in
practice,
neutrons\342\200\224is
\302\273
128
Quantum
Dynamics
Interferenceregion
B
FIGURE
2.5.
Experiment
to detect gravityinduced
quantum
interference.
arriving at
exp
relative to
imngl2sin8 T
h
B.6.16
that of the wave packetarriving at D via path A CD,where T is the time spent for the wave packetto go from B to D (orfrom A to C) and mn9 the neutron mass.We can control this phasedifferenceby rotating the 8 can change from 0 to tt/2, or from 0 to plane of Figure the time spent T9 or /iAwavepacket, in terms of X, the de Broglie Expressing for wavelength of the neutron, we obtain the following expression the phase
2.5;
\342\200\224
tt/2.
difference:
~ <$>acd =
B.6.17)
optics.
In this manner we predict an observableinterferenceeffect that dependson angle 5, which is reminiscentof fringes in Michelsontypeinterferometersin
An alternative, more wavemechanicalway to understand B.6.17 follows. Becausewe are concerned with a timeindependentpotential, the sum of the kinetic energy and the potential energy is constant:
2m
+ mgz =
?.
B.6.18
The difference in height between level BD and level AC implies a slight difference in p, or X. As a result, there is an accumulation of phase differencesdue to the X difference.It is left as an exercise show that this to wavemechanicalapproach also leadsto result B.6.17).
2.6.Potentials
129
1200
3 o o c o 3 A)
1000
800
600
30
FIGURE
20
10
10
20 8.
30
2.6.
Dependence of gravityinduced
is that What is interesting about expression B.6.17) its magnitude is neither too small nor too large; it isjust right for this interesting effectto be detected with thermal neutrons traveling through paths of \"tabletop\" F A dimensions. or X =1.42 (comparable to interatomic spacing in silicon) As we rotate the loop for and lxl2 =10 cm2, we obtain 55.6 rn\\glxl^K/h2. we predict the intensity in the interferenceregion to plane gradually by we should see exhibit a series of maxima and minima; quantitatively It 55.6/27T= 9 oscillations. is extraordinary that such an effecthas indeed taken from a 1975 beenobservedexperimentally;seeFigure 2.6 experiment of R. Colella,A. Overhauser, and S. A. Werner. The phase shift due to
o
90\302\260,
gravity
gets washedout. The gravitational potenhas been shown to enter into the Schrodingerequation just as expected. This experiment also shows that gravity is not purely geometric at the on the quantum level because effectdepends (m/hJ.*
h
potential
as
We
is seen to be verified to well within 1%. emphasize that this effect is purely quantum mechanicalbecause
this doesnot imply that the equivalence principle is unimportant in understandof this sort. If the gravitational mass (wgrav) and inertial mass (winert) were The fact that we could unequal, {m/h)z would have to be replaced by m grav'\" inert correctly predict the interference pattern without making a distinction between marav and grav minert shows some support for the equivalence principle at the quantum level.
understanding
* However,
an effect
//r.
130
Quantum
Dynamics
Gauge Transformationsin Electromagnetism Let us now turn to potentials that appearin electromagnetism.We consideran electric and a magnetic field derivable from the timeindepenscalar and vector potential, <?(x) and A(x):
timeindependent
E = V4>,
B = vxA.
B.6.19
The Hamiltonian for a particle of electric charge e (e < 0 for the electron) p subjectedto the electromagneticfield is taken from classical hysicsto be e4>.
<f>
B.6.20)
In quantum mechanics and A are understood to be functions of the position operator x of the charged particle. Becausep and A do not The commute, somecare is neededin interpreting B.6.20). safest procedure is to write
) A2.
In
this
B.6.21
form the Hamiltonian is obviously Hermitian. To study the dynamics of a chargedparticle subjected <? and A, let to in We can evaluate the time us first proceed the Heisenberg picture. derivative of x in a straightforward manner as
\342\200\224
dx1 =
dt
\\xt,H\\ in
rz\342\200\224
(p\342\200\224
eA,/c)
m
, yZ.b.lZ)
which shows that the operator p, defined in this book to be the generator of translation, is not the same as mdx/dt.Quite often p is called canonical momentum, as distinguished from kinematical (or mechanical) momentum, denotedby
II:
dt
Even
though
we have
for canonical momentum, the analogous commutator does not vanish for mechanical momentum. Instead we have
Rewriting
],
B.6.24
B.6.25
the Hamiltonian as
n2 H= 2m +
\342\200\224
e<f>
B.6.26
2.6.Potentials
131
d2x dU = e dt
dt
dt
dt
B.6.27)
This then is Ehrenfest's theorem, written in the Heisenberg picture, for the of in the presence E and B. charged particle We now study Schrodinger's wave equation with <? and A. Our first task is to sandwich H between (x' nd a f0; f). The only term with which we have to be careful is
a,
\\oc,t0;t)
a,to;t)
,
\302\253A(x')
(*'\\a,to;t) B.6.28)
It
is important to emphasizethat the first V' in the last line can differentiate
both
we have
M(x')
ih
V' M(x')
d
\342\200\224
e<t>(x')(x'\\a, t) = ih t0;
dt
(x'\\a, 0; t). t
continuity
B.6.29)
equation
dt
B.6.30)
(x'\\a,to;t)written as
me
substitution
\\p,
with
but
for the
B.6.31
B.6.32)
Writing
y/p
we exp(iS/h)[see B.4.18)],obtain
an
B.6.33)
132
which
Quantum
Dynamics
is to be compared with B.4.20). will find this form to be We convenient in discussinguperconductivity, flux quantization, and so on.We s also note that the spaceintegral of j is the expectation value of kinematical momentum (not canonical momentum) apart from 1/m:
n.
We
transformations
B.6.34)
in
+ 4>+4> A,
with
A^A,
B.6.35)
X constant, that is, independent of x and f. Both E and B obviously remain unchanged. This transformation just amounts to a change in the zero point of the energy scale,a possibility treated in the beginning of this w the section; ejust replaceV by e<f>. We have already discussed accompanyneededfor the state ket [seeB.6.5)],we do not dwell on this so change transformation any further. Much more interesting is the transformation
accompanying
4>+4>, A^A+vA, B.6.36 where A is a function of x. The static electromagneticfields E and B are are Both and unchanged under B.6.36). B.6.35) B.6.36) specialcasesof
C ut
A>A+vA,
<9A
B.6.37
B, given
by
c ot
=V
XA,
B.6.38
unchanged, but in the following we do not considertimedependent fields and potentials. In the remaining part of this section the term gauge transformation refers to B.6.36). In classicalphysics observable effects such as the trajectory of a chargedparticle are independent of the gauge used,that is, of the particular of choice A we happen to adopt.Considera charged particle in a uniform magnetic field in the zdirection This magnetic field may be derived from
B.6.39
or also from
Ax=By,
A=0,
Az
= 0.
B.6.41
2.6.Potentials
133
first
by
B.6.42)
is indeedof the form of o Regardless f which A we may use, the trajectory of the chargedparticle with a given set of initial conditions is the same;it is just a in uniform circular motion when projected the with a uniform rectilinear motion in the zdirection. jcyplane,superposed Yet if we look at px and py, the results are very different. For one thing, px is a constant of the motion when is used but not when is
which
helix\342\200\224a
B.6.36).
used.
B.6.41)
B.6.40)
dx9
dt
dy9mmmm
In general, the canonical momentum p is not a gaugeinvariant quantity; its numerical value dependson the particular gauge used even when we are referring to the same physical situation. In contrast, the kinematic momenII, or mdx/dt,that traces the trajectory of the particle is a gaugeinvariant as one may explicitly verify. Because and mdx/dtare p quantity, related via B.6.23), p must change to compensate for the change in A given
momentum
by
reasonable
transformations,
We now return to quantum mechanics.We believe that it is reasonto demand that the expectationvalues in quantum mechanicsbehave in a manner similar to the corresponding classicalquantities under gauge are not to change under gauge transfortransformations, so (x) and while (p) is expected change. to of Let us denoteby \\a) the state ket in the presence A; the state ket for the same physical situation when
B.6.42).
(II)
= A+vA B.6.44) of is usedin place A is denoted by a). ere as well as A, is a function of H A, the positionoperator x. Our basicrequirementsare
and
B.6.45a
B645b)
In addition, we require, as usual, the norm of the state ket to
be preserved:
(a\\a)= (a\\a).
We must
B.6.46)
that
relates \\a) to
a):
B.6.47)
134
Quantum
Dynamics
B.6.48a)
evA
eA
B.6.48b)
assertthat
= exp
will
he
B.6.49)
is is all do the job. irst, ^ is unitary, so B.6.46) right. Second, .6.48a) F B satisfied becausex commutes with any function of x. As for obviously B.6.48b), note that just exp
ieA
he
 ieA
he
\342\200\224
p,exp \\~hc~
/ ieA
+P
ieA
= expi
ieA he
exp
+P
B.6.50)
where we have usedB.2.23b). The invariance of quantum mechanicsunder gauge transformations can alsobe demonstrated by looking directly at the Schrodingerquation. e Let of f0; /) be a solution to the Schrodingerequation in the presence A:
a,
(peA/c)
2m
e<t>
B.6.51
eA/c\342\200\224
d_
2m We
dt
. B.6.52)
seethat
is taken to be
in
B.6.53) will accordance B.6.49), the new Schrodingerequation B.6.52) with then
(ieA
 ieA
he
eA
applying
evA
\\
ieA
B.6.54)
twice. B.6.50)
2.6.Potentials
135
w also Equation B.6.53) implies that the corresponding ave equations are related via
he
B.6.55)
where A(x') is now a real function of the position vector eigenvalue x'. into This can, of course,be verified also by directly substituting B.6.55) w by Schrodinger's ave equation with A replaced A+ vA. In terms of p and , we seethat p is unchangedbut S is modifiedas follows:
eA .
B.6.56)
This is highly satisfactorybecause seethat the probability flux given by we gauge invariant. To summarize, when vector potentials in different gauges are used for the same physical situation, the corresponding state kets (or wave functions) must necessarilybe different. However,only a simple change is needed;we can go from a gauge specified by A to another specified by A + vA by merely multiplying the old ket (the old wave function) by The exp[ieA(x)/hc] (exp[/eA(x')/#<:]). canonicalmomentum, definedas the of translation, is manifestly gauge dependentin the sensethat its generator expectation value dependson the particular gauge chosen,while the kinemomentum and the probability flux are gauge invariant. is The reader may wonder why invariance under B.6.49) called invariance.This word is the translation of the German Eichinvarianz, gauge where Eich means gauge. There is a historical anecdote that goeswith the origin of this term. Considersome function of position at x: F(x). At a neighboring we obviously have point
is B.6.33)then
kinematic
But
We must then
V(?)A
B.6.60)
encountered in B.6.32) exceptfor the absenceof /. Historically, H. Weyl unsuccessfully attempted to construct a geometric theory of electromagnetism based on Eichinvarianz the scale function 2(x) in by identifying
Quantum
Dynamics
Fockand F. London realized the importance of the quantum combination B.6.60), they recalledWeyl's earlier work and gaugeinvariant
birth
of
2 with i times A. We are stuck with the term gauge invarianceeven though the quantummechanicalanalogue of B.6.58)
1at x
l ie
~hc
\\A'dx
at x+ dx
B.6.61
to
would actually
than
\"scale change.
The AharonovBohm Effect The use of vector potential in quantum mechanics has many farW someof which we are now ready to discuss. e start reaching consequences, with a relatively innocuouslooking problem. Considera hollow cylindrical shell, as shown in Figure 2.7a. e W assumethat a particle of charge e can be completelyconfined to the interior of the shell with rigid walls.The wave function is required to vanish on the inner (p = pa) and outer (p = ph) walls as well as at the top and the bottom. It is a straightforward boundaryvalueproblem in mathematical physicsto obtain the energyeigenvalues. Let us now considera modified arrangement where the cylindrical shell encloses uniform magnetic field, as shown in Figure 2.7b. pecifia S
(a)
FIGURE
magnetic
(b)
shell
2.7.
field.
Hollow cylindrical
(a)
without
magnetic
field,
(b)
with
uniform
2.6.Potentials
137
cally, you may imagine fitting a very long solenoidinto the hole in the The middle in such a way that no magneticfield leaksinto the region p>paconditionsfor the wave function are taken to be the same as boundary before; the walls are assumed to be just as rigid. Intuitively we may conjecture that the energy spectrum is unchanged becausethe region with to B # 0 is completely inaccessible the charged particle trapped insidethe shell. However, quantum mechanics tells us that this conjecture is not
correct.
Even though the magnetic field vanishes in the interior, the vector theoremwe can infer that potential A is nonvanishing there; using Stokes's the vector potential neededto producethe magnetic field B ( = Bz) is
A=
where 4> is the
I^U,
B.6.62)
unit vector in the directionof increasingazimuthal angle. In to solve the Schrodingerequation to find the energyeigenvalues attempting for this new problem,we need only to replacethe gradient V by V (ie/hc)\\;we can accomplishthis in cylindricalcoordinatesby replacingthe partial derivative with respectto as follows:
<f>
d<}>
[he) 2 '
cylindricalcoordinates: oz
in
= pjop
+z\342\200\224
+ <j>p
\342\200\224.
o<f>
B.6.64)
The replacement B.6.63) results in an observable change in the energy spectrum, as the reader may verify explicitly. This is quite remarkable becausethe particle never \"touches\" the magnetic field; the Lorentz force i the particle experiencess identically zero in this problem, yet the energy levelsdependon whether or not the magneticfield is finite in the hole region t inaccessibleo the particle. The problemwe have just treated is the boundstate versionof what is commonly referred to as the AharonovBohm effect.* We are now in a position to discussthe original form of the AharonovBohm effect itself. Considera particle of charge e going aboveor belowa very long impenetraInsidethe cylinder is a magnetic field cylinder, as shown in Figure 2.8. parallel to the cylinder axis, taken to be normal to the plane of Figure 2.8. a So the particle paths above and below enclose magneticflux. Our object is to study how the probability of finding the particle in the interferenceregion B dependson the magneticflux.
impenetrable
*After a 1959 paper by Y. Aharonov and D.Bohm. Essentially 10years earlier by W. Ehrenberg and R. E. Siday.
the
138
Even to the
though this
Quantum
Dynamics
problem can be attacked by comparing the soluSchrodinger quation in the presenceand absenceof B, for e reasonswe prefer to use the Feynman pathintegral method. pedagogical Let x2 and x^ be typical points in sourceregion A and interference region m B, respectively.We recall from classical echanics that the Lagrangian in the presencef the magnetic field can be obtained from that in the absence o of the magnetic field, denotedby ^chLskai* as follows:
solutions
classical
\\
dt
r@) . 'classical
?^L.a c dt
dt
B.6.65)
The corresponding change in the action for some definite path segment going from (xw_l9 tn_x) to (xw, tn) is then given by
B.6.66)
But this
i\"
e
nl
\\
B.6.67)
where ds is the differential line element along the path segment,so when we consider the entire contribution from xx to xN, we have the following
change:
Flexp
All this
nexp
exp he
\342\200\224
AJs
B.6.68)
Fortunately, we know from the theory of electromagnetismthat the line integral JA'dsis independent of paths, that is, it is dependentonly on the end points,as long as the loop formed by a pair of different paths doesnot enclose magnetic flux. As a result, the contributions due to A =?0 to all a paths going above the cylinder are given by a common phase factor;
is for a particular path, such as going above the cylinder. We must still sum over all possible paths, which may appearto be a formidable task.
inteference
region
FIGURE
2.8.
The AharonovBohm
effect.
2.6.Potentials
139
similarly, the contributions from all paths going below the cylinder are multiplied by another common phase factor. In the pathintegral notation we have, for the entire transition amplitude,
above
L below (exp
I I
above
{)L
/V
above
below
exp \\hc
A*ds
below
*
B.6.69
The probability for finding the particle in the interferenceregion B depends on the modulus squaredof the entire transition amplitude and hence on the phase difference between the contribution from the paths going above and of below.The phase differencedue to the presence B is just e e e A*ds Amds He He above below
)iy
/V
B.6.70
standsfor the magneticflux insidethe impenetrablecylinder.This where means that as we change the magnetic field strength, there is a sinusoidal component in the probability for observing the particle in region B with a periodgiven by a fundamental unit of magnetic flux, namely,
\302\256B
B.6.71
emphasize that the interference effect discussedhere is purely mechanical. Classically,the mption of a charged particle is dedetermined solely by Newton's secondlaw supplemented by the force law of Lorentz. Here,as in the previous boundstate problem, the particle can never enter the region in which B is finite; the Lorentz force is identically zero in all regionswhere the particle wave function is finite. Yet there is a of or striking interference pattern that dependson the presence absence a magnetic field inside the impenetrable cylinder. This point has led some that peopleto conclude in quantum mechanicsit is A rather than B that is fundamental. It is to be noted, however,that the observableeffectsin both i examplesdepend only on 3>a, which is directly expressiblen terms of B. t Experimentso verify the AharonovBohm effecthave beenperformed using a thin magnetized iron filament calleda whisker *
We quantum
*One such
1443.
recent experiment
is that of A. Tonomura et
al., Phys.
Rev. Lett.
48 A982):
140
Quantum
Dynamics
Magnetic Monopole We concludethis section with one of the most remarkable predictof quantum physics,which has yet to be verified experimentally.An astute student of classical lectrodynamicsmay be struck by the fact that e there is a strong symmetry between E and B, yet a magnetic referred to as a magnetic monopole\342\200\224analogous to electric charge is equations. The sourceof a magnetic field peculiarly absent in Maxwell's observedin nature is either a moving electric charge or a static magnetic dipole,never a static magneticcharge. Insteadof
predictions
charge\342\200\224com
charge\342\200\224commonly
B.6.72
analogous to
V*E
B.6.73
V*B actually vanishes in the usual way of writing Maxwell's equations. Quantum mechanics doesnot predict that a magneticmonopole must exist. However, it unambiguously requires that if a magnetic monopole is ever found in nature, the magnitude of magnetic charge must be quantized in terms of e, h, and c, as we now demonstrate. Supposethere is a point magneticmonopole, situated at the origin, of strength eM analogous to a point electriccharge. The static magnetic field is then given by
MU
B.6.74)
At first sight
it may
from
=
in
^Acosfl)
spherical coordinates:
B.6.75
xA =
d<}>
1
r sin 0 30 dr
(^sin0) dAr
+
But
1 0 .sin0 r
A
dr
difficulty\342\200\224it
. B.6.76
\"Gauss's law\"
is singular on the negative t out to be impossibleo construct a singularvalid everywherefor this problem. o see this we first note T potential = 4ireM
closed surface
B.6.77)
2.6.Potentials
141
FIGURE
2.9.
surface boundary enclosing the origin at which the magnetic On monopole is located. the other hand, if A were nonsingular, we would
for
any
have
V(V XA) = O
everywhere;hence,
closed surface in
B.6.78)
B'da
volume inside
B.6.79)
contradiction with B.6.77). However, one might argue that becausethe vector potential is just a devicefor obtaining B, we need not insist on having a single expression for A valid everywhere.Suppose construct a pair of potentials, we
@<7Te)
Adi)=_
\342\200\224
B.6.80a
cosfl)
B.6.80b
such that the potential A(I) can be used everywhereexceptinsidethe cone defined by 6 = 77 e around the negative zaxis;likewise,the potential A(II) can be used everywhereexceptinside the cone6 = e around the positive for zaxis;seeFigure 2.9. ogether they lead to the correct expression B T * everywhere.
*An alternative approach to this problem uses A(I) everywhere, but taking special careof the string of singularities, known asa Dirac string, along the negative zaxis.
142
Quantum
Dynamics
Consider now what happens in the overlap region e < 6 < it e, the where we may use either A(I) or A(II). Because two potentials lead to the same magnetic field, they must be related to each other by a gauge
\342\200\224
transformation. To
find
appropriate for
\\
this
that
l6M
r sin 6
U
B.6.81
i0S
for Recalling the expression gradient in spherical coordinates, *1dA  1 dA dA VA = rj~+ 4>~^E ~5T>
A
*?*+
r MX B.6.82
we deducethat
A will
= 2eM<}>
B.6.83
do the job. Next, we consider the wave function of an electrically charged to As particle of charge e subjected magnetic field B.6.74). we emphasized earlier, the particular form of the wave function dependson the particular gauge used. In the overlap region wherewe may use either A(I) or A(II), the wave functions are, according to B.6.55), related to each corresponding
other by
*<\302\246\342\200\242)_
expJ^jSpti)^.).
must
B.6.84
Wave
each be singlevaluedbecauseoncewe the state ket in terms of the positioneigenketsmust be unique. After all, as we have repeatedly ememphasized, the wave function is simply an expansion coefficientfor the state ket in terms of the position eigenkets. Let us now examine the behavior of wave function \\p(II) on the equator 6 = 77/2 with somedefinite radius r, which is a constant. When we the increase azimuthal angle <? along the equator and go around once,say from = 0 to = 2tt, \\p(II), as well as \\p(I), must return to its original value this becauseeach is singlevalued.According to B.6.84), is possible only if functions \\p(I) and
\\//(II)
<f> </>
he quantized
in units
N=
+ 0,+1, 2,....
\\e\\.
B.6.85
2\\e
B.6.
I electronicharge.t is amusing c
The smallest magnetic charge possibleis hc/2\\e\\, where e is the that once magneticmonopole is assumed a to exist, we can use B.6.85) so to speak, to explain why the backward,
Problems
143
electric chargesare quantized, for example, why the proton charge cannot
be 0.999972 times
We
\\e\\*
that quantum mechanics does not require magnetic monopolesto exist. However, it unambiguously predictsthat a magneticcharge, if it is ever found in nature, must be quantized in units of The quantization of magnetic charges in quantum mechanics was hc/2\\e\\. first shown in 1931 P.A. M. Dirac.The derivation given here is due to by T. T.Wu and C.N. Yang.
PROBLEMS
write the
operators
time.
equations of motion for the timedependentoperHeisenberg S Sx(t)9 Sy(t),and Sz(t). olvethem to obtain Sx^y^z as functions of of Chapter made an error and wrote H as
What
attempting to solve the most general timedependentproblem using an illegal Hamiltonian of this kind. (You may assume Hn = H22 = 0 for
point explicitly by
3.An
simplicity.) electron is subject to a uniform, timeindependentmagnetic field of strength B in the positive zdirection.At / = 0 the electron is known to be in an eigenstateof S h with eigenvalueh /2,where h is a unit vector, lying in the jczplane,that makes an angle /? with the zaxis. a. Obtain the probability for finding the electron in the sx = h/2state as a function of time.
\342\200\242
b. Find
c. For
4.
the expectationvalue of Sx as a function of time. your own peace of mind show that your answers make good sensein the extreme cases(i) /? > 0 and (ii) /? > tt/2. Let x(t) be the coordinate operator for a free particle in one dimension in the Heisenberg picture. Evaluate
*Empirically
established to an accuracy of
the equality in magnitude between the electron charge and the proton charge is four parts in 1019.
144
Quantum
Dynamics
5. Considera particle in
by
By
2\\(a\"\\x\\a')\\2(Ea,Ea,,)=2m,
6. Considera particle in
By
'
x
\"
/ P2
\\
To
identify
the
analogue
of the
virial
relation with the quantummechanicalanapreceding theorem it is essential that the lefthand sidevanish.
this
happen?
in
one dimension.At
=0
it
relation
In addition, we know
Using the Heisenbergicture, obtain ((AjcJ), as a function of t(t > 0) p when ((AxJ)r==0 given. (Hint: Take advantage of the property of is the minimumuncertainty wave packet you worked out in Chapter
Problem 18). 8. Let \\a') and \\a\") be eigenstates of a Hermitian operator A with The Hamiltonian opereigenvalues and a'\\ respectively
operator
1,
is given by
a'
(a'^a\.")
H=\\a')8(a\"\\+\\a\8(a%
where S is just a real number. a. Clearly, \\a') and a\")are not eigenstatesof the Hamiltonian. Write down the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian. What are their energy eigenvalues? b. Supposethe system is known to be in state \\a') at t = 0.Write down the state vector in the Schrodingerpicture for t > 0.
Problems
145
is the probability for finding the system in \\a\") for / > 0 if the system is known to be in state \\a') at / = 0? d.Can you think of a physicalsituation corresponding this problem? to 9.A box containing a particle is divided into a right and left compartment by a thin partition. If the particle is known to be on the right (left) side with certainty, the state is representedy the positioneigenket i?)(L)) b
where we have neglectedspatial variations within each half of the The most general state vector can then be written as
\\a)
c. What
box.
= \\R)(R\\a)+\\LXL\\a),
where (R\\ot) and (L\\ot) can be regardedas \"wave particle can tunnel through the partition; this tunneling
characterized
functions.\"
by the Hamiltonian
where A is a real number with the dimensionof energy. a. Find the normalized energy eigenkets. hat are the corresponding W energy eigenvalues? b. In the Schrodingerpicture the basekets \\R) and \\L) are fixed, and the state vector moves with time. Suppose system is represented the as given above at / = 0.Find the state vector t0 = 0;t) for by t > 0 by applying the appropriate timeevolutionoperator to \\a). c. Supposeat t = 0 the particle is on the right sidewith certainty. What is the probability for observing the particle on the left side as a function of time? d.Write down the coupledSchrodingerequations for the wave func(R\\a, ^o^O; )and (La,0=0; ). Show that the solutions to the / / t coupledSchrodingerequations are just what you expectfrom (b). e. Supposethe printer made an error and wrote H as
a)
a,
functions
explicitly solving the most general timeevolutionproblem with Hamiltonian, show that probability conservationis violated. 10. sing the onedimensionalsimple harmonic oscillator as an example, U illustrate the difference between the Heisenbergpicture and the in Schrodinger icture. Discuss particular how (a) the dynamic variables p x and p and (b) the most general state vector evolvewith time in each of the two pictures. Consider a particle subject to a onedimensional simple harmonic oscillator potential. Suppose t = 0 the state vector is given by at
By
this
11.
where p is the momentum operator and a is some number with dimension of length. Usingthe Heisenberg picture, evaluate the expecvalue (jc) for / > 0.
expectation
146
Quantum
Dynamics
12. . Write a
in specified
Problem
11 / = 0.You may at .2 x
function
(in
use
'
\\
l/2\\
exP
mo)
b.Obtain a simple expression the probability that the state is found for in the ground state at t = 0.Doesthis probability change for t > 0?
\\
a+/\"V2^
 Imi0
JP_\\
a^
fltw>
\\X\302\261maJ'
evaluate (m\\x\\n),
(m\\p\\n), (m{jc, p)\\n),(m\\x2\\n), and (m\\p2\\n). the virial theoremholds for the expectation valuesof the kinetic and the potential energy taken with respect to an energy
eigenstate.
/ IS 'iI* \\ ( Ti /
\\
\\C\302\261
>
\342\200\242
with
Schrodingerquation for the state vector, derive the Schrodinger e equation for the momentumspace wave function. (Make sure to the operator p from the eigenvalue/?'.)Can you guessthe distinguish
energy eigenfunctionsin momentum space? known as the correlation function, defined by
where x(t) is the position operator in the Heisenberg picture. Evaluate the correlation function explicitly for the ground state of a onedimensimpleharmonic oscillator. 16. onsideragain a onedimensionalsimple harmonic oscillator.Do the C following algebraically,that is, without using wave functions. a. Construct a linear combination of 0) and such that (jc) is as large as possible. b. Supposethe oscillatoris in the state constructed in (a) at / = 0.What is the state vector for t > 0 in the Schrodingerpicture? Evaluate the expectation value (x) as a function of time for t > 0 using (i) the p picture. Schrodinger icture and (ii) the Heisenberg c. Evaluate ((AjcJ) as a function of time using either picture.
onedimensional
1)
Problems
147
17.Show for
= exp[ &2<0jt20>/2],
A 18.
where x is the position operator. coherent state of a onedimensional simple harmonic oscillator is defined to be an eigenstateof the (nonHermitian)annihilation operator
a:
is a normalizedcoherent state.
X>
c. Write
as
uncertainty
LfM\\n).
of \\f(n)\\2 with respectto n is of the Show that the distribution Poissonform. Find the most probablevalue of n, hence of E. d. Show that a coherent state can also be obtained by applying the translation (finitedisplacement)operator e~ipl/h (where p is the momentum operator, and / is the displacement distance) to
19. et L
1966, 26264.)
TV
J\302\261
= ha^a^,
\302\261
+ Jz = z(a\\a
 a*_a_),
\\+
where a
and a\\ are the annihilation and creation operators of two the usual simple independent simple harmonic oscillator satisfying harmonic oscillator commutation relations. Prove
2_
+1
~zkx2 oo
for
b.What
148
A 21. particle in
Quantum
Dynamics
one dimensionis trapped between two rigid walls: 0, for 0 < jc < L oo, for x < 0, x > L. At t = 0 it is known to be exactly at x = L/2with certainty. What are the relative probabilitiesor the particle to be found in various energy f
Write down the wave eigenstates?
worry function
for
mathematical
22.Considera
particle in one dimension bound to a fixed center by a 5function potential of the form V( x) = vo8 (x), (v0 real and positive). Find the wave function and the binding energy of the ground state.Are there excitedbound states? 23.A particle of massm in one dimensionis bound to a fixed center by an attractive Sfunctionpotential:
\342\200\224
subtleties.)
At t = 0, the potential is suddenly switchedoff (that is, V= 0 for t > 0). Find the wave function for t > 0.(Be quantitative! But you need not attempt to evaluate an integral that may appear.) 24. A particle in one dimension (\342\200\224oo<jc<oo) is subjectedto a constant
V(x)= \\8(x),(X>0).
energy spectrum continuous or discrete?Write down an for approximate expression the energyeigenfunctionspecifiedby E. Also sketchit crudely. b. Discussbriefly what changes are neededif V is replacedby
a. Is the
V=\\x,
K=Xjc. 25.Consideran
electron confined to the interior of a hollow cylindrical shell whoseaxis coincides ith the zaxis. he wave function is required T w to vanish on the inner and outer walls, p = pa and ph9 and also at the top and bottom, z = 0 and L. a. Find the energyeigenfunctions.(Donot bother with normalization.) Show that the energyeigenvaluesare given by
Imn
2m e
mn
hr_\\
\\
JL,^>,.3,...,
YYX
/7th
b. Repeat the
same problem when there is a uniform magnetic field that the energy eigenvalues are ininfluenced by the magnetic field even though the electron never \" touches\"the magnetic field.
Problems
149
c. Compare,in
that quantization\"
particular, the ground state of the B = 0 problem with of the B # 0 problem.Show that if we require the groundstate energy to be unchanged in the presenceof B, we obtain \"flux
lirNhc
in one dimension under the influenceof a can be written as potential V(x). Suppose its wave function H P t)/h]. rovethat S(x,t) satisfiesthe classical amiltonJacobi exp[/iS(jc, equation to the extent that h can be regardedas small in some sense. Show how one may obtain the correct wave function for a plane wave H by starting with the solution of the classical amiltonJacobiequation with V(x)set equal to zero. hy do we get the exact wave function in W this particular case? for 27. Usingsphericalcoordinates, obtain an expression j for the ground and excitedstates of the hydrogen atom. Show, in particular, that for m!=?0 states, there is a circulating flux in the sense that j is in the direction of increasing or decreasing dependingon whether ml is positive or negative. 28. Derive B.5.16) obtain the threedimensional generalization of and
<J>,
B.5.16).
function
as
=
taking
Jd3x'K(x'9r9x'90)\\fi_it/h,
the groundstateenergyis obtained by
Showthat B.5.20)B.5.22).
_l_dZ
Z
Illustrate this for a particle in a onedimensionalbox. 30. The propagator in momentum spaceanalogous to B.5.26) is given by for (p\", /p',0). Derive an explicit expression (p\", t\\p\\ t0) for the freet particle case. 31.a. Write down an expressionfor the classicalaction for a simple harmonic oscillator for a finite time interval. b. Construct (xn,tn\\xn_l,tn_l) for a simple harmonic oscillator using Feynman's prescription for tn tn_1 = A? small. Keeping only terms up to order (A/J, show that it is in complete agreement with the 0 limit of the propagator given by B.5.26). t t0 32. State the Schwingeraction principle (seeFinkelstein 1973, Obtain 155). the solution for (x2t2\\xlt1) by integrating the Schwingerprinciple and for compareit with the correspondingFeynman expression Describethe classicalimits of these two expressions. l
\342\200\224
\302\273
150
Quantum
Dynamics
33.Show that
34. a. Verify
35.Considerthe
generated
b.Verify
j given by Hamiltonian of a spinlessparticle of charge o presence f a static magnetic field, the interaction terms can by
Poperator Poperator
B.6.31). e. In
the
be gener
>
f where A is the appropriate vector potential. Suppose,or simplicity, that B is uniform in the positive zdirection. Prove that the magnetic field the above prescription indeedleads to the correct expression the for with the magof the orbital magnetic moment (e/2mc)L interaction field B. Show that there is also an extra term proportional to + B2(x2 y2), and comment briefly on its physical significance. 36.An electron moves in the presenceof a uniform magnetic field in the zdirection (B= Bz). a. Evaluate
magnetic
where
=P
eA
n,+
eB\\h
eA y
b. By
comparing the Hamiltonian and the commutation relation obin (a) with those of the onedimensionaloscillator problem, show how we can immediately write the energyeigenvaluesas
obtained
2 7,2
2m
me
1_
2
n
where hk is the continuous eigenvalueof the pz operator and nonnegativeinteger including zero. 37. Considerthe neutron interferometer.
is a
Problems
151
that
Prove
successive axima m
that
produce two
where
\342\200\224
gn
(=
in
\342\200\2241.91)
is the neutron magnetic moment in units of had solved this problem in 1967, could have you
publishedit
PhysicalReview Letters
!]
CHAPTER 3
Theory of AngularMomentum
This chapter is concerned with a systematic treatment of angular momenand related topics.The importance of angular momentum in modern A physicscan hardly be overemphasized. thorough understanding of angumomentum is essential in molecular,atomic, and nuclear spectroscopy; angularmomentum considerationsplay an important role in scattering and collisionproblemsas well as in boundstate problems.Furthermore, anguangularmomentum in nuclear have important generalizations\342\200\224isospin concepts a physics,SUC),SUB)\302\256UA) in particle physics, nd so forth.
momentum angular
Rotations
30\302\260
We recall from elementaryphysics that rotations about the same axis commute, whereasrotations about different axesdo not. For instance, a rotation about the zaxisfollowedby a rotation about the same zaxis is rotation followed by a rotation, both obviously equivalent to a about the same axis. However, let us considera rotation about the rotation about the xaxis, zaxis,denotedby /?z(tt/2),followed by a denoted by RxGt/2);compare this with a rotation about the jcaxis
60\302\260 60\302\260 30\302\260 90\302\260 90\302\260 90\302\260
152
Rotations 3.1.
Commutation
Relations
153
followed by a rotation about the zaxis. he net results are different, as T from Figure we can see Our first basictask is to work out quantitatively the manner in which rotations about different axesfail to commute.To this end, we first recall how to representrotations in three dimensions by 3x3real, orthogonal matrices.Considera vector V with components Vx, Vv, and V2. When we rotate, the three components becomesome other set of numbers, Vx, Vv\\ and V/. The old and new components are related via a 3x3orthogonal
90\302\260
3.1.
matrix
R:
v
X
\\VX
V y
\\
R
>
K
1
C.1.1a
V' / *
\\
1>W
RRT=RTR=1,
C.1.1b
V'2 + V'2 r r z y
T where the superscript stands for a transpose a matrix. It is a property of of orthogonal matrices that
K2 + vy2
+ K2 =
C.1.2)
is automatically satisfied.
>
FIGURE
the noncommutativity
of finite rotations.
154
To be definite, we considera rotation about the zaxis by angle The convention we follow throughout this bookis that a rotation operation while the coordinate axes affects a physical system itself, as in Figure remain unchanged.The angle is taken to be positive when the rotation in question is counterclockwisein the xyplane, as viewed from the positive If zside. we associatea righthanded screw with such a rotation, a positive rotation around the zaxis means that the screw is advancing in the W positive zdirection. ith this convention,we easily verify that
3.1,
<j>
<j>
cos<f>
sin<f>
\342\200\224
sin<J>
cos<? 0 0
I,
C.1.3)
different convention, in which a physical system rethe coordinate axes rotated, this same matrix with a a rotation of the x and >>axes, positive would have represented clockwise when viewed from the positive zside.It is obviously important not to mix the two conventions! Someauthors distinguish the two approachesy using b \"activerotations\" for physical systems rotated and \"passiverotations\" for the coordinateaxesrotated. We are particularly interested in an infinitesimal form of Rz: remained
Had we adopted a
fixed
but
<f>
l0
\342\200\224
0 0
12
0 o
C.1.4)
1
0 0 and
10
0 )
\342\200\224
1^
0
C.1.5a
1
0
1
C.1.5b
z\342\200\224that
is, may be read from by cyclicpermutations of jc, y, x y, y z, z * x. Compare now the effectof a jaxis rotation followed by an jcaxisrotation with that of an jcaxisrotation followed by a j^axis
which
*
*
C.1.4)
3.1. Rotations
Commutation
Relations
155
1Rx(e)R(s)=
\342\200\224
1
e
\342\200\224
C.1.6a
le
and
1R(e)Rx(s)=
\342\200\224
0 e
1
C.1.6b
From C.1.6a) C.1.6b) have the first important result:Infinitesimal and we rotations about different axesdo commute if terms of order e2 and higher are ignored.* The secondand even more important result concernsthe manner in which rotations about different axesfail to commute when terms of order e2are kept:
= Rx(e)Ry(e)Ry(e)Rx(e) =R
where all terms of order higher derivation. We also have
than
0 0
0 0
0 0
1,
C.1.7)
this
C.1.8
where any stands for
as
any
rotation
axis.Thus the
final
C.1.9
This is an exampleof the commutation relations between rotation operabout different axes,which we will use later in deducing the angularmomentum commutation relations in quantum mechanics.
operations
vector
*Actually there is a familiar example of this in elementary mechanics. The angular velocity co that characterizes an infinitesimal change in rotation angle during an infinitesimal time interval follows the usual rule of vector addition, including commutativity of vector addition. However, we cannot ascribe a vectorial property to a finite angular change.
156
Infinitesimal
Rotations in Quantum Mechanics So far we have not used quantummechanicalconcepts. matrix The R is just a 3 X 3 orthogonal matrix acting on a vector V written in column matrix form. We must now understand how to characterize rotations in
quantum
to the original unrotated system. Given a rotation operation R, corresponding characterized by a 3x3orthogonal matrix /?, we associatean operator in the appropriate ket spacesuch that
mechanics. Because rotations affect physicalsystems,the state ket corresponding to to a rotated system is expected look different from the state ket corre
C.1.10
where \\a)R and a)stand for the kets of the rotated and original system, respectively.* Note that the 3x3orthogonal matrix R acts on a column matrix made up of the three components of a classical vector, while the The operator@(R)acts on state vectors in ket space. matrix representation of @(R),which we will study in great detail in the subsequent ections, s F dependson the dimensionality N of the particular ket spacein question. or TV = 2, appropriate of a for describing spin \\ system with no other degrees freedom, @(R)is represented a 2x2matrix; for a spin 1 system, the by appropriaterepresentationis a 3 X 3 unitary matrix, and so on. To construct the rotation operator @{R),it is again fruitful to examine first its properties under an infinitesimal rotation. We can almost how we must proceedby analogy. In both translations and time guess and evolution, which we studied in Sections1.6 respectively, the infinitesimal operators could be written as appropriate
2.1,
U? with
= liGe
C.1.11
r,
IT
e^dx'
C.1.12
G^r, e*dt
rotation
C.1.13
for an infinitesimal time evolution with time displacement dt. We know from classical mechanics that angular momentum is the generator of rotain much the same way as momentum and Hamiltonian are the of translation and time evolution, respectively. We therefore generators define the angular momentum operator Jk in such a way that the operator for an infinitesimal rotation around the kth axis by angle d<$> can be Thesymbol Q) stems from
the German word Drehung, meaning
rotation.
3.1. Rotations
obtained by
in
Commutation Relations
157
letting
r,
With C.1.11).
d<f>
e^d<t>
C.1.14
Jk taken to be Hermitian, the infinitesimal rotation is guaranteed to be unitary and reducesto the identity operator in operator
the limit
/ d<t>)=l ~y
d<}>
C.1.15
unit
vector h by an
bookwe do not define the angularmomentum be x X p. This is important becausespin angular momentum, to h which our general formalism also applies, as nothing to do with xt and pr Put in another way, in classical echanicsone can prove that the angular m momentum defined to be xXp is the generator of a rotation; in contrast, in quantum mechanics we define J so that the operator for an infinitesimal rotation takes form C.1.15). A finite rotation can be obtained by compounding successively infinitesimal rotations about the same axis.For instance, if we are interested in a finite rotation about the zaxis by angle <?, we consider operatorto =
lim
00
11
z h
\\
In order to obtain the angularmomentum commutation relations, we need one more concept. s we remarked earlier, for every rotation R A represented a 3 X 3 orthogonal matrix R there existsa rotation operator by We 3>(R)in the appropriateket space. further postulate that @(R)has the same group properties R: as Rl = rt=> @(R)\\= @(R) Identity: C.1.17a
Closure:
Inverses:
C.1.17d
158
Let us now return to the fundamental commutation relations for rotation operationsC.1.9) written in terms of the R matrices. Its rotation operatoranalogue would read
/
1
2h2 ]
(1 1
iJye
r
.2
I*)
UXE
1
2h2
l
2h2)
Equating
C.1.18
order e2 on
C.1.18),
terms of
[jx,Jy\\ =ihJz.
Repeating this kind of argument
known
with
C.1.19
[ji9Jj\\=iheiJkJk,
C.1.20
as the fundamental commutation relationsof angular momentum. In general, when the generators of infinitesimal transformations do not commute, the corresponding group of operations is said to be nonthe rotation group in three dimensions is Abelian. Becauseof nonAbelian. In contrast, the translation group in three dimensionsis Abelian becausept and p commuteeven with i # We emphasize that in obtaining the commutation relations we have used the following two concepts:
C.1.20),
j.
C.1.20
axesfail to commute.
is no exaggeration to say that commutation relations C.1.20) summarize a compact manner all the basicpropertiesof rotations in three dimen
FINITEROTATIONS
Rotation Operator for Spin \\ The lowest number, N9 of dimensionsin which the angularmomencommutation relations C.1.20) realized, is N =2.The reader has are already checkedin Problem 8 of Chapter 1that the operatorsdefined by
angularmomentum
C2.1
3.2.Spin
\\
159
with satisfy commutation relations C.1.20) Jk replacedby Sk. It is not a priori obvious that nature takes advantage of the lowest dimensional realization of C.1.20), numerous experiments\342\200\224from atomic specbut to convince us that this is to nuclear magnetic resonance\342\200\224suffice troscopy in fact the case. Considera rotation by a finite angle about the zaxis.If the ket of the ket after rotation is a spin \\ system before rotation is given by
<J>
a),
given by
\\a\\n
= Sd (<b)\\a\\
\342\200\2247^1
C 2 2\
with
C.2.3)
yJ.^.H)
To seethat this operator really rotates the physical system, let us look at its effect on (Sx).Under rotation this expectation value changes as follows:
Wjc/ We must
R\\a\\^x\\a/R
therefore compute
exp
I
C.2.5)
We C.2.1).
r For pedagogicaleasonswe evaluate this in two different ways. Derivation Herewe use the specificform of Sx given by then obtain for C.2.5)
1:
Hi
exp
i
\"~\"
h
(><+l)}exp h
\342\200\224
Svsin<t>.
C.2.5):
exp
h
Derivation 2:Alternatively
C.2.6)
we may t use formula B.3.47)o evaluate
Sxexp
V.)\\h
+ ihS.
h2S.
1 %K[sz,[sz,[s2,sx)}}
n
+
12!
= Sxcos<j>
\342\200\224
3!
Svsin<j>.
C.2.7)
160
Notice that in derivation 2 we usedonly the commutation relations for Si9 so this method can be generalized to rotations of systems with angular
momentum
higher
than
\\.
For spin \\, both methods give (Sx)+ R(a\\Sx\\a)R (Sx)cos<t> (Sy)sin<t>,
\302\253
C.2.8)
where the expectation value without subscriptsis understoodto be taken with respectto the (old)unrotated system. Similarly,
C.2.9) (Sy) + (Sy)cos<t>+ (Sx)sin<t>. As for the expectation value of Sz, there is no change becauseSz commutes
with
C.2.10 <S,)+(SZ). are Relations C.2.8), and C.2.9), C.2.10) quite reasonable. hey show that T when applied to the state ket, does rotate the rotation operator C.2.3),
expectation value of S around the zaxis by angle In other words,the expectation value of the spin operator behaves as though it were a classical vector under rotation:
</>.
@2(<t>):
C.2.11
where Rki are the elementsof the 3x3orthogonal matrix R that specifies the rotation in question.It should be clear from our derivation 2 that this I property is not restricted to the spin operator of spin \\ systems.n general, we have
IXC2.12 ??
under rotation, where Jk are the generators of rotations satisfying the Later angularmomentumcommutation relations C.1.20). we will show that relations of this kind can be further generalizedto any vector operator. So far everything has been as expected. now, be preparedfor a But We on surprise! examine the effectof rotation operator C.2.3) a general ket, a little more closely. e W
C.2.13
seethat
h>(a>.C.2.14
The appearanceof the halfangle <f>/2 here has an extremely interesting
consequence.
2*rr. We then
have
>a>.
C.2.15
3.2.Spin
\\
161
So the ket for the rotated state differs from the original ket by a minus = Att) rotation to get back to the same ket (</> sign.We would need a for the expectation with a plus sign.Notice that this minus sign disappears value of S becauseS is sandwichedby a)and (a, oth of which change b sign.Will this minus sign ever be observable?We will give the answer to this onceagain. interesting question after we discuss spin precession
360\302\260 720\302\260
R Spin Precessionevisited
in We now treat the problem of spin precession, lready discussed a from Section2.1, a new point of view. We recall that the basicHamiltonian of the problemis given by
(
m\342\202\254c
C.2.16
where
(a)
_ =
\\e\\B
C.2.17)
C.2.18
we Comparing this equation with C.2.3), see that the timeevolution operhere is precisely same as the rotation operator in C.2.3) with set the equal to cor. In this manner we seeimmediately why this Hamiltonian causesspin precession. we and C.2.9), C.2.10),obtain Paraphrasing C.2.8),
operator
<J>
(Sx\\= <Sx>,=0coscor<Sv>,=0sincor,
= 27r/co,the spin returns to its original direction. This set of equations can be used to discuss spin precession a the of an electronlike particle which, however, is 210 times as heavy. The muon, muon magnetic moment can be determined from other experiments\342\200\224for example,the hyperfine splitting in muonium, a bound state of a positivemuon and an be eh/lm^c,just as expectedfrom Dirac'srelativistic of spin 2 particles. We will here neglect very small correctionsthat theory ( arise from quantum field theory effects). Knowing the magnetic moment we can predict the angular frequency of precession. o C.2.19) be and, in S can has beencheckedexperimentally.In practice, as the external magnetic fact, field causes the spin precession, spin directionis analyzedby taking advantage of the fact that electrons from muon decay tend to be emitted preferentially in the direction opposite the muon spin. to
After t
electron\342\200\224to
162
Let us now look at the time evolution of the state ket itself. we Assuming that the initial (t = 0) ket is given by C.2.13),obtain after
time
a)
and we must wait acquires a minus sign at C.2.20) Expression t = 47r/coto get back to the original state ket with the same sign.To sum up, the period for the state ket is twice as long as the periodfor spin precession
2tt
precession
t = 2tt/(o,
\ +l0)t/2\\)(\a). \\)(
C.2.20)
0) 0)
Study
C.2.21a
2it Rotations
state ket
C.2.21b
parts\342\200\224path
describean experimentperformed to detect the minus sign the universe is multiplied by a minus sign, there will be no observableeffect.The only way to detect the predictedminus sign is to make a comparison between an unrotated state and a rotated state. As in gravityinduced quantum interference, discussed in Section2.6, e rely on the art of neutron interferometry to verify this w extraordinary prediction of quantum mechanics. A nearly monoenergeticbeam of thermal neutrons is split into two A and path B\\ seeFigure 3.2.ath A always goesthrough a P magneticfieldfreeregion; in contrast, path B enters a small region where a static magnetic field is present.As a result, the neutron state ket going via where T is the time spent in the path B suffers a phase change eTlOiT/2, B =? 0 region and to is the spinprecession frequency
in
\"
= ?f:> (g,,\302\253i.9i)
mpc
C.2.22)
Interference
region B
FIGURE
3.2.
a 2n
rotation.
3.2.Spin
\\
163
which C.2.17), is appropriate for the electron with When path A and path B meet again in the eh/2mec. the interference region of Figure 3.2, amplitude of the neutron arriving via
compare this
path
with
magnetic moment
B is
C.2.23
while the amplitude of the neutron arriving via path A is cl9 independent of B. So the intensity observable in the interference region must exhibit a sinusoidalvariation
(^
C.2.24
where 8 is the phasedifferencebetween cx and c2 (B = 0). In practice, the time spent in the B # 0 region, is fixed but the precession frequencyto is varied by changing the strength of the magnetic field. The intensity in the interference region as a function of B is predictedto have a sinusoidal variation. If we call Ai5 the differencein B neededto producesuccessive maxima, we can easily show that A5 = where / is the path length.
^?,
C.2.25
In deriving this formula we usedthe fact that a Air rotation is needed for the state ket to return to the original ket with the same sign, as required of by our formalism. If, on the other hand, our description spin \\ systems were incorrect and the ket were to return to its original ket with the same value for Ai5 would be just onehalf sign under a 2tt rotation, the predicted of C.2.25). Two different groups have conclusivelydemonstrated experimentally that prediction is correct to an accuracy of a fraction of a percent.* C.2.25) This is another triumph of quantum mechanics. he nontrivial prediction T in has C.2.15) beenexperimentallyestablished a direct manner.
Pauli TwoComponent ormalism F Manipulations with the state kets of spin \\ systems can be convenusing the twocomponentspinor formalism introduced by W. Pauli in 1926. Section In we learned how a ket (bra) can be representedby a column (row) matrix; all we have to do is arrange the expansioncoefficientsin terms of a certain specifiedset of basekets into a
conveniently
carriedout
1.3
*H. Rauch et al., Phys. Lett. 54A, 425A975); S.A. Werner et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 35 A975), 1053.
casewe have
=x
4
C.2.26)
C.2.27a)
and for an arbitrary state ket and the corresponding state bra. Column matrix
C.2.27b <a<a+><++<aX\302\253a+>,<a\302\273
is C.2.27a)referred to as a twocomponentspinor and is written
c
V
\"***\" N
as
+ The matrix elements ( + 1^1 > and ( + \\Sk\\ ), apart from h/29are to be set equal to those of 2x2matrices ak9 known as the Pauli matrices.
\342\200\224
()
C.2.28
C.2.29)
We identify
(f)
We can now write the expectation value
(Sk) = (a\\Sk\\a) =
h
C.2.31
where the usual rule of matrix multiplication is used in the last line. that Explicitly, we seefrom C.2.1) together with C.2.30) 0 1 0
1 Oj'
/
0/'
C.2.32
where the subscripts 2, and 3 refer to x, y, and z, respectively. someproperties the Pauli matrices.First, of We record
1,
+ OjOj
where the righthand side of
= 0,
for / #
j,
C.2.33a C.2.33b
is C.2.33a)to
be understoodas the
2x2
3.2.Spin
identity
\\
165
(a,, ,}=25,,.. a
relations
,
C.2.34)
We
commutation
C.2.35)
which we
realizations of the angularmomentum commutation relations C.1.20). and CombiningC.2.34) C.2.35) we can obtain
seeto be the
Noticealso that
OiO2
~~
<*2ai
= *a3
C.2.36)
l,
This We now consider a*a, wherea is a vector in three dimensions. is actually to be understood as a 2 X 2 matrix. Thus
\302\246
C.2.38)
identity,
C.2.39)
and commutation
To prove this all we need are the anticommutation and relations, C.2.34) C.2.35), respectively:
J k
= ab+/o(axb).
If the components a are real, we have of
C.2.40)
(aaJ= a2,
where ais the magnitude of the vector a.
C.2.41
Rotations in the TwoComponent ormalism F Let us now study the 2x2 matrix representation of the rotation
operator<S>(h,</>).
We have
exp
7\342\200\224?
= exp
ih
\342\200\224^
C.2.42)
166
Using
I
o*n
which
for for
n
\302\253
even,
odd,
C.2.43)
follows from
we C.2.41),can write
2
exp
0
2
4!
= lcosl
Explicitly,
in
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
\342\200\224zcvhsin!
I.
C.2.44
2 X 2 form we have
\342\200\224
cosi
iomn<t>
\342\200\224
mzsin
cosi
\342\200\224
exp
I
+ mzsin
C.2.45)
as the operator iSmh<f)/h) acts on a state ket a),the 2x2 acts on a twocomponentspinor Underrotations exp( /a*h<J>/2) we change x as follows:
Just
exp(\342\200\224
matrix
\342\200\224
x\302\253
C.2.46
On the other hand, the aks themselvesare to remain unchanged under rotations. So strictly speaking,despite its appearance,a is not to be regarded as a vector; rather, it is xtCFX which obeys the transformation property of a vector:
C.2.47)
An
using
exp 2
and so on, which is the
axexpi
C.2.48
analogue of C.2.6).
2x2matrix
3.2.Spin
167
In
that
a spin \\ ket
a discussing 2<n rotation using the ket formalism, we have seen T into a). he 2x2analogue of this statement is \\a) goes
\342\200\224
exp!
which
\342\200\224
1, for any
h,
C.2.49
is evident from
As an instructive application of rotation matrix let us see how we can construct an eigenspinorof a*h with eigenvalue where h is a unit vector in some specified direction. Our object is to construct x satisfying In other
representation
C.2.44).
C.2.45), +1,
C.2.50
C.2.51
Actually
this can be solved as a straightforward eigenvalueproblem (see Problem 9 in Chapter 1),but here we presentan alternative method based on rotation matrix C.2.45). Let the polar and the azimuthal angles that characterizeh be /? and a, respectively.We start with I l ], the twocomponentspinor that represents the spinupstate. Given this, we first rotate about the >>axis by angle /?; we rotate by angle a about the zaxis.We seethat the desired subsequently
Second
rotation
First rotation
FIGURE
3.3.
168
In spin state is then obtained; seeFigure 3.3. the Pauli spinorlanguage this of operations is equivalent to applying exp(o2fi/2)to sequence i The followedby an application of exp( io3a/2). net result is
cosi
\342\200\224
io2sm\\
\342\200\224
cos. j + /
cosif
in
/a/2
C.2.52)
completeagreement with Problem 9 of Chapter 1 if we realize that a phase common to both the upper and lower components is devoid of
physical significance. A 3.3.SOC), UB), ND EULER ROTATIONS S Orthogonal Group
We
will
now
of the operationswith
have
sections.
The most elementary approach to rotations is based on specifying the axis of rotation and the angle of rotation. It is clear that we need three real numbers to characterizea general rotation: the polar and the azimuthal anglesof the unit vector h taken in the direction of the rotation axis and the rotation angle itself. Equivalently, the same rotation can be specifiedby the three Cartesiancomponents of the vector h</>. However, these ways of characterizing rotation are not so convenient from the point of view of the group propertiesof rotations. For one thing, unless is studying infinitesimal or h is always in the same direction, we cannot add vectors of the form h</> to characterizea succession rotations. It is much easierto of work with a orthogonal matrix R becausethe effect of successive rotations can be obtained just by multiplying the appropriate orthogonal
<f> <f>
3x3
matrices.
How many independent parameters are there in a 3 X 3 orthogonal matrix? A real 3x3matrix has 9 entries, but we have the orthogonality constraint
C.3.1
3.3SOC), UB),and S
which
Euler Rotations
169
beingthe
As
number previously obtained by a more elementarymethod. The set of all multiplication operations with orthogonal matrices forms a group. By this we mean that the following four requirements are
correspondsto 6 independent equations becausethe product RRT, sameas RTR, is a symmetrical matrix with 6 independent entries. a result, there are 3 (that is, 96) independent numbers in /?, the same
satisfied:
two
is satisfiedbecause holds:
C.3.2) C.3.3)
C.3.4)
in
matrix
by
1\342\200\224physically
to corresponding no rotation
Rl=lR = R
sense\342\200\224defined
is a member of the classof all orthogonal matrices. 4. The inverse matrix R~l\342\200\224physically to corresponding rotation the opposite by
RR1= R~lR=l
is also a member.
C.3.5)
This group has the name SOC), here S standsfor special, standsfor w O 3 for three dimensions. ote only rotational operationsare N orthogonal, consideredere,hence have SOC)rather than OC) (which can include we h the inversion operationof Chapter4 later).
Unitary unimodular
group
In the previous sectionwe learned yet another way to characterizean that acts on matrix is, to look at the arbitrary is unitary. As a result, for the the twocomponentspinor x Clearly,
rotation\342\200\224that
can write the most general unitary unimodular matrix as a C.3.7) U(atb)=[ b* a* J where a and b are complexnumbers satisfying the unimodular condition
We
\342\200\224
2x2 C.2.45)
C.2.45)
C.3.6)
that
is, its
\\
b\\
C.3.8)
170
We
unitary
t = U(a9byU(a9b)
[b*
b
a
b*
a,
C.3.9)
where we have used C.3.8). Notice that the number of independent real is parameters in C.3.7) again three. We can readily see that the 2x2matrix C.2.45) characterizesa that rotation of a spin \\ system can be written as U(a,b). Comparing C.2.45 with C.3.7), identify we
Re(a) = cosl
\342\200\224
Im(a) =
\\m(b)
=
\342\200\224
\302\253zsin!
w^sinl
J,
C.3.10
from
which
the unimodular
The two complex numbers a and b are known as CayleyKlein H parameters. istorically the connection between a unitary unimodular maand a rotation was known long before the birth of quantum mechanics. In fact, the CayleyKleinparameters were used to characterize complicated in motions of gyroscopes rigidbody kinematics. Without appealing to the interpretations of unitary unimodular of matrices in terms of rotations, we can directly checkthe group properties multiplication operations with unitary unimodular matrices.Note in parmatrix
particular
that
U(al9bl)U(a29 = U(axa2 bxb^ axb2 + a$bx), b2) where the unimodular condition for the product matrix is
ala2 bxb2\\ Forthe inverse of U we have
\342\200\224
C.3.11
C.3.12
C.3.13
This group is known as SUB),where S stands for special,U for unitary, and 2 for dimensionality2.In contrast, the group defined by multiplication constrained operationswith general 2x2unitary matrices (not necessarily T to be unimodular) is known as UB). he most general unitary matrix in two dimensionshas four independent parameters and can be written as eiy (with y real) times a unitary unimodular matrix: a SUB)is calleda subgroup of UB).
U=el
b
C.3.14
3.3SOC), UB),and S
Euler Rotations
171
we Because can characterizerotations using both the SOC)language and the SUB)language, we may be temptedto concludethat the groups c SOC)and SUB) areisomorphic\342\200\224that is, that there is a onetooneoro o This correspondence betweenan element f SOC)and an element f SUB). inference is not correct. Considera rotation by 2ir and another oneby 4tt. In the SOC)language, the matrices representing a 2tt rotation and a 4tt rotation are both 3x3identity matrices;however, in the SUB)language the times the 2 x 2 identity matrix and the identity correspondingmatricesare matrix itself, respectively. More generally, U(a,b) and U( a, b) The both correspondto a single 3x3matrix in the SOC)language. corU for a given /?, the corresponding correspondence therefore is twotoone; is doublevalued. ne can say, however, that the two groupsare locally O
1
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
isomorphic.
Euler Rotations
that
From classicalmechanics the reader may be familiar with the fact in rigid body can be accomplished three steps, known as Euler rotations. The Euler rotation language,specifiedby three Euler angles, provides yet another way to characterize the most general rotation in three dimensions. The three steps of Euler rotations are as follows. First, rotate the rigid body counterclockwise(as seen from the positive zside)about the s zaxisby angle Imagine now that there is a body ^axisembedded, o to speak,in the rigid body such that before the zaxis rotation is carried out, the body>>axis coincides ith the usual ^axis,referred to as the spacefixed w Obviously, after the rotation about the zaxis, the body ^axisno j;axis. w longer coincides ith the spacefixed >>axis; let us call the former the T >>'axis. o seehow all this may appearfor a thin disk, refer to Figure 3.4a. We now perform a secondrotation, this time about the y 'axisby angle /?. As a result, the body zaxis no longer points in the spacefixed zaxis direction. call the bodyfixedzaxisafter the secondrotation the z'axis; We seeFigure 3.4b. third and final rotation is about the z'axisy angle y. The b The body >>axis now becomes >>\"axis of Figure 3.4c. terms of 3 X 3 In the orthogonal matrices the product of the three operations can be written as
an arbitrary rotation of a
a.
C.3.15
cautionary remark is in order here.Most textbooksin classical mechanics prefer to perform the secondrotation (the middle rotation) about rather than about the body ^axis (see,for example, the body xaxis This Goldstein1980). conventionis to be avoided in quantum mechanicsfor a reasonthat will become apparent in a moment. In C.3.15) appear Ry. and Rz>, which are matrices for rotations there about body axes. his approach to Euler rotations is rather inconvenientin T
A
172
(a)
(b)
(c) 3.4.
Euler rotations.
FIGURE
we f mechanics because earlier obtained simple expressionsor the spacefixed (unprimed) axis components of the S operator, but not for the bodyaxiscomponents.It is therefore desirableto expressthe bodyaxis in rotations we considered terms of spacefixedaxis rotations. Fortunately there is a very simple relation, namely,
quantum
The meaning of the righthand side is as follows. First, bring the body Figure 3.4a (that is, the >>'axis)back to the original fixedspace about the ^directionby rotating clockwise(as seenfrom the positive zside) zaxisby angle a; then rotate about the >>axis by angle ft. Finally, return the body 7axisto the direction of the >>'axisby rotating about the z tells fixedspaceaxis (not about the z'axis!) angle Equation C.3.16) by us that the net effectof these rotations is a single rotation about the y 'axis by angle /?.
>>axis of
a.
3.3SOC), UB),and S
Euler Rotations
173
To prove this assertion,let us lookmore closelyat the effectof both sidesof C.3.16)the circular disc of Figure 3.4a. learly, the orientation on C of the body >>axis is unchanged in both cases,namely, in the y 'direction. Furthermore, the orientationof the final body zaxis is the same whether we apply Rv>(fi) or Rz(a)R (fi)Rz x(a).In both casesthe final body zaxis makesa polar angle fi with the fixed zaxis (the same as the initial zaxis), and its azimuthal angle, as measured in the fixedcoordinatesystem, is just a.In other words,the final body zaxis is the same as the z'axisf Figure o
We C.3.15).obtain
=
where in the summarize,
final
Rz(a)Ry(p)Rz(y),
C.3.18
= R(a,0,y) R,(a)Rjfi)Rz(y),
C.3.19
where all three matriceson the righthand siderefer to fixedaxis rotations. Now let us apply this set of operations to spin \\ systemsin quantum mechanics. orresponding the product of orthogonal matrices in C.3.19 to C there existsa product of rotation operators in the ket spaceof the spin \\ system under consideration: The 2x2matrix representation of this product is ia3a ia3y
C.3.20)
exp exp
I
exp
I
/a/2
0
0 0
/(ay)/2sin(j8/2)
C.3.21
where C.2.44) used.This matrix is clearly of the unitary unimodular was form. Conversely, the most general 2x2 unitary unimodular matrix can be written in this Euler angle form. Notice that the matrix elements of the second (middle) rotation had exp( io <f>/2) are purely real. This would not have been the case we chosento rotate about the jcaxisrather than the >>axis, as done in most
\342\200\224
174
textbooksin classical echanics.In quantum mechanics it pays to stick to m our convention because we prefer the matrix elements of the second rotation, which is the only rotation matrix containingoffdiagonalelements,
to
* be purely real.
representation
The 2x2 matrix in C.3.21) is called the = \\ irreducible representaof the rotation operator 3){a, y). Its matrix elementsare denotedby /?, a,/?, y). In terms of the angularmomentum operatorswe have
expl
higher
y=2>\342\204\242
In
yanaloguesof C.3.21).
PURE VERSUSMIXEDENSEMBLES
Polarized Versus UnpolarizedBeams
The formalism of quantum mechanicsdeveloped so far makes statison predictions an ensemble,that is, a collection,of identicallyprepared i physical systems.More precisely,n such an ensembleall members are A goodexample of to be characterizedby the same state ket supposed this is a beam of silver atoms coming out of an SG filtering apparatus. Every atom in the beam has its spin pointing in the same direction, namely, the direction determined by the inhomogeneity of the magnetic field of the filtering apparatus.We have not yet discussedhow to describequantum of mechanicallyan ensemble physicalsystemsfor which some,say 60%,are and the remaining 40% are characterized by some characterized by other ket j6). of To illustrate vividly the incompleteness the formalism developed so far, let us considersilver atoms comingdirectly out of a hot oven, yet to be subjectedto a filtering apparatus of the SternGerlachype. On symmet grounds we expectthat such atoms have random spin orientations; in with such an other words,there should be no preferred direction associated so ensembleof atoms. According to the formalism developed far, the most general state ket of a spin \\ system is given by
statistical
a).
a),
symmetry
C.4.1
generally,
*This, of course, depends on our convention Jv) are taken to be purely imaginary.
elements of
SY
(or, more
3.4.Density
175
a equation capableof describing collection of atoms with random characterizesa state ket spin orientations? The answer is clearly no; C.4.1) whosespin is pointing in somedefinite direction,namely, in the direction of h, whosepolar and azimuthal angles, /? and a, respectively,are obtained by
solving
Is this
^ e'asin@/2) cC\302\260s(/?/2)
C.4.2)
a situation of this kind we introduce the conceptof fractional population, or probability weight. An ensembleof silver atoms with completely random spin orientation can be viewed as a collectionof are silver atoms in which 50%of the membersof the ensemble characterized We specify such an ensemble by  + ) and the remaining 50% by by
\342\200\224
seeC.2.52). To copewith
assigning
).
_=
0.5,
C.4.3)
where w+ and w_ are the fractional population for spinup and down, there is no preferred direction for such a beam, it is respectively. Because reasonableto expectthat this same ensemble be regardedequally well can The mathematical formalism as a 5050 mixture of \\SX; + ) and \\SX;
\342\200\224
this neededto accomplish will appearshortly. It is very important to note that we are simply introducing here two real numbers w+ and w_. There is no information on the relative phase between the spinupand the spindown ket. Quite often we refer to such a situation as an incoherent mixture of spinupand spindown states.What we are doing here is to be clearly distinguished from what we did with a coherent linear superposition, example, for
).
y2 /
\\
y2 )
\342\200\224
C.4.4)
where the phase relation between  + > and  > contains vital information in on the spin orientation in the xyplane, in this case the positive xdirection. In general, we should not confuse w+ and w_ with c+2 \\c_\\2. and The probability conceptassociated with w+ and w_ is much closerto that encounteredin classicalprobability theory. The situation encountered in dealing with silver atoms directly from the hot oven may be compared with that of a graduating classin which 50%of the graduating seniorsare male, the remaining 50%female.When we picka student at random, the probabilWhoever heard of a that the particular student is male (or female)is 0.5. student referred to as a coherent linear superposition male and female of with a particular phaserelation? The beam of silver atoms coming directly out of the oven is an example of a completely random ensemble;the beam is said to be unprobability
176
polarized becausethere is no preferred direction for spin orientation. In contrast, the beam that has gone through a selective SternGerlachtype measurement is an example of a pure ensemble;the beam is said to be a are polarized becausell membersof the ensemble characterizedby a single common ket that describesa state with spin pointing in some definite T direction. o appreciate the differencebetweena completelyrandom ensemand a pure ensemble, us consider rotatable SG apparatus wherewe let a can vary the direction of the inhomogeneousB just by rotating the apparaWhen a completely unpolarized beam directly out of the oven is subjectedto such an apparatus, we always obtain two emerging beamsof equal intensity no matter what the orientation of the apparatus may be.In to contrast, if a polarized beam is subjected such an apparatus, the relative intensities of the two emerging beamsvary as the apparatus is rotated. For one someparticular orientation the ratio of the intensities actually becomes I to zero.n fact, the formalism we developed in Chapter 1 tells us that the relative intensitiesare simply cos2(/?/2) sin2(/?/2), and where /? is the angle between the spin direction of the atoms and the direction of the inhomogemagnetic field in the SG apparatus. A complete random ensemble a pure ensemble be regarded and can In as the extremesof what is known as a mixed ensemble. a mixed ensemble a certain the membersare characterizedby example, a state ket a>,the remaining 30%by /?).In such a case beam is saidto the be partially polarized. Here \\a) and /?) need not even be orthogonal; we can, for example,have 70% with spin in the positive xdirection and 30% with spinin the negativezdirection.*
ensemble apparatus. inhomogeneous
fraction\342\200\224for
70%\342\200\224of
pure ensemble definition is a collection of physical systems by such that every member is characterizedby the same ket \\a). In contrast, in a mixed ensemble, fraction of the memberswith relative population wx are a characterized by aA)), some other fraction with relative population w2, by can aB)),and so on. Roughly speaking, a mixed ensemble be viewedas a mixture of pure ensembles,ust as the name suggests.The fractional j
A
*In the literature what we call pure and mixed ensembles are often referred to as pure and mixed states. In this book, however, we use state to mean a physical system described by a definite state ket \\a).
repeatedly
to
spin \\ systems.
3.4.Density
177
C.4.5)
As we mentioned previously, aA)) and aB)) need not be orthogonal. neednot coincide Furthermore, the number of terms in the / sum of N with the dimensionality N of the ket space; it can easily exceed . For 40% with spin in example,for spin \\ systemswith N = 2, we may consider the positive zdirection, 30% with spin in the positive xdirection, and the remaining 30% with spin in the negative ^direction. Supposewe make a measurement on a mixed ensembleof some observable We may ask what is the averagemeasured value of A when a A. large number of measurementsare carried out. The answer is given by the ensemble average of A, which is defined by
C.4.5)
a'
C.4.6)
where \\a') is an eigenket of A. Recall that (oSl)\\A\\a{l)) is the usual quantum mechanical expectation value of A taken with respect to state tells a(/)).Equation C.4.6) us that these expectationvalues must further be weighted by the correspondingfractional populations wr Notice how probfor conceptsenter twice; first in (tf'a(/))2 the quantummechaniprobability for state a(/)>to be found in an A eigenstate \\a')\\ second, in the probability factor wi for finding in the ensemble quantummechania state characterizedby a(/)).* We can now rewrite ensemble average C.4.6) a more general using
probabilistic
quantummechanical quantummechanical
basis, {\\b')}:
V b\"
b'
the sum of the (b\")is just the dimensionality of the ket space,while the number of terms in the sum of the / dependson is Notice how the mixed ensemble viewedas a mixture of pure ensembles. that in this form the basicproperty of the ensemble which doesnot depend on the particular observableA is factored out. This motivates us to define the density operator p as follows:
in
b'
C.4.8)
*Quite often in the literature the ensemble average is also called the expectation value. However, in this book, the term expectation value is reserved for the average measured value when measurements are carried on a pure ensemble.
178
following
form:
= ?vvz<fc''a(/)><<*(/>'>
C.4.9)
The density operator contains all the physically significant information we in we obtain about the ensemble question. eturning to C.4.7), can possibly R seethat the ensemble averagecan be written as
b'
b\"
= tr( pA).
using
C.4.10
Because trace is independent of representations,tr(pA) can be evaluated the is an extremely powerful any convenient basis.As a result, C.4.10)
relation. There are two propertiesof the density operator worth recording. First, the density operator is Hermitian, as is evident from C.4.8). Second, the density operator satisfiesthe normalization condition
b'
=1.
C.4.11
Because the Hermiticity and the normalizationcondition, for spin \\ of with dimensionality 2 the density operator, or the corresponding systems F density matrix, is characterizedby three independent real parameters. our
real numbers characterizea 2 X 2 Hermitian matrix. However,only three are independentbecauseof the normalization condition. The three numbers needed are [Sx],[Sy], and [Sz];the reader may verify that knowledge of these three ensemble averagesis sufficient to reconstruct the density operThe manner in which a mixed ensembleis formed can be rather involved. We may mix pure ensemblesharacterizedby all kinds of a(/))'s c with appropriatew/s; yet for spin \\ systems three real numbers completely in T that a mixed characterize the ensemble question. his strongly suggests in into ensemble be decomposed pure ensembles many different ways. A can problemto illustrate this point appearsat the end of this chapter. A pure ensemble specifiedby wt =1for some / = n, is = 0 for all other conceivablestate kets, so the correfor wt density operator is written as corresponding
operator. a(/)>\342\200\224with instance\342\200\224and
with
C.4.12
ensembleis
C.4.13
3.4.Density
179
or, equivalently,
= p(pl) 0.
C.4.14)
addition to
ensemble zero or one, as can be seenby inserting a complete set of base are kets that diagonalize the Hermitian operator p between p and (p 1) of When C.4.14). diagonalized,the density matrix for a pure ensemblemust therefore look like
\342\200\224
tr(p2)=l.
C.4.15)
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
(diagonal form)
o;
C.4.16
It can be shown that tr(p2) is maximal when the ensemble pure; for a is mixed ensemble tr(p2) is a positive number less than one. Given a density operator, let us seehow we can construct the density matrix in some specifiedbasis.To this end we first corresponding recall that
I\302\253X\302\253I
b' b\" this showsthat we can form the square matrix corresponding a(/))(a(/) to in the senseof outer product, the column matrix formed by by combining, w w (b'\\a(l)) ith the row matrix formed by (a(/)6\,") hich, of course,is equal to (Z>\"a(l))*. final step is to sum such square matrices with weighting The
= E El*'X*'l\302\253X\302\253l*\"X*''l
E?
C.4.17)
factors
wi9
as indicated in
expected.
It
form
agreeswith
as C.4.9),
\\
is instructive to
study
systems.
Example
Sz
+.
C.4.18
180
\\SX;\302\261)(SX;\302\261\\
= 1)
f
' 1)
1.
C.4.19)
3.
weights
E0% each):
I 2
0
which
i 2
C.4.20
is just the identity matrix divided by 2.As we remarked earlier, the sameensemblecan also be regarded as an incoherent mixture of an Sx + and ensemble an Sx ensemble ith equal weights.It is gratifying that our w
\342\200\224
i 2
0
I 2
I I 2 2 I I I 2 2 2
>
I 2 I 2
I 2 1 2
\342\200\224.
C.4.21
where we seefrom Example 2 that the two terms on the righthand sideare with Sx + and Sx Because in the density matrices for pure ensemble p is this case just the identity operator divided by 2 (the dimensionality), we have
= = C.4.22 tx(PSx) tr(pS) tr(pSz)= 0, Thus for the ensemble where we used the fact that Sk is traceless. averageof
S we have
= [S] 0.
C.4.23
This is reasonable becausethere should be no preferred spin direction in a random ensemble spin \\ systems. of completely Example 4. As an example of a partially polarized beam, let us considera o 7525 mixture of two pure ensembles, ne with Sz + and the other with
C.4.24
3.4.Density
181
i I 2 2
I I I
7 8 8 8 8
I I) 2 2
C.4.25)
8
that this
from which
follows
= [sy]=o, [sz]
C.4.26)
ensemble
leave as an exercise the readerthe task of showing for can be decomposed ways other than C.4.24). in
We
Time Evolution
of Ensembles
Howdoesthe density operator p change as a function of time? Let us supposethat at sometime t0 the density operator is given by
C427)
ensembleis to be left undisturbed, we cannot change the fractional population vvz. Sothe changein p is governedsolelyby the time evolution of
If the
a(/)> at
a <'\\
to*\\a(i\\to;t).
C.4.28)
t,\\ t\\H)
that
 a('\\t0;
r><a<'\\
C.4.29)
This looks like the Heisenberg equation of motion exceptthat the sign is This is not disturbing becausep is not a dynamic observablein the wrong! Heisenberg picture.On the contrary, p is built up of Schrodingerpicture state kets and state bras which evolvein time according to the Schrodinger equation. It is amusing that C.4.29) be regarded the quantummechanican as of Liouville'stheorem in classical tatistical mechanics, s analogue
quantummechanical
^Pclassical
r
L Pclassical
>
rri
Jclassical'
dt
C.4.30)
in
where
pciassicai
is C.4.29)
phase
by a single moving point in phase space at each instant of time. A classical statistical state, on the other hand, is <jy, described by such t'iat nonnegative density function at time t is pciassical probability that a system is found in the interval dpj
X,...,
dqx,...,
pciassicai(9i\302\273\302\2739/\302\273Pi\302\273\302\273/;y\302\2730
182
for C.4.10)
the
ensemble
average
=/ Pclassical
q,
(^4 1\"h
where d T
Continuum
So far we have considered density operatorsin ket spacewhere the T of base kets are labeledby the discreteeigenvalues someobservable. he conceptof density matrix can be generalizedto caseswhere the base kets used are labeledby continuous eigenvalues.In particular, let us considerthe ket spacespannedby the position eigenkets x'). analogue of C.4.10) The is
given by
C.4.32)
C433)
where
that
is the wave function corresponding the state ket a(/)).Notice to the diagonal element (that is, = x\") of this is just the weighted sum of the probability densities. nceagain, the term density matrix is indeed O
\\pi
x'
In continuum cases,too, it is important to keep in mind that the same mixed ensemblecan be decomposed different ways into pure in For ensembles. instance, it is possibleto regard a \"realistic\" beam of particleseither as a mixture of planewavestates (monoenergeticfreeparstates)or as a mixture of wavepacketstates.
freeparticle
appropriate.
3.4.Density
183
1 1
N
0
1
C.4.34)
0
in any
1)
C.4.20)]. C.4.16)
This followsfrom representation [compareExample 3 with the fact that all states correspondingto the basekets with respectto which I the density matrix is written are equally populated. n contrast, in the basis where p is diagonalized, we have for the matrix representation of the density operator for a pure ensemble. two diagonal matricesC.4.34) The and both satisfying the normalization requirement cannot if look more different. It would be desirable we could somehowconstruct a
C.4.16),
C.4.11),
quantity
a = tr( p In
\342\200\224
p).
C.4.35)
The logarithm of the operator p may appear rather formidable, but the is quite unambiguous if we use the basisin which p is meaning of C.4.35)
diagonal:
E^fi
iW^i=
we C.4.16) have
CA36)
we have
Becauseeach element p(^ag) is a real number between 0 and 1,a is F C necessarily ositive semidefinite. or a completelyrandom ensemble .4.34), p
C.4.37)
C.4.38)
where we have used
Pkk
~~
n(diag) Pkk
C.4.39)
for each term in We now argue that physically a can be regardedas a quantitative measure of disorder.A pure ensembleis an ensemblewith a maximum amount of order because all members are characterized by the same in quantummechanical state ket; it may be likened to marching soldiers a
C.4.36).
184
Theory
of Angular
Momentum
a vanishesfor such an ensemwellregimentedarmy. Accordingto C.4.38), i On the other extreme, a completely random ensemble,n which all states are equally likely, may be likenedto drunken quantummechanical soldierswandering around in random directions. ccording to C.4.37),is a A indeed,we will show later that In N is the maximum possiblevalue large; for a subjectto the normalization condition
ensemble.
Ip**1.
k
C440)
In thermodynamicswe learn that a quantity calledentropy measures disorder.It turns out that our o is related to the entropy per constituent via member, denotedby S, of the ensemble
S = A:a,
mechanics.
C.4.41
where k is a universal constant identifiablewith the Boltzmann constant. In fact, C.4.41) be taken as the definition of entropy in quantum statistical may
We now show how the density operator p can be obtained for an ensemblein thermal equilibrium. The basic assumption we make is that nature tends to maximize a subject to the constraint that the ensemble value. To justify this average of the Hamiltonian has a certain prescribed would involve us in a delicate discussion how equilibrium is of assumption as established a result of interactionswith the environment, which is beyond the scopef this book.In any case, nce o o thermal equilibrium is established, we expect
ot
r0.
C.4.42
this Becauseof C.4.29), means that p and H can be simultaneously So may diagonalized. the ketsusedin writing C.4.36) be taken to be energy With eigenkets. this choice standsfor the fractional population for an pkk
C.4.43
However, we must take into account the constraint that the ensemble value. In the language of statistical average of H has a certain prescribed mechanics, is identified with the internal energyper constituent denoted [H]
by
U:
[H]= tr{pH)= U.
C.4.45a
3.4.Density and
185
C.4.45b)
We
by using
Lagrange multipliers. We
Y]=0,
variation
C.4.46)
C.4.47)
which
for an
arbitrary
is possibly only if
The constant y can be eliminatedusing the normalization condition C.4.40), and our final result is
Pkk
\302\273
C.4.48)
fxAAQ\\
directly gives the fractional population for an energy eigenstatewith that the sum is over eigenvalue Ek. It is to be understood throughout i distinct energy eigenstates;f there is degeneracywe must sum over states with the sameenergyeigenvalue. The density matrix elementC.4.48)s appropriate for what is known i in statistical mechanics as a canonical ensemble. ad we attempted to H maximizea without the internalenergyconstraint C.4.45a), would have we obtained instead
which Pkk which
= 77
>
(independent of k),
C.4.49)
is the density matrix element appropriate for a completelyrandom ensemble.Comparing C.4.48) with C.4.49), e infer that a completely w random ensemblecan be regarded as the ft limit (physically the of a canonical ensemble. hightemperature limit)
\302\2730
We
partition
function
Z=?exp(/??J k
in
C.4.50)
Z=tr(eI*H).
Knowing
pkk given in
C.4.51)
C.4.52)
everything
which
follows. We can
186
Theory
of Angular
Momentum
C.4.53)
internal
IXexP(k
N
C.4.54)
a formula well known to every student of statistical mechanics. The parameter fi is related to the temperature T as follows:
CA55)
where k is the Boltzmann constant. It is instructive to convinceourselvesof this identification by comparing the ensembleaverage [H] of simple harmonic oscillatorswith the kT expectedfor the internal energy in the classicalimit, which is left as an exercise. have already commented that We l in the hightemperature limit, a canonical ensemble becomesa completely in random ensemble which all energy eigenstates are equally populated.In the oppositelowtemperaturelimit (/? oo), C.4.48)ells us that a canonit ensemblebecomesa pure ensemblewhere only the ground state is
\302\273
canonical
As a simple illustrative made a example,consider canonical ensemble of spin \\ systems, ach with a magneticmoment eh/2mecubjected a e to up s uniform magnetic field in the zdirection.The Hamiltonian relevant to this Because problemhas already been given [seeC.2.16)]. H and Sz commute, is the density matrix for this canonical ensemble diagonal in the Sz basis. Thus
populated.
C.4.56)
is just
C.4.57)
3.5.Eigenvalues
From
this
187
we compute
tanh C.4.58) [Sx] = [Sy] = 0, [Sz] = 21 2 The ensembleaverage of the magnetic moment component is just elmec T times [Sz]. he paramagnetic susceptibility x may be computedfrom
\\
 'ti
\\mxj
[Sz] =
C.4.59)
In
this way
h )
2mecBi
tanh
C.4.60)
A 3.5. EIGENVALUESND
ANGULAR
EIGENSTATES F O MOMENTUM
expressionsfor
work out the eigenvaluesand eigenkets of J2 and Jz and derive the matrix elements of angular momentum operators, first obtained in a and paperby M. Born, W. Heisenberg, P.Jordan.
first
of Up to now our discussion angular momentum has been confinedexcluto spin \\ systems with dimensionality N =2.In this and subsequent sectionswe study moregeneralangular momentum states.To this end we
exclusively
1926
Commutation
Everything
we will do followsfrom the angularmomentum commurelations C.1.20), where we may recall that /, is defined as the of infinitesimal rotation. The first important property we derive generator from the basiccommutation relations is the existence a new operator J2, of defined by
commutation
,
that
C.5.1
To prove this
C.5.2)
y
= 0.
caseswhere k = 1 and 2 follow by
C.5.3
The proofs for the cyclic permutation B A > 2 > 3 >1) of the indices. ecause Jy, and Jz do not commute with Jx,
188
each other, we can chooseonly one of them to be the observable to be diagonalized simultaneously with J2.By convention we chooseJz for this
purpose.
We now lookfor the simultaneous eigenketsof J2 and Jz. We denote the eigenvaluesof J2 and Jz by a and b, respectively:
C.5.4a) C.5.4b)
To determine the allowedvalues for a and b, it is convenient to work the nonHermitian operators
with
J
commutation relations and
\302\261
= Jx\302\261iJy,
than with
C.5.5)
Jx
= [J+,J_] 2hJz
[Jz,J\302\261]
C.5.6a)
=
\302\261hJ\302\261,
C.5.6b)
which
[j2,/\302\261]=0,
C.5.7)
is an obvious consequencef C.5.2). o What is the physicalmeaning of J To answer this we examinehow Jz acts on b):
which
\302\261?
J\302\261\\a9
Jz(J\302\261\\\302\260>b))=([Jz9J\302\261]+J\302\261Jz)\\a,b)
= (b\302\261h)(J\302\261\\a,b))
C.5.8)
J\302\2619
where we have used C.5.6b).other words,if we apply /+(/_)to a Jz In the resulting ket is still a Jz eigenket exceptthat its eigenvalueis eigenket, which now increased (decreased)y one unit of h. So now we seewhy b one step up (down) on the \"ladder\" of Jz eigenvalues,are known as the step
are reminiscentof some commutation relationswe encounteredin the earlier the chapters.In discussing translation operator y(l) we had
the also, in discussing simple harmonic oscillatorwe had =
C.5.6b)
C.5.9)
a.
C.5.10
We
The seethat both C.5.9) C.5.10) a structure similar to C.5.6b). have and physical interpretation of the translation operator is that it changes the eigenvalueof the position operator x by 1 in much the same way as the
3.5.Eigenvalues
189
ladderoperator /+ changesthe eigenvalueof Jz by one unit of h. Likewise, the the oscillator creation operator a^ increases eigenvalueof the number
operator TV
by unity.
J\302\261
Even though changes the eigenvalueof Jz does not change the eigenvalueof
J2:
by
one unit of h,
it
= a(J\302\261\\a9b)),
where we have used C.5.7). summarize, To of eigenkets J2 and Jz with eigenvaluesa and b
J\302\261\\a9b)
\302\261
C.5.11
are simultaneous
may write
h. We
c\302\261\\a9b\302\261h)9
C.5.12
where the proportionality constant c will be determined later from the normalization requirement of the angularmomentum eigenkets.
\302\261
Eigenvaluesof J2 and Jz We now have the machinery neededto construct angularmomentum eigenketsand to study their eigenvaluespectrum. Supposewe apply /+ say successively, n times, to a simultaneouseigenketof J2 and Jz. We then obtain another eigenketof J2 and Jz with the Jz eigenvalueincreased nh, by while its J2 eigenvalue is unchanged. However, this processcannot go on indefinitely. It turns out that there exists an upper limit to b (the Jz eigenvalue)for a given a (the J2 eigenvalue):
a>b2.
To prove this assertion we first note that
C.5.13 ).
Now J +J\\
C.5.14
<> (a9b\\j+9
C.5.15
thus
(a,b\\(j2Jz2)\\a,b)>0,
which,
in turn,
C.5.16
such that
C.5.17)
Stated another way, the eigenvalueof b cannot be increased beyond bmax. Now C.5.17) implies also
C.5.18
190
But
= J2J2hJz.
So
C.5.19)
= 0. {32Jz2hJz)\\a,bmax)
Because\\a,
or
In a similar manner we argue from
^min SUch that
C.5.20)
bmax)
this
C.5.21)
that C.5.13)
C.5.22)
there must also exist a
_
0,^min) = U.
yi.j.23)
By
in
writing
/+ /_ as
/+ J_ = J2Jz2 + hJz
^ = ^minv^min
\342\200\224
C.5.24)
^J.J.ZjJ
analogy with
we C.5.19),conclude that
*U *
with we C.5.22) C.5.25) infer that
By comparing
with
*>max=?min>
6max
C.5.26)
positive, and
that
~bmax<b<bmax.
C.5.27)
Clearly, we must be able to reach \\a9 bmax) by applying /+ successivelyto \\a9 bmin) a finite number of times. We must thereforehave where n is someinteger. As a result, we get
It
C5.29)
with
work with
j\\
C.5.30)
The maximum value of the Jz eigenvalueis jh9 where is either an integer or a halfinteger. Equation C.5.22) implies that the eigenvalueof J2 is given
by
C.5.31
3.5.Eigenvalues
191
C.5.32)
values are integers; if is a halfinteger, all m values are halfintegers.The allowed ravaluesfor a given are
is an integer, all
m= y,y+
2 +1states Instead of \\a9 b) it is more convenient to denote a simultaneous eigenket of J2 and Jz by  j\\ m). The basiceigenvalueequations now read
l,...,yl,y.
C.5.33)
C.5.34a)
m) = mh\\j, m),
C.5.34b)
either an integer or a halfintegerand m given by C.5.33). very It is to recall here that we have used only the commutation relations important to C.1.20)obtain these results.The quantization of angular momentum, is a manifested in C.5.34), direct consequence f the angularmomentum o commutation relations, which, in turn, follow from the propertiesof rotatogether with the definition of Jk as the generator of rotation.
with
rotations
Operators
C.5.34)
and
Let us work out the matrix elementsof the various angularmomenoperators. Assuming y, m) to be normalized,we obviously have from
(j\\m'\\J2\\j\\m)
= j(j + l)h28yj8m,m
C.5.35a)
\\ m'\\Jz\\j,
m) = mh&sjSm.m.
C.5.35b)
(j,m\\Jl
Now
J+ \\j,
 
J + j, m)
2m].
C.5.36)
C.5.37)
leads C.5.36) to
C.5.38)
192
Sowe have determined c* up to an arbitrary phasefactor. It is customary 'jm to choose to be real and positive by convention. So cfm
C.5.39)
Similarly, we can derive
/.
C.5.40)
to
be
C.5.41
Representationsof the Rotation Operator Having obtained the matrix elementsof Jz and J we are now in a I positionto study the matrix elements of the rotation operator @{R). f a rotation R is specifiedby h and we can define its matrix elements by
\302\2619
<f>,
C.5.42)
These matrix elements are sometimescalled Wigner functions after E. P. Wigner, who made pioneeringcontributions to the grouptheoreticalpropermechanics.Notice here that the same /value we C.5.42);neednot considermatrix elements of 2d(R) between states with different yvalues becausethey all vanish is trivially. This is because 3>(R)\\j,m) still an eigenketof J2 with the same + l)h2: eigenvalue
properties
of rotations
in quantum
appearsin
j(j
C.5.43)
which follows directly from the fact that J2 commutes with Jk (hence with any function of Jk). Simply stated, rotations cannot change the yvalue, which is an eminently sensible result. Often in the literature the By + 1)X + 1) matrix formed by *s referred to as the B +1)dimensional irreduciblerepresentation of the rotation operator @{R). his means that the matrix which correT to an arbitrary rotation operator in ket space not necessarily corresponds characterized by a single yvalue can, with a suitable choice basis, be of
Bj
3.5.Eigenvalues
and Eigenstates
of Angular
Momentum
193
C.5.44)
\302\256m'lt
X where eachshadedsquare is a Bj +1) By +1) squarematrix formed by wi^ somedefinite value of Furthermore, each square matrix itself cannot bebrokeninto smaller blocks
j.
2y+1
k 2/+1
2y+1/c
2/+1
C.5.45)
choice basis. of The rotation matricescharacterizedby definite form a group.First, the identity is a member becausethe rotation matrix correspondingo no t x By + l) identity matrix. Second, the rotation D> 0) is the inverse is also a member; we simply reverse the rotation angle > <J>) without changing the rotation axis n. Third, the product of any two
with
any
\342\200\224
Bj+1)
(<f>
C.5.46)
a where the product RXR2 represents single rotation. We also note that the rotation operator is rotation matrix is unitary becausethe corresponding we have unitary; explicitly
C547)
To appreciatethe physical significanceof the rotation matrix let us start with a state represented \\j\\m). We now rotate it: by
\\j\\m)>\302\256(R)\\j9m). though this rotation operation doesnot change j\\ we generallyobtain states with mvaluesother than the original m. To find the amplitude for being found in m'),we simply expand the rotated state as follows:
C.5.48
Even
\\j\\
C.5.49
m
where, in using the completeness relation, we took advantage of the fact that connectsonly states with the same So the matrix element 2^m{R) @(R) is simply the amplitude for the rotated state to be found in m') when the unrotated state is given by \\j9m). original In Section3.3 saw how Euler angles may be used to characterize we the most general rotation. We now consider the matrix realization of for C.3.20) an arbitrary (not necessarily
j.
\\j\\
j):
\342\200\224
Um
'exp
h
exp
(j,m'exp
Noticethat the
only nontrivial part which mixes different mvalues. It
C.5.50
>\302\273axis,
matrix
C.5.51
of C.3.21),
(f) sin. f
mr
cos
C.5.52
3.6.Orbital
Angular
Momentum
195
The next simplestcaseis y =1,which we considerin some detail. Clearly, we must first obtain the 3x3matrix representation of Jv. Because
/=
from the defining equation
2/
1
C.5.53)
m'= y/li m'= 0.
0 0
\342\200\224
0
\\/2i
\\fli
0
y/li
C.5.54)
Our next task is to work out the Taylor expansionof exp( iJvft/h). Unlike the case = \\, [JyJ=1)]2 independent of 1and Jvfy=1). However,it is easy is to work out
1)\\3 /O= l)
h
C.5.55)
J,
h
for Consequently,
=1only,
h
it
is legitimate to replace
A
\342\200\224
cos/3)
we have
\\
sin/3,
C.5.56)
verify in
detail. Explicitly
/
sin
sin/3
cos
sin^S
learn a much
becomes timeconsumingfor large j. In Section easiermethod for obtaining dj^L(fi) for any j. MOMENTUM
We introduced the concept of angular momentum by defining it to be the generator of an infinitesimal rotation. There is another way to approach the subjectof angular momentum when spinangularmomentum is zero or can be ignored.The angular momentum J for a singleparticle is then the same as orbital angular momentum, which is defined as In
this
C.6.1)
two
approaches.
196
Orbital Angular Momentum as Rotation Generator note that the orbital angularmomentum operator definedas satisfies the angularmomentum commutation relations C.6.1)
We first
C.6.2)
by virtue of the commutation relations among the components of x and p. This can easily be proved as follows:
ZPy
\302\246
ZPx
XPz
yp
= ihL
Next we let act on an arbitrary position eigenket \\x\\ obtain
C.6.4)
be interpreted as the infinitesimal rotation operator about the zaxis by angle 8<f>. Usingthe fact that momentum is the generator of translation, we
y\\
[see A.6.32)]
L
1/
= \\x',y',z')
1/
\\x',y\\z')
= \\x'
C.6.5)
This is preciselywhat we expectif Lz generates an infinitesimal rotation about the zaxis. we have demonstrated that if p generates translation, So then L generates rotation. Suppose the wave function for an arbitrary physical state of a spinlessparticle is given by {x\\ y\\z'\\a).After an infinitesimal rotation about the zaxis is performed, the wave function for the rotated state is
{x\\y\\z'\\\\i
It
C.6.6)
C.6.7)
Forthe rotated state we have, according to C.6.6),
1
C.6.8)
3.6.Orbital
Angular
Momentum
197
Because(r,0,4>\\ is an
arbitrary
C.6.9)
is a wellknown result from wave mechanics. Even though this relation can alsobe obtainedjust as easily using the position representation of the momentum operator, the derivation given here emphasizesthe role of Lz as the generator of rotation. We next considera rotation about the .xaxis by angle 8$x.In we analogy with C.6.6) have
which
C.6.10
By
x\\ expressing y\\
and
z' in
that
<x'L\302\273
i*
C.6.11
Likewise,
(x'\\Lv\\a)
If)
\\
cos<J>tt~cot6 sin<J>^7 du
d<p
\302\261
<x'a>. C.6.12
we have
C.5.5),
{x'\\L
Finally,
it
\302\261\\a)
\\
d<p)
using
<x'a>. C.6.13
C.6.14
and as follows: C.6.9), C.6.13), 1
sin20
Apart from
1
dd \\sm0 dd
C <x'a>. .6.15
w 1/r2, e recognizethe differential operator that appearshere to be just the angular part of the Laplacian in sphericalcoordinates. It is instructive to establish this connectionbetween the L2 operator
and the angular part of the Laplacian in another way by looking directly at the kineticenergyoperator. We first recordan important operator identity,
\342\200\224
L p (x*p)+/7ix*p, C.6.16 where x2 is understoodto be the operator x*x,ust as p2 stands for the j
\342\200\224x
198
ijlm
L
ijlm
Pm*
= x2p2 x2p2/7ixpijlm
= x2p2
(x\302\273p)
+/7jx*p.
C.6.17)
= x'=
\342\200\224
(
\\a), first
note that
ihV
ihr'
. ..
'(x'\\a))
C.6.18
Likewise,
= h
Thus
d dr
<x' x'a>
C.6.19
. C.6.20)
{2mjV'2<x'a>
\\
( h2
1
2
2m
C.6.21
The first two terms in the last line are just the radial part of the Laplacian The last term must then be the angular part of the acting on in on (x'a), completeagreement with C.6.15). Laplacian acting
(x'a).
SphericalHarmonics Consider a spinlessparticle subjectedto a spherical symmetrical potential.The wave equation is known to be separablein spherical coordi
3.6.Orbital
Angular
Momentum
199
/ C.6.22) <x>,, m) = Rnl(r)Yr@,*), where the positionvector x' is specifiedby the spherical coordinates 0, r,
stands for some quantum number other than / and m, for number for boundstate problemsor the quantum for a freeparticlesphericalwave. As will be made clearer in Section energy this o 3.10, form can be regarded as a direct consequence f the rotational invariance of the problem.When the Hamiltonian is sphericallysymmetriH commutes with Lz and L2, and the energy eigenketsare expectedto be eigenketsof L2 and Lz also. BecauseLk with A: =1,2,3 satisfy the
and
4>9
and
example,the radial
symmetrical,
angularmomentum commutation relations, the eigenvaluesof L2 and Lz are expected be /(/ + l)/i2,and mh = to + Becausethe angular dependence common to all problemswith is sphericalsymmetry, we can isolate it and consider
this point of view, by @, <j>) is the amplitude for a state characterized /, m to be found in the direction n specified 0 and by Supposewe have relations involving orbital angularmomentum eirelations involving the eigenkets. We can immediately write the corresponding harmonics. or example,take the eigenvalueequation F spherical
Y\342\204\242
[lh,(l l)h,...9(ll)h9lh
C.6.23)
C.6.24)
Multiplying
using
 ihjr(h\\l, = m)
we C.6.9), obtain
mh(h\\l,
m).
C.6.25)
We
^y/\"@,<?)= m/*y/\"@,4>),
which
C.6.26)
behave like
elm<t>.
<?) must
C.6.27)
C.6.28)
Y,m
orthogonality relation
itself. The
C6.29
200
leads to
I
C.6.30)
where we have used the completeness relation for the direction eigenkets,
C.6.31
To obtain the have
which,
Y\342\204\242
with
the m
\342\200\224
case. e W
C.6.32)
o leads because f C.6.13), to
ike*
= n/,/> 0
C.6.33)
m we Remembering that the ^dependence ust behave like e'1*, can easily show that this partial differential equation is satisfiedby
C.6.34)
to C.6.30)be*
(D7
2'/!
4it
C.6.35
Starting
with
dd
+ icot 6
n/,m)
C.6.36
t successivelyo obtain all Ytm with / fixed. Becausethis is done in many textbookson elementary quantum mechanics, we will not work out the detailshere. he result for m > 0 is T
(D/ I'll
*Normalization
(\342\200\224
l\342\200\224m
lm d(cos6)
C.6.37)
1)'is inserted
Yf\302\260
obtain
/>,(!)\302\253!
C.6.39)]. [see
of C.6.30), course, doesnot determine the phase of cf. The factor when we use the L_ operator successively to reach the state m 0, we whose phase is fixed by with the same sign as the Legendre polynomial P^cosO)
condition
so that
\302\253
3.6.Orbital
Angular
Momentum
201
and we define Yi
by
p Regardlessof whether m is positive or negative, the ^dependent art of with a highest power of is [sin0]wtimes a polynomial in cos0 Ytm@,
<f>)
\342\200\224
? [}*.
C.6.38)
\\m\\.
Form = 0, we obtain
From the point of view of the angularmomentum commutation i relations alone,t might not appearobvious why / cannot be a halfinteger. It turns out that several arguments can be advanced against halfinteger /values. First, for halfinteger /, and hence for halfinteger m, the wave function would acquire a minus sign,
e'\302\253Bw)\302\273\302\253lf
C.6.40
under a 2tt rotation. As a result, the wave function would not be singlevalued; we pointed out in Section2.4that the wave function must be of singlevaluedbecauseof the requirement that the expansion a state ket in terms of positioneigenkets e unique. We can prove that if L, defined to be b x X p, is to be identified as the generator of rotation, then the wave function must acquirea plus sign under a 2tt rotation. This followsfrom the fact that the wave function for a 27rrotatedstate is the original wave function itself with no sign change:
(x' exp
\\
5
n
\342\200\224
Jt'sin27r,
<x1a>,
z' a) C.6.41
where we have used the finiteangleversion of C.6.6). let us suppose Next, with a halfinteger / were possible. o be specific,we choose T the Y/m@,4>) / we simplestcase, = m = \\. According to C.6.34) would have From the property of
L__
C.6.42
we [seeC.6.36)]would
then
obtain
\302\253\302\246
+1cot
= c1/2<r'*/2cot 0\\/sin0\\
C.6.43
This expression not permissible ecause is singular at 6 = 0, What is is it b it. worse,from the partial differential equation
=0
C.6.44
202
we directly obtain
in
[^,
Y\342\204\242
C.6.45)
Finally, we know from the Sturmsharp contradiction with C.6.43). with Liouville theory of differential equations that the solutionsof C.6.28) / form a complete set. An arbitrary function of 6 and <? can be integer it with integer / and m only. Forall these reasons expandedin terms of is futile to contemplate orbital angular momentum with halfinteger /val/values.
H Spherical armonicsas Rotation Matrices We concludethis section on orbital angular momentum by discussh the spherical armonics from the point of view of the rotation matrices W introduced in the last section. e can readily establishthe desiredconnecbetween the two approaches y constructing the most general direction b eigenketh) by applying appropriate rotation operatorsto z),the direction eigenketin the positive zdirection.We wish to find S>(R)such that
discussing connection
\\h)
= @(R)\\z).
C.6.46
\342\200\242
We can rely on the techniqueusedin constructing the eigenspinorof a h in Section We first rotate about the >>axis by angle 0, then around the zaxisby angle see with ft > 0, a > In the notation of Euler Figure
3.2.
<J>;
3.3
<f>.
angleswe have
Writing
as C.6.46)
C.6.47)
C.6.48
we seethat h), when expandedin terms of /,m), contains all possible /values. However, when this equation is multiplied by (l,m'\\ on the left, only one term in the /sum contributes, namely,
(/,m'h> = m
<f>
E#i'i,(\302\253
C.6.49
Now (/, m\\z) is just a number; in fact, it is precisely evaluated at 6 = 0 with undetermined. At 6 = 0, is known to vanish for m # 0, which can alsobe seendirectly from the fact that z) is an eigenket of Lz S (which equalsxpy ypx) with eigenvaluezero. o we can write
<f>)
Y\342\204\242 \342\200\224
F,
C.6.50
3.7.Addition of Angular
Returning to
Momenta
203
we C.6.49),have
C.6.51
or
C.6.52)
Notice the
m
C.6.53
3.7.ADDITIONOF ANGULAR
Angularmomentum
collisions. physics\342\200\224from
MOMENTA
addition has important applications in all areas of modern to atomic spectroscopy nuclear and particle colliaddition provides an Furthermore, a study of angularmomentum excellent to illustrate the conceptof change of basis,which we opportunity discussed extensivelyin Chapter
1.
o SimpleExamples f AngularMomentum
worth
Addition
Before studying a formal theory of angularmomentum addition, it is looking at two simple exampleswith which the reader may be familiar: A) how to add orbital angular momentum and spinangular momentum and B) how to add the spinangular momenta of two spin \\ Previously we studied both spin \\ systemswith all quantummechaas position and momentum degreesof freedomother than and quantummechanicalparticles with the space degreesof freedom (such as position or momentum) taken into account but the internal degreesf freedom (such as spin)ignored. realistic description A of o a particle with spin must of coursetake into account both the spacedegree of freedom and the internal degrees freedom.The base ket for a spin \\ of be visualizedto be in the directproduct spaceof the infiniteparticle may dimensional ket spacespannedby the position eigenkets{x')} the and we have twodimensional spin spacespannedby  + ) and  Explicitly, for the base ket
quantummechanical
particles.
spin\342\200\224such
\342\200\224ignored
\342\200\224
).
C.7.1)
where
any operatorin
).
any
204
b The rotation operator still takes the form exp(Jh</>//j)ut / of rotations, is now made up of two parts, namely, generator
J, the
J = L+ S.
L\302\2561
C.7.2)
It
as C.7.2) +
1\302\256S,
where the
write
L 1standsfor the identity operator in the spin space,while k the 1in 1 S standsfor the identity operator in the infinitedimensional et the position eigenkets. L Because and S commute,we can spacespannedby
\302\256 \302\256
1in
C.7.3)
C.7.4)
The wave function for a particle with spin is written as The two components follows:
+
C.7.5)
\\p
in
C.7.6)
stands for the probability density for the particle to be as the base spin up and down, respectively.Insteadof kets for the spacepart, we may use \\n, /, m), which are eigenketsof L2 and Lz with eigenvaluesh2l(l + 1)and mth, respectively.For the spin part, are eigenkets S2 and Sz with eigenvalues3h2/4 and h/29respectively. of However, as we will show later, we can also use base kets which are of In other words,we can expanda state ket of eigenkets 7Z, L2, and a particlewith spin in terms of simultaneouseigenkets f L2, S2, Lz, and Sz o where
\\\\p
found at
x' with
\302\261(x')\\2
x')
\302\261>
\302\261
J2,
S2.
or in terms of simultaneouseigenketsof J2,7Z, L2, and S2. e will study in W detail how the two descriptionsre related. a As a second example, we study two spin \\ two electrons\342\200\224with the orbital degreeof freedom suppressed. he total spin T operatoris usually written as
particles\342\200\224say
S = S1+S2,
x\302\256
C.7.7)
but again it
is to be understood as
1+1
\302\256
JS29
where the
1in the first (second)term standsfor the identity operator in the spin spaceof electron 2 A). We, of course,have
and so forth.
Within
C.7.8)
C.7.9)
the
space of electron
1B)we
3.7.Addition of Angular
Momenta
205
commutation relations
and As a direct consequencef C.7.9) o
C.7.10) [Slx,Sly]=ihSlz,[S2x,S2y]=ihS2z,....
we C.7.10),have
[Sx,Sy\\=ihSz
C.7.11
and so on for the total spin operator. are The eigenvaluesof the various spin operators denotedas follows: 2 2: s(s+l)h2
Sz = Slz+ S2z
Slz
S2z
Again,
two
: mh : mxn : rn2h
C.7.12
we can expand the ket corresponding an arbitrary spin state of to electronsin terms of either the eigenketsof S2 and Sz or the eigenkets of iSlz and S2z.The two possibilitiesre as follows: a 1.The {^h,w2} representation based on the eigenkets of S^ and and
m1 = \\,
where
\\\\\342\200\224
) stands for
= m2
l>>
\342\200\224
C713)
\\,
and
so forth.
based on the eigenketsof S2 and Sz: m = \302\2611,0), \\s = 0,m = 0), \\s =1,
tripletsingletrepresentation)
C.7.14)
between the
Notice that in each set there are four base kets. The relationship two sets of baseketsis as follows:
= 5=l,w=l> ++>, =
>,
)
A+>!+\302\273\342\200\242
\\y/2
The righthand side of C.7.15a) us that we have both electrons with tells W spin up; this situation can correspond only to j =1,m =1. e can obtain from C.7.15b) C.7.15a) applying the ladderoperator by
i3
= i3i
in
= (SlxiSly)(S2xiS2y) +
C.7.16)
206
write
In doing so we must remember that an electron 1 to both sidesof C.7.15a). operatorlike S\\_ affectsjust the first entry of ++), and so on. We can
C.7.17)
as
C.7.18)
which immediately leads to Likewise,we can obtain m= once again to by applying Finally, we can obtain it to be orthogonal to the other three kets,in by requiring
\342\200\224
C.7.15b). j=1, C.7.16) C.7.15b). C.7.15d) particular to C.7.15b). The coefficientsthat appearon the righthand sideof C.7.15) the are
1)
coefficientsto be discussed further at a simplestexampleof ClebschGordan later time. They are simply the elementsof the transformation matrix that connectsthe {mx, basis to the m2) m) basis.It is instructive to derive these coefficientsin another way. Suppose write the 4x4matrix correwe to corresponding
[s,
becausean operator
matrix that
S2 = S12+S22+2S1S2 = S2l+S22+2SlzS2zSl+ S2_+ Sl_S2+ + C.7.19) using the (mvm2) basis. The square matrix is obviously not diagonal
\\mx, m2) basekets into the base kets. The elements of this unitary matrix are preciselythe \\s,m) ClebschGordan coefficientsfor this problem.The readeris encouraged to work out all this in detail.
\342\200\224h)
with
diagonalizesthis matrix
carries the
++).The unitary
Addition
Having gained some physicalinsight by consideringimpleexamples, s we are now in a position to study more systematicallythe formal theory of t angularmomentumaddition. Considerwo angularmomentum operators Jx and J2 in different subspaces. he components of Ji(J2)satisfy the usual T angularmomentum commutation relations:
C.7.20a)
and
[J2i,j2j]=iheukj2k.
C.7.20b)
Momenta
207
= [Ju,J2l]0
C.7.21)
between any pair of operators from different subspaces. 1 The infinitesimal rotation operator that affects both subspace and 2 is written as subspace
1We
Hx n5<> h
\342\200\242
i ^ L
\\
1
H2
\342\200\242
n8(J>
=, 1
i{tx\302\256\\
\342\200\242
1\302\256J2)
C.7.22)
define the total angular momentum by
JsJ^l+
as
1\302\256^,
C.7.23)
which
is more commonly
written
J = J1+J2.
The finiteangleversionof C.7.22) is
C.7.24)
~*
) C.7.25) Notice the appearanceof the same axis of rotation and the same angle of rotation. It is very important to note that the total J satisfies the angularmomentum commutation relations
ft
~l
Uexp
C.7.26)
as a direct consequence C.7.20) C.7.21).other words, J is an of In and momentum in the senseof Section 3.1. angular Physically this is reasonable because is the generator for the entire system. Everything we learned in J Section example, the eigenvaluespectrum of J2 and Jz and the matrix elements of the ladderoperators\342\200\224also holdsfor the total J. As for the choice basekets we have two options. of
3.5\342\200\224for
Simultaneouseigenketsof J2,J22, Jlz,and J2z, denoted by \\j\\j2\\ mxm2). bviously the four operatorscommute with each other. O The defining equations are Option A:
I)h2\\jj2; mxm2),
m2), = hih +l)h2\\Jd2>^i^2>^ = m2h\\jj2; xm2). m
that this
J2, Option B: Simultaneouseigenketsof J2, J22, and Jz. First, note set of operatorsmutually commute. In particular, we have
[J2,J12]=O,
C.7.28)
208
which
writing
J2 as
C.7.29)
use \\jv
I)h2\\jj2; jm),
j2;jm).
Quite often jl9 j2 are understood, and the basekets are written
\\j\\m).
as
It
is very
important
[J2,/Z]=O,
we have
C.7.31)
[J2,J1Z]*O,[J2,/2J'#O,
C.7.32)
This as the reader may easily verify using C.7.29). means that we cannot add J2 to the set of operators of option A. Likewise, e cannot add Jlz w to the set of operators of option B. We have two possible setsof and/orJ2z base kets corresponding the two maximal sets of mutually compatible to observables e have constructed. w Let us considerthe unitary transformation in the senseof Section 1.5 connectsthe two bases: that
\\j\\h\\
Jm) =
?
m
H\\hJi\\
m\\mi){kh\\
mlm2\\jj2;m), j
C.7.33)
yV^
C.7.34)
and where the righthand side is the identity operator in the ket space of given j\\ and j2. The elements of this transformation matrix c (JiJi*m\\m2\\J\\JT> Jm) are ClebschGordanoefficients. There are many important properties ClebschGordanoefficients of c that we are now ready to study. First, the coefficients vanish unless
m
= mx + m2.
C.7.35)
To prove this,
Multiplying
first
note that
(J,
(j\\j2;mlm1\\
Jlz J2z)\\jJ2;jm) = 0.
on the left, we obtain
mxm2\\jxj2\\
C.7.36)
mntim2)(jj2;
jm) = 0,
C.7.37)
3.7.Addition of Angular
which
Momenta
209
A proves our assertion. dmire the power of the Dirac notation! It in bracket form, coefficients Dirac's to write the ClebschGordan really pays as we have done. vanish unless the Second, coefficients
+ \\JiJ2\\*J*JiJ2
C.7.38)
This property may appear obvious from the vector model of angularmomentum addition, where we visualizeJ to be the vectorial sum of Jx and J2. However, it is worth checking this point by showing that if C.7.38) holds, then the dimensionality of the spacespannedby {\\j\\j2\\ m\\m2)} is the (ml,m2) the same as that of the spacespannedby {\\j\\j2\\ Jm)}way of counting we obtain
F\302\260r
+ C.7.39) NBj\\+ l)Bj2 l) becausefor given j\\ there are 2j\\ +1 possiblevalues of m x; a similar A statement is true for the other angular momentum j2. s for the (j\\m) way of counting, we note that for each j\\ there are 2j+ l states, and according to C.7.38), itself runs from jx j2 to jx + j2,where we have assumed, j without loss of generality, that j\\ > j2. We thereforeobtain
\342\200\224
j\\
+h
J\\
h
C.7.40)
Because both ways of counting give the same TVvalue, we see C.7.38) that is * quite consistent. The ClebschGordan coefficientsform a unitary matrix. Furtherthe matrix elementsare taken to be real by convention.An immediate of consequence this is that the inversecoefficient(j\\j29 jm\\jlj2\\ m^m^) is the same as (j\\j29 ^\\^2\\j\\j2\\ jm) itself. A real unitary matrix is orthogoso we have the orthogonality condition
Furthermore,
orthogonal,
<JlJ2lm\\m is obvious from the orthonormality of {\\j\\j2\\ miM2)}together with the reality of the ClebschGordan coefficients. ikewise, also have we L
C.7.41)
which
j m )=
Ojj'Omm>.
C.7.42)
book.
*A complete proof of C.7.38) given in Gottfried is
210
As a
obtain
specialcaseof
this
we may set
then
C.7.43)
which
is just the normalization condition for \\j\\j2\\ ji Some authors use somewhat different notations for the ClebschGordan coefficients. Instead of (j\\j29 mlm2\\jlj2\\ jm) we sometimes see mxm2m), Cjd^jm\\ mxm2\\ and so on. They C(jj2j; (j\\mlj2m2\\jlj2jm), can alsobe written in terms of Wigner's 3y symbol, which is occasionally
found
in
the literature:
JJiJ
m^m0
\342\200\224
C.7.44)
Coefficients* RecursionRelationsfor the ClebschGordan
With j\\, j2,and fixed, the coefficientswith different are related to each other by recursionrelations.We start with
mx
and m 2
C.7.45)
and we m'2) UsingC.5.39) C.5.40) obtain (with mx>m[, m2>
J2;j,
m[ m'2
m\302\261\\)
m '2)(j2 m'2
\302\261
m +1)\\jj2; [9 m'2
\302\261
Our next
mality, which
(j\\j2;rn[m2\\jj2; jm). C.7.46) on step is to multiply by {Jxj^m^m^ the left and use orthonorX
nonvanishing
righthand
C.7.47) =
m'2\302\261l
term and
C.7.48)
recoupling, and the
coefficients,
3.7. Addition
of Angular Momenta
211
manner we obtain the
this
desired recursion
j2;mlm2\\jlj2;
mi
j9
mi
m\302\261\\)
\302\261
mi) {j\\h\\
\302\261
\\h\\
Jm)
2; jm).
1H2
\302\261
\"h, m 2
C.7.49)
It is important to note that becausethe J operatorshave shifted the condition C.7.35)or the ClebschGordan f mvalues, the nonvanishing coefficientshas now become [when appliedto C.7.49)]
mx
+ m2 = m
\302\2611.
C.7.50)
We can appreciate the significanceof the recursion relations by The in looking at C.7.49) an m1m2plane. /+ recursionrelation (uppersign) tells us that the coefficient at (ml9m2) is related to the coefficientsat a L (m1 l,m2)nd (ml,m2 \\\\ as shown in Figure 3.5a. ikewise,the /_ recursion relation (lower sign) relates the three coefficientswhose m1,m2 valuesare given in Figure 3.5b. Recursion relations C.7.49),ogether with normalization condition t almost coefficients.We say ( C.7.43), uniquely determineall ClebschGordan \"almost uniquely\" because conventionshave yet to be specified.) certain sign Our strategy is as follows.We go back to the m1m2plane,again for fixed l9 j2,and j\\ and plot the boundary of the allowed region determined by
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
Ju
\\m2\\^J2,
seeFigure 3.6a. We
A.
j
mx
+ m2^ /;
C.7.51)
corner, denotedby may start with the upper righthand Because work near A at the start, a more detailed \"map\" is in order; we
RHS
\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\
1 I
j\\
(mi,m21)
\\ \\ \\ \\
i
(mi,m2)
\\ \\
RHS
(a) J+ relation
FIGURE
(b)
Jrelation
relations
212
with
We seeFigure 3.6b. apply the J _ recursion relation C.7.49)lower sign), ( (mvm2+l) corresponding to A. Observe now that the recursion
to relation connectsA with only B becausethe site corresponding (ml+ we can obtain the ClebschAs i l,ra2)s forbidden by m1<jv a result, Gordancoefficientof B in terms of the coefficientof A. Next, we form a/+ triangle made up of A, B, and D.This enablesus to obtain the coefficient We of D oncethe coefficientof A is specified. can continue in this fashion: to E\\ knowing B and E we can get to C, Knowing B and Z>, we can get and so on. With enough patience we can obtain the ClebschGordan coefficientof every site in terms of the coefficientof starting site, A. For The overall normalization we use C.7.43). final overall sign is fixed by the following example.) convention. (See As an important practical example we consider the problem of addingthe orbital and spinangularmomenta of a single spin \\ particle.We have
= / (integer), Jl
~~
ml m2
= mh
S \"~
J 2
C.7.52)
j are given by
=0
C.7.53) Sofor each / there are two possible yvalues;for example,for / = 1(p state) r where the subscript efers we get, in spectroscopicotation, p3/2 and pl/2, n is
to
particularly
T simple. he allowedsitesform
m=\\\\
problem
particu
upperrow for
r\342\200\224
1 1 1
>
Forbidden!
I
! J \\\\J
J+
\342\200\2244
\\ \\ \\
J
^x
/77i+m2\342\200\224/
I
m2\342\200\224J2
c
(b)
(a)
FIGURE
3.7.Addition of Angular
Momenta
213
X X \\
\302\246
4
\"
m.
X \\
I
K
i \\
m
\342\200\242 \342\200\242
FIGURE 3.7. Recursion relations used to obtain the ClebschGordan coefficients for and j2 = s = \\.
jl = /
the
in
case = I + \\. Because cannot exceed we can usethe J _ recursion j' \\, ms such a way that we always stay in the upper row {m2= ms = \\), while the
one
m /value changesby
obtain from
Suppressingj\\ = I, j2 = \\
/(/
where we have used
In
this way
+ + +!)(/ im)(m\\,\\\\l
C.7.54)
C.7.55)
by one unit:
m
1 1, 1
We
/+2'm
2' 2
1^
C.7.56
can in turn express(m + \\, \\\\l + \\, m +1)in terms of (m + f, \\\\l + j,m + 2), and so forth. Clearly, this procedurecan be continued until mt reaches/, the maximum possible value:
11
2
/+
,
+2
l+m+
2/ + 1
C.7.57)
214
configuration in which ml and ms / and \\, respectively.The total m = m7 + ms is / is, + which is possibleonly for = I + \\ and not for = / \\. So \\ml = /, must be equal to \\j = / + 5, m = I + \\) up to a phase factor. We ms = take this phasefactor to be real and positiveby convention.With this choice
angularmomentum
Considerthe
j,
that
i)
j:
j:
\342\200\224
we have
C.7.58)
Returning to
we C.7.57), finally
obtain
1 1, 1
But this
determine
/+2'm
2/ + 1
C.7.59)
de
is only about onefourth of the story. We must still the value of the question marks that appearin the following:
=/ +
,m) =
,m
=m
2/ + 1
1 = = m,ms 1
C.7.60)
\342\204\2422'W*=2
2 '\"'5
1_
We note that the transformation matrix with fixed m from the (m,,ms) basis is, becauseof orthogonality, expectedto have the basis to the form
(j,m)
cos sin a a C.7.61) a sin a cos a shows that cos is C.7.59) itself; so we can Comparisonwith C.7.60) determine sin a up to a sign ambiguity: readily
\342\200\224
sin2a =
We
\342\200\224
B/+ 1)
\342\200\224
(/
#\302\273
+*
B/+ 1)
C.7.62)
all
\\j
\342\200\224
convention. So the
(m,= m + \\,ms= \\\\j = 1 + \\,m) must be positivebecause = I + \\ statesare reachableby applying the J _ operator successivelyto j I + in = I + 2)* and tne matrix elementsof J_ are always positive by
claim that
i,
2x2transformation
2/ + 1 2/ + 1
matrix
2/ + 1 2/ + 1
C.7.63
3.7.Addition of Angular
We
Momenta
215
in
twocomponentform as follows:
X
. C.7.64)
They are, by construction, simultaneous eigenfunctionsof L2, S2,J2,and Jz. They are also eigenfunctionsof L*Sbut L*S,being just
LS=Q)(J2L2S2),
follows: 2
lh2
C.7.65)
?.
C.7.66)
ClebschGordan Coefficientsand Rotation Matrices addition may be discussedfrom the point of Angularmomentum view of rotation matrices. Considerhe rotation operator 3)Ul)(R) the ket t in the angularmomentum space spanned by eigenketswith eigenvalue jv c T Likewise, onsider@Ul\\R). he product ^(yi)\302\256^(^) is reduciblein the sense that after suitable choice of base kets, its matrix representation can
take the following form:
O
(J1+J21)
(J1+J22)
C.7.67)
216
In the notation of group
theory this
is written as
C.7.68)
known as the ClebschGordan series: expansion
EE j m m'
where the ysum runs from The proof of this equation j2\\ to jx + j2. follows. First, note that the lefthand sideof C.7.69)the same as is m[m2)
1^
C.7.69)
? {%2
C.7.70)
But the
of statesin the
UiJ2>mim2\\@(R)\\JiJ2'> m[m2)
j' m'
righthand
C.7.71)
sideof C.7.69). we application of C.7.69), derive an important formula for an integral involving three spherical harmonics. First, recall the connection between 3)^1 and 7/w* given by C.6.52). Letting j\\ * /1?j2 > we (hence m'^O) in C.7.69), obtain, after complex /2,m(^0,m2^0 conjugation, is just the
As an interesting
/'
m'
We
both sidesby Y^XO^) and integrate over solid angles.The multiply summations drop out becauseof the orthogonality of spherical harmonics,
3.8.Schwinger's
217
with
C.7.73)
The squareroot factor times the first ClebschGordan coefficient s indepeni of orientations; that is, of m1 and m2. The secondClebschGordan coefficientis the one appropriate for adding lx and l2 to obtain total /. t Equation C.7.73)urns out to be a specialcase of the WignerEckart theorem to be derived in Section 3.10. formula is extremelyuseful in This matrix elementsin atomic and nuclear spectroscopy. evaluating multipole
independent
MOMENTUM
UncoupledOscillators There exists a very interesting connection between the algebra of angular momentum and the algebra of two independent (that is, uncoupled) n oscillators,which was worked out in J. Schwinger's otes [see Quantum Theory of Angular Momentum, edited by L. C. Biedenharn and H. Van Dam, Academic PressA965), p.229]. Let us considertwo simple harmonic w oscillators, hich we call the plus type and the minus type. We have the annihilation and creation operators, enotedby a+ and a\\ for the plustype d w We oscillator;likewise, e have a_ and al_ for the minustype oscillators. also define the number operators 7V+ and N_ as follows:
Momentum and
#+ = a\\ a +
We
N_
= ala_.
C.8.1)
TV
assumethat the usual commutation relations among a, a*, and for oscillators the same type (seeSection 2.3). of
]
hold
a_,
9
a\\ \\
\\= \\=a\\9
any
al]=al.
= [a+,al] [a_,a\\]=0
sense that we say the
two
C.8.3)
oscillators are
in this
uncoupled.
218
BecauseJV+ and N_ commute by virtue of C.8.3), can build up we simultaneous eigenkets of iV+ and N_ with eigenvalues n+ and n_, respectively.Sowe have the following eigenvalueequations for
N\302\261:
. C.8.4)
and the complete analogy with B.3.16) B.3.17),creation and and a+, act on w+, n_ ) as follows: operators,a\\ In
annihilation
w +,
w_+ 1),
C.8.5a)
C.8.5b)
We
can obtain the most general eigenketsof N+ and N _ and a!_ successivelyto the vacuum ket defined by
by
applying
a\\ \\
= 0, a+0,0>
In
this way
= a_0,0> 0.
C.8.6)
we obtain
n + , n_ >
C.8.7)
C.8.8a)
C.8.8b)
We can readily prove that these operators satisfy the angularmomentum commutation relations of the usual form
[Jz,J\302\261]
\302\261
C.8.9a) C.8.9b)
C.8.10)
C.8.11
3.8.Schwinger's
219
N
which
''
C.8.12
is left as an exercise.
What are the physicalinterpretations of all this? We associate spin up (m = with one quantum unit of the plustype oscillatorand spindown (m = j) with one quantum unit of the minustype oscillator. If you like, you may imagine one spin \\ \"particle\" with spin up (down) with each T quantum unit of the plus (minus) type oscillator. he eigenvaluesn + and n_ are just the number of spins up and spins down, respectively.The is that it destroys one unit of spin down with the zcompomeaning of of spinangular momentum and createsone unit of spin up with the zcomponent of the zcomponent of spinangular momentum + /_ by angular momentum is therefore increased h. Likewise destroysone unit of spin up and createsone unit of spin down; the zcomponent of by angular momentum is therefore decreased h. As for the Jz operator, it times the differenceof n+ and /i_, just the zcomponent simply counts at our disposalwe can easily of the total angular momentum. With examine how and Jz act on \\n+, n_ ) as follows:
j)
\342\200\224
/+
\342\200\224
zcomponent
h/2
h/2;
h/2
C.8.5)
J\302\261
C.8.13a
C.8.13b
C.8.13c
t Noticethat in all these operations, the sum n+ + n_, which correspondso the total number of spin \\ particles remains unchanged. reduce to the and Observenow that and Jz operatorswe derived in Section3.5, f familiar expressionsor the provided we substitute
m.
C.8.14
which
220
Notice also that the eigenvalue of the J2 operator defined by changesas follows:
<h 2
\\
C.8.12
2
All this may that
+1
+ h2j(j l).
C.8.16
not be too surprising becausewe have already proved and J2 operatorswe constructed out of the oscillator operators satisfy the usual angularmomentum commutation relations. But it is inin instructive to see an explicit manner the connectionbetween the oscillator it I matrix elements and angularmomentum matrix elements. n any case, is
J\302\261
now natural to
use
7
in w_
_ =
>
m==
\342\200\236
j
into
\342\200\224
According to
\342\200\224
means that y is unchanged and m goesinto ra Likewise, we seethat the /_ operator that changes n+ into n+ rc_ into n_ +1 lowersm by oneunit without changing y. We can now write as C.8.7) for the most general N+, N_ eigenket
+
1,which
f h++1,l_
m/
\\
[a~l\\0) ?
1;
+1.
into
w m
C.8.18
j.
where we have used 0) for the vacuum ket, earlier denotedby 0,0). A special caseof C.8.18)of interest. Let us set m = which is for physically means that the eigenvalueof Jz is as large as possible a given We have
j,
^L ?
We
C.8.19
can imagine this state to be built up of 2j spin \\ particles with their in the positive zdirection. In general, we note that a complicated object of high can be visualized as being made up of primitive spin \\ particles, + m of them with spin up and the remaining m of them with spin down.This picture is extremely convenienteven though we obviously cannot always regard an object of angular momentum literally as a composite system of spin \\ All particles. we are saying is that, as far as the transformation properties under rotations are concerned, we can visualize any object of angular as a composite momentum system of 2j spin \\ particlesformed in the manner indicatedby C.8.18).
j j
\342\200\224
3.8.Schwinger's
221
From the point of view of angularmomentum addition developedin the previous section,we can add the spinsof spin \\ particles to obtain As a simpleexample, we states with angular momentum j9 momenta of two spin \\ particles to obtain a total can add the spinangular oscillator scheme, angular momentum of zero as well as one.In Schwinger's when we start we obtain only states with angular momentum however, In the language of permutation symmetry to be with spin \\ particles. in developed Chapter6, only totally symmetrical states are constructed by this method. The primitive spin \\ particles appearing here are actually bosons!This method is quite adequate if our purposeis to examine the propertiesunder rotations of states characterizedby and m without asking how such states are built up initially. The reader who is familiar with isospin in nuclear and particle physicsmay note that what we are doing here provides a new insight into one the isospin(or isotopicspin)formalism. The operator /+ that destroys unit of the minus type and createsone unit of the plus type is completely analogous to the isospinladder operator T+ (sometimes denotedby /+) that annihilates a neutron (isospin down) and createsa proton (isospin up), thus raising the zcomponent of isospinby one unit. In contrast, Jz is analogous to Tz, which simply counts the differencebetween the number of
j j 1,  2,....
\342\200\224
2j
2j
Explicit Formula for Rotation Matrices s Schwinger'schemecan be used to derive, in a very simple way, a closedformula for rotation matrices, first obtained by E. P.Wigner using a similar (but not identical) method. We apply the rotation operator S)(R)to In the m), written as C.8.18). Euler angle notation the only nontrivial rotation is the secondone about the j>axis, o we direct our attention to s
\\j\\
y>
C.8.20
We
have
C.8.21
contributes.
Now, @(R)acting on 0)just reproduces because, y virtue of C.8.6) b 0) contribin the expansion of exponential C.8.20) only the leading term,
So
1,
 iJJ3
h
exp
C.8.22
222
B.3.47). Letting
y
h in
'
C.8.23
/ I
Jy
'
u+
~ J at y
h
' 2/
C.8.24
at.Collectingterms,
= alcosl?)alsml?). + 3(R)ai?)1(R)
Likewise,
C.8.25)
i?)alsmi?).
Actually
cos
a \\
sin( j
under a rotation about the jaxis. ubstituting S and C.8.21) recalling the binomial theorem
N\\xN
C.8.26)
at
kyk
we obtain
k X
(Nk)\\k\\'
C.8.28
j + m k)\\k\\{j(
m)\\(jm)\\ .
. m/)!/! .....
o).
x[a
\\
C.8.29
We may
with compareC.8.29)
')\\(j
m')\\
C.8.30
3.9.Spin Correlation
We
223
can obtain an explicit form for d^)m{^) equating the coefficientsof by and w powersof a\\ in C.8.29) C.8.30). Specifically, e want to compare a\\ with raisedto + m' in C.8.30) a\\ raisedto 2y /c /, so we identify
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
l=
We
jkm'.
C.8.31)
are seekingdm,m(fi) with m' fixed.The /csum and the /sum in C.8.29) are not independent f each other; we eliminate / in favor of k by taking o As for advantage of C.8.31). the powersof #t_, we note that al_ raisedto m' in C.8.30) automatically matches with at raisedto k + I in C.8.29) when C.8.31) is imposed.The last step is to identify the exponents of a which are, respectively, cos(/?/2), in(/3/2), nd s
\342\200\224
(1),
\342\200\224
jml
j
m
\342\200\224
mm',
\342\200\224
formula
we obtain Wigner's
(j + m /
k)\\k\\( ft
\\
cosy
ft
\\2j2k + mm
s^nT
j  k  m')\\{k '
+ m')\\
C.8.33)
where we take the sum over k whenevernone of the arguments of factorials in the denominator are negative.
spinsinglet) =
/
v v
\342\200\224
\\
2 /
(z+;z>z;z+ 
quantization
\302\273,
C.9.1)
224
example
z + ; z ) means that electron 1is in the spinup state and electron 2 is in the spindown state.The same is true for ;z+ Supposewe make a measurementon the spin component of one of the electrons. Clearly, there is a 5050chance of getting either up or down the because composite system may be in z+ ; z ) or z z + ) with equal if one of the components is shown to be in the spinup probabilities.But state, the other is necessarilyin the spindown state, and vice versa. When the spin component of electron 1 is shown to be up, the measurement a subsequent apparatus has selectedthe first term, z+;z of C.9.1); measurement of the spin component of electron 2 must ascertain that the state ket of the composite system is given by z+ It is remarkable that this kind of correlation can persisteven if the two particlesare well separated and have ceasedto interact provided that as there is no change in their spin states.This is certainly the they fly apart, casefor a = 0 system disintegrating spontaneously into two spin \\ particles with no relative orbital angular momentum, because angularAn momentum conservation must hold in the disintegration process. examof this would be a rare decay of the tj meson (mass549 MeV/c2)nto a i muon pair
\342\200\224
z\342\200\224
).
\342\200\224
\342\200\224;
\342\200\224)
;z\342\200\224
).
C.9.2)
which, t More realistically, in protonproton scattering at low kinetic energies,he in Pauli principleto be discussed Chapter 6 forces the interacting protons to be in lS0 (orbital angular momentum 0, spinsinglet state), and the spin states of the scattered protons must be correlated in the manner indicated distance. even by C.9.1) after they get separated a macroscopic by To be more pictorial we considera system of two spin \\ particles in O moving in oppositedirections, as in Figure 3.8. bserver A specializes measuring Sz of particle 1(flying to the right), while observer B specializes in measuring Sz of particle 2 (flying to the left). To be specific,let us assume that observer A finds Sz to be positive for particle 1. Then he or she can predict, even before B performs any measurement, the outcome of B's measurement with certainty: B must find Sz to be negativefor particle 2.On the other hand, if A makesno measurement,B has a 5050chanceof getting Sz + or Sz This by itself might not be so peculiar. ne may say, \"It is just like O an urn known to contain one black ball and one white ball. When we blindly pick one of them, there is a 5050chance of getting blackor white. But if the first ball we pickis black,then we can predictwith certainty that the secondball will be white.\" It turns out that this analogy is too simple.The actual quantummechanical situation is far more sophisticated than that! This is because observersmay choose measure Sx in place of Sz. The same pair of to
unfortunately,
.
3.9.Spin Correlation
225
Particle2
Particle1
FIGURE
3.8.
Spin correlation in
a spinsinglet
state.
white or
\"quantummechanicalballs\" can be analyzed either in terms of black and in terms of blue and red! Recall now that for a single spin \\ system the Sx eigenkets and Sz are eigenkets related as follows:
x\302\261>
=
compositesystem, we can rewrite spinsinglet ket
f
C.9.3)
by C.9.1) choosingthe xdirection as the axis of quantization: Returning now to our
spinsinglet) =
Apart from the
x
C.9.4)
overall sign, which in any caseis a matter of convention,we because couldhave guessedthis form directly from C.9.1) spinsingletstates Let have no preferreddirection in space. us now supposethat observer A
to can choose measure Sz or Sx of particle 1by changing the orientation of in his or her spin analyzer,while observer B always specializes measuring Sx of particle 2.If A determines Sz of particle 1to be positive, B clearly has a even though Sz of particle 2 is 5050 chancefor getting Sx+ or Sx known to be negative with certainty, its Sx is completelyundetermined.On to that A alsochooses measure Sx;if observer the other hand, let us suppose A determinesSx of particle 1 to be positive, then without fail, observer B to will measure of particle 2 to be negative.Finally, if A chooses make no Sx measurement, B, of course,will have a 5050 chance of getting Sx + or To sum up: Sx
;
\342\200\224
A measures Sz and B measures Sx, there is a completely random correlationbetween the two measurements. 2. If A measures Sx and B measures Sx, there is a 100%(opposite sign)correlationbetween the two measurements. 3.If A makes no measurement, B'smeasurements show random
1.If
results. resultsof such measurementswhen B and A are Table 3.1 showsall possible to allowed to choose measureSx or Sz.
226
TABLE Spin component measured by A
3.1.pincorrelation Measurements S
A's result
\342\200\242+\302\246
B'sresult
z z x x
Z
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
z x z z
X X X
X
Z
+ + +
\342\200\224 \342\200\224 \342\200\224
x z z
X X
x z x
Z Z
+ +
These considerationshow that the outcome of B'smeasurement s to dependon what kind of measurementA decidesto perform: an appears
A and B can be miles apart with no possibility of communications or mutual interactions. Observer A can decide how to orient his or her
measured.
I spinanalyzer apparatus long after the two particles have separated. t is as 2 \"knows\" which spin component of particle 1 is being particle though
The orthodox quantummechanicalinterpretation of this situation is as follows. A measurementis a selection(or filtration) process. When Sz of 1is measuredto be positive, then component z+;z ) is selected. particle A subsequent easurementof the other particle'sSz merely ascertains that m the system is still in z+; ).We must acceptthat a measurementon what z as appearsto be a part of the system is to be regarded a measurementon the whole system.
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
interpretation of spincorrelation measurements. Their feelings are typified in the following frequently quoted remarks by A. Einstein, which we call Einstein'slocality principle: \"But on one supposition should, in we hold fast: The real factual situation of the system S2 my opinion, absolutely is independentof what is done with the system Sl9 which is spatially in this separatedfrom the former.\" Because problem was first discussed a
3.9.Spin Correlation
227
A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, it is sometimes as the EinsteinPodolskyRosen aradox.* p Somehave argued that the difficulties encounteredhere are inherent in the probabilisticinterpretations of quantum mechanics and that the l dynamic behavior at the microscopicevel appearsprobabilistic only bebecause someyet unknown hidden not parameters\342\200\224socalled been specified.t is not our purposehere to discussvarious alternatives to I quantum mechanics based on hiddenvariable or other considerations. d Rather, let us ask, Do such theoriesmake predictionsifferent from those of it mechanics? Until 1964, could be thought that the alternative quantum theories could be concoctedin such a way that they would give no predictions,other than the usual quantummechanical predictions,that to couldbe verified experimentally.The whole debatewould have belonged the realm of metaphysics rather than physics.It was then pointed out by J. S. Bell that the alternative theories basedon Einstein'slocalityprinciple actually predict a testable inequality relation among the observables of w o e spincorrelationxperimentsthat disagrees ith the predictions f quantum
known
variables\342\200\224have
1935 paper of
mechanics.
We derive Bell'sinequality within the framework of a simple model, conceived by E. P. Wigner, that incorporates the essential features of the various alternative theories. Proponents of this model agree that it is to impossible determine Sx and Sz simultaneously. However,when we have a large number of spin \\ particles, we assign a certain fraction of them to have the following property: If Sz is measured, we obtain a plus sign with certainty. If Sx is measured, we obtain a minus sign with certainty. A particlesatisfying this property is said to belong to type (z +,x Notice that we are not asserting that we can simultaneously measure Sz and Sx to be + and respectively.When we measure Sz, we do not measure Sx9 and vice versa. We are assigning definite valuesof spin components in more than one direction with the understanding that only one or the other of the can E components actually be measured. ven though this approach is fundadifferent from that of quantum mechanics,the quantummechanifundamentally predictionsfor Sz and Sx measurements performed on the spinup provided there are as many particles belonging (Sz+) state are reproduced to type (z +,x +) as to type (z +,x Let us now examine how this model can account for the results of spincorrelationmeasurements made on compositespinsinglet systems.
\342\200\224).
\342\200\224, quantummechanical
\342\200\224).
*To be historically accurate, the original EinsteinPodolskyRosen paper dealt with measurements of x and p. The use of composite spin systems to illustrate the EinsteinPodolskyRosen paradox started with D.Bohm.
\\
228
Clearly, for a particular pair, there must be a perfect matching between particle1and particle 2 to ensure zero total angular momentum: If particle 1is of type (z +,x then particle 2 must belong to type (z x +), and so can forth. The resultsof correlation measurements,such as in Table 3.1, be reproducedif particle 1and particle 2 are matched as follows:
\342\200\224),
\342\200\224,
particle 1 particle 2
)~(z+,x)>
+ )~(z+,x )
with
t equal populations,hat is, 25% each.A very important assumption is here. upposea particular pair belongsto type C.9.5a) observer and implied S A decidesto measure Sz of particle then he or she necessarilyobtains a of plus sign regardless whether B decidesto measure Sz or Sx.It is in this A sensethat Einstein'slocality principle is incorporated in this model: 's of B's result is predetermined choice to what to measure. as independently In the examples in considered far, this model has beensuccessful so the predictionsof quantum mechanics.We now consider reproducing s different morecomplicatedituations where the model leads to predictions from the usual quantummechanicalpredictions. his time we start with T three unit vectors a, b, and c,which are, in general, not mutually orthogonal. We imagine that one of the particles belongsto some definite type, say ,b+ ,c+ ), which means that if Sais measured, we obtain a minus sign with certainty; if S#b is measured, we obtain a plus sign with certainty; if Scis measured,we obtain a plus with certainty. Again there must be a perfect matching in the sensethat the other particle necessarilybelongsto to ensure zero total angular momentum. In any given type (a + ,b event, the particle pair in question must be a member of one of the eight T a types shown in Table 3.2. heseeight possibilities re mutually exclusive and disjoint.The population of each type is indicated in the first column. Let us supposethat observer A finds S^ a to be plus and observer B finds S2bto be plus also.t is clear from Table 3.2 I that the pair belong to either type 3 or type 4, so the number of particle pairs for which this situation is realized is N3 + N4. Because is positive semidefinite,we must Nt have inequality relations like
1;
(a\342\200\224
\342\200\224,c
\342\200\224)
C.9.6)
Let P(a+;b+ ) be the probability that, in a random selection, observer A measuresSxato be + and observer B measures S2bto be +, and so on.
3.9.Spin Correlation
TABLE
229
3.2.
Population
Particle
(a+,b+ ,c
N2
NA
(a+,b,c + (a,b ,
(a,b,c
(a,b+,c (a+,b,c
(a+,b+ ,
(a,b,c
Clearly, we have
C.9.7)
In a similar manner, we obtain
N,)
\342\200\242
C9.8)
C.9.9)
We now return to the world of quantum mechanics. In quantum mechanics we do not talk about a certain fraction of particle pairs, say N3/L*N;,belonging to type 3. Instead, we characterize all spinsinglet in systemsby the same ket C.9.1); the language of Section3.4 we are concerned here with a pure ensemble.Using this ket and the rules of quantum mechanics we have developed, we can unambiguously calculate each of the three terms in inequality C.9.9). We first evaluate P(a+;b ). Suppose + observer A finds Sxato be positive; becauseof the 100% (oppositesign) correlation we discussed measurementof S2awill yield a minus sign with certainty. But earlier, B's to calculate P(a+;b ) we must considera new quantization + axis b that makesan angle 9ab with a; seeFigure 3.9. According to the formalism of Section 3.2,he probability that the S2b measurement yields + when t particle 2 is known to be in an eigenketof S2*awith negativeeigenvalueis
230
a direction
b direction
<S2>
I
FIGURE
3.9.
Evaluation
of
b P(a4; 4).
given by
cos
As a result, we obtain
2 )
I
C.9.10
sm
C.9.11
initially obtaining the other two terms of
\\
C.9.12
plane, and let c bisectthe
We now show that inequality is not always possiblefrom of view. For simplicity let us choose b, and c to lie in a, geometricpoint
two
C.9.12)
directionsdefined by a and b:
a a
C.9.13
is then violated for Inequality C.9.12)
C.9.14)
Forexample,take 0 = 7r/4; we then
obtain
not compatible
with
< ?? 0.5000.292
C.9.15
Bell's
the senseof being experimentally inequality. There is a real verifiable\342\200\224difference between quantum mechanicsand the alternative theosatisfying Einstein's locality principle.
observable\342\200\224in
theories
3.9.Spin Correlation
231
Several experimentshave beenperformed to test Bell'sinequality. In one of the experiments spin correlations between the final protons in lowenergy protonproton scattering were measured.In all other experiphotonpolarization correlations between a pair of photons in a cascade transition of an excited atom (Ca,
experiments
Hg,...),
C.9.16)
or
in
in
lS0) were
1.1:
S7
>
I
?
in in in
ydirection,
45\302\260 135\302\260
Sx Sx
H\342\200\224>
>?
C.9.17)
The results of all recent precisionexperiments have conclusively established Bell's that was violated,in one case more than nine by inequality standard deviations. Furthermore, in all these experiments the inequality relation was violated in such a way that the quantummechanicalpredictwere fulfilled within error limits. In this controversy,quantum mechahas triumphed with flying colors. The fact that the quantummechanicalpredictions ave beenverified h mean that the whole subject is now a triviality. Despite the does not experimental verdict we may still feel psychologicallyuncomfortableabout many aspects of measurements of this kind. Considerin particular the following point:Right after observerA performs a measurementon particle how does particle may, in principle, be many light years away from particle to \"know\" how to orient its spin so that the remarkcorrelationsapparent in Table 3.1 realized? In one of the experiare to test Bell's inequality (performed by A. Aspect and collaborators) the analyzer settings were changed so rapidly that A'sdecision to what to as measure could not be made until it was too late for any kind of influence, traveling slowerthan light, to reach B. We concludethis section by showing that despitethese peculiarities we cannot use spincorrelationmeasurementsto transmit any useful inforinformation between two macroscopically separatedpoints.In particular, superluminal (faster than light) communicationsare impossible. A Suppose and B both agree in advance to measure Sz; then, without B knows preciselywhat A is getting. But this doesnot mean that asking A,
predictions mechanics
1,
2\342\200\224which
1\342\200\224get
remarkable
experiments
in mind here that by working with photons we are going outside the quantum mechanics, which is the subject of this book.
232
A
and B are communicating;B just observes random sequence positive a of and negative signs.There is obviously no useful information contained in it. B verifiesthe remarkablecorrelationspredicted quantum mechanicsonly by after he or she gets together with A and compares notes (or computer the
sheets).
measurements are completelyuncorrelated with the results of B's measureso there is no information transferred. But then, suppose suddenly A breakshis or her promise and without telling B starts measuring Sx.There are now complete correlationsbetweenA's results and B's results.However, B has no way of inferring that A has changed the orientation of his or her of analyzer. B continues to see just a random sequence + 's and 's by looking at his or her own notebook only. So again there is no information transferred.
measurements,
be thought that A and B can communicateif one of them suddenly changesthe orientation of his or her analyzing apparatus. Let us supposethat A agreesinitially to measure S29 and B, Sx.The results of A's
It might
3.10. TENSOROPERATORS
Vector Operator
We have been using notations such as x, p, S, and L, but as yet we their rotational properties. hey are vector have not systematicallydiscussed T under rotations? In this section we operators,but what are their properties q give a preciseuantummechanicaldefinition of vector operatorsbased on W their commutation relations with the angularmomentum operator. e then generalize to tensor operators with morecomplicatedtransformation propand derive an important theoremon the matrix elementsof vectorand
properties
We all know that a vector in classical hysicsis a quantity with three p under a rotacomponentsthat transforms by definition like 2y/?,y V} It is reasonableto demand that the expectation value of a vector operator V in quantum mechanics be transformed like a classicalvector under rotation. Specifically,as the state ket is changed under rotation accordingto
Vf\342\200\224>
tensoroperators.
rotation.
\\a)+9(R)\\a),
the expectation value of V
<a>\302\273
C.10.1
> {a\\&(R)Vt9(*)\\\302\253)
arbitrary
= E*,,<aJ\302\273.
ket
T a>. herefore,
C.10.2
C.10.3
233
hold as an operator equation, where RtJ is the 3x3 matrix that to corresponds rotation R. Let us now consider specificcase,an infinitesimal rotation. When a the rotation is infinitesimal, we have
ieJh
h
C.10.4
We
as C.10.3)
C.10.5
In particular, for h along the zaxis, we have
/I e
e 0 0
1
y
C.10.6
SO
il: K+^[VX,JZ]=
y
C.10.7a)
C.10.7b) J ]=
the commutation relations
C.10.7c)
V must satisfy
[VnJj]=ieiJkhVk.
C.10.8)
Clearly, the behavior of V under a finite rotation is completely determined by the precedingcommutation relations; we just apply the t bynow familiar formula B.3.47)o
exp
We simply
C.10.9)
]]]\302\246
need to calculate
giving
back to us
Vl
ox
Vk
C.10.10 (k # /, j) as in
Noticethat the
c angularmomentum commutation relationsare a special ase in which we let Vi Ji9 Vk > Jk. Other special asesare [y, Lz]= of c ihx, [jc,Lz] = ihy, [px,Lz]= ihp , [py, Lz] = ihpx\\ these can be proved
defining
C.10.8)
explicitly.
234
generalizing Vi
LjR^Vj as follows:
TiJk..m
by
rlJk... E E E
k'
 /' r
*\302\273>*jj>
T>>rk>...
C.10.11
under a rotation specifiedby the 3 X 3 orthogonal matrix R. The number of indicesis calledthe rank of a tensor.Such a tensor is known as a Cartesian
tensor.
component
The simplestexample of a Cartesian tensor of rank 2 is a dyadic formed out of two vectors U and V. One simply takes a Cartesian compoof U and a Cartesian component of V and puts them together:
C.10.12
Noticethat we have nine componentsaltogether.They obviously
like
C.10.11)
transform
reducible\342\200\224that
differently
under rotation. The trouble with a Cartesian tensor like C.10.12) is that it is it can be decomposed into objectsthat transform differis, under rotations. Specifically, or the dyadic in C.10.12) f we have
UV
C.10.1
The first term on the righthand side, U#V, is a scalar product invariant under rotation. The secondis an antisymmetric tensor which can be written as vector product ^(UxV)^. There are altogether 3 independent compowhere 1 The last is a 3 X 3 symmetric traceless tensor with 5 ( = 6 The number comesrom the traceless f condition) independent components. of independentcomponents checks:
components.
\342\200\224
1,
+ 3x3=1 3 + 5.
We
C.10.14
note that the numbers appearing on the righthand sideof C.10.14) are the multiplicities of objectswith angular momentum / = 0, / = precisely and / = 2, respectively.This suggestshat the dyadic has beendecomposed t into tensorsthat can transform like sphericalharmonicswith / = and 2. In fact, C.10.13) simplest nontrivial example to illustrate the reducis the of a Cartesiantensor into irreduciblesphericaltensors. Before presenting the precise definition of a spherical tensor, we first give an example of a spherical tensor of rank k. Supposewe take a We have already seenthat it can be written as sphericalharmonic Yim{6, We now y/m(n), where the orientation of n is characterized by 6 and n replace by somevector V. The result is that we have a sphericaltensor of rank k (in place of /) with magnetic quantum number q (in placeof m),
1,
0,1,
reduction
<\302\273.
<t>.
235
C.10.15
( replacez/r)= (h)z by Vz, and so on.
casek = 1 we take spherical harmonics with
/ = and
C.10.16
v/2
To seethe transformation of spherical tensors constructed in this transform under rotations. First, we manner, let us first review how have for the direction eigenket;
Y\342\204\242
F just ^ are irreducible, as y7m are. or this reason,working with spherical tensorsis more satisfactory than working with Cartesian tensors.
C.10.18
which defines the rotated eigenket (n'\\l* rn) would look in terms of
with
\302\256(Rl)\\l,
^(n).
m'
W In'). e wish We
m) =
?/, ^iPjR1) m
C.10.18):
it
C.10.19
C.10.20
Yfm(V)9
C.10.21
m
unitarity
C.10.21)
as components
All this work is just to motivate the definition of a spherical tensor. We now consider pherical tensors in quantum mechanics. otivated by M s we define a spherical tensor operator of rank k with
k
Bk+1)
9$\\R)T}k> q'=k
C.10.22a
236
or, equivalently,
q'=k
^^
C.10.22b
o This definition holdsregardless f whether T^k) can be written as Y^q(W)\\ for example,(Ux + iUy)(Vx + iVy) is the q = + 2 component of a spherical tensor of rank 2 even though, unlike (Vx + iVyJ, it cannot be written as more convenient definition of a spherical tensor is obtained by the namely, considering infinitesimal form of C.10.22b),
A
k q'=
or
C.10.23
[Jn,Tf\\ = 2 r^(^'jnA:<7). q'
By taking h
nonvanishing
and
[z^\\q^C.10.25
J\302\261
??
(x
\302\261
C.10.24
q)(k
\302\261q
T<k\302\261\\.
C.10.25b
of spherical
Product of Tensors
We have seenhow to form a scalar, vector (or antisymmetric tensor), a tracelesssymmetric tensor out of two vectors using the Cartesian and tensor language. Of course,spherical tensor language can also be used Chapter 17),for example, (Baym 1969,
r0
@)
(Uxv)
C.10.26
_
237
of rank 1, Uq(Vq) is the qth component of a spherical tensor correspondingto vector U(V). The precedingtransformation properties can be checked by comparing with and remembering that {/+ = x UO (Ux+ iUy)/yf2, U.^iUxiUy)/)/!,= UZ. A similar checkcan be
Y\342\204\242
made for
V\302\261l
0. For instance,
kx
Theorem.Let X^l) and Z^2) be irreducible sphericaltensorsof rank and k2, respectively. hen T
It
<7l
*/i/7
It It
'
It si\\ \\^'
1' 2/ 7'
i 1(I /7 I
^2
is a
spherical{irreducible)tensor of rank k.
Proof We must show
that
accordingto C.10.22)
xk^ kq)
E
^
EE E E E
^
becomes expression
EEEE
ft'
238
reducesto expression
~~q q \\~
im*~~qq
The foregoingshowshow we can construct tensor operators higher of or lower ranks by multiplying two tensor operators. Furthermore, the manner in which we construct tensor products out of two tensors is completely analogous to the manner in which we construct an angularmomentum eigenstate by adding two angular momentums; exactly the same ClebschGordanoefficientsappearif we let kx 2 * A,2> #1,2 m 1,2c
~~*
and nuclei,
mselectionRule
<\302\253',
j'm'\\T(k)\\a,
jm) = 0, unlessm'=q+ m.
C.10.28
hence,
Another
T^k)\\a,
?
property of
transformation
jm) = 9T^&9\\a,m). j
C.10.29
If we now let
Of
3.10.Tensor
Operators
239
jm),
C.10.30
m!.
theoremsin quan
with
The WignerEckart Theorem. The matrix elementsof tensoroperators respectto angularmomentum eigenstatessatisfy
<a\\
C.10.3
where the doublebarmatrix elements independentof m and m\\ and q. i Before we present a proof of this theorem, let us look at its significance.First, we see that the matrix element is written as the product of two factors. The first factor is a ClebschGordanoefficientfor adding c and k to get It dependsonly on the geometry, that is, the way the t T system is oriented with respect o the zaxis. here is no referencewhatsoever to the particular nature of the tensor operator.The secondfactor does dependon the dynamics, for instance, a may stand for the radial quantum number and its evaluation may involve, for example, evaluation of radial integrals.On the other hand, it is completelyindependent of the magnetic quantum numbers m,m\\ and q, which specify the orientation of the physical system.To evaluate (<x\\ jfmf\\T^k)\\a, jm) with various combinaof m, m\\ and it is sufficient to know just one of them; all others can be related geometrically because they are proportional to ClebschGordan coefficients,which are known. The common proportionality factor is {a'j'WT^Waj), hich makes no reference whatsoever to the geometric w features. The selectionrules for the tensor operator matrix element can be immediately read off from the selectionrules for adding angular momenc f Indeed, rom the requirement that the ClebschGordanoefficientbe derived we immediately obtain the mselectionrule C.10.28) nonvanishing, before and also the triangular relation
j'.
combinations
q'
momentum.
C.10.32
j'm'\\T<k\302\261\\\\a9
jm),
C.10.33
240
or using
' + l)(a'9j'9m'Tl\\T\342\204\242\\a9jm)
*',j'm'\\T}k>\\a9j9m\302\261l)
{(k+ q)(k
\302\261q
C.10.34
the form the same
Both and m>ml9k+j29 q*m2. recursion relations are of = 0,that is, firstorderlinear homogeneousequations with YtjdijXj coefficientsatj.Whenever we have
c Comparethis with the recursionrelation for the ClebschGordanoefficient Note the striking similarity if we substitute j'> m' * m, y * jl9 j9 C.7.49).
jjj
C.10.35
we cannot solve for the
ratios; so
Xj Xj
(or j>7)
\"J
individually
but
or
x, = cyi9
C.10.36
where
c is a universal proportionality factor. Noting that recursion relation C.7.49) corresponds \\\\jlj2\\ jm) in the ClebschGordan to (a\\ jW\\T^\\\\a9 jm), we seethat jm) = (universalproportionality constant independent of (a'9
j'm'\\T(\302\261\\\\a,
m,
j'm'),
C.10.37
two
1.
0,that
(a',j'm>\\S\\a, jm) = 8jr8mJaj^J> C.10.38 yjl] + 1 because acting on a,m) is like adding an angular momentum of zero. S j
2. Example Vector operator which in the sphericaltensor languageis a rank so we 1 tensor.The sphericalcomponent of V can be written as rule have the selection
Vqam\302\261h09
??
Am
sm'm = 1,0
\302\261
Ay
j'j = / ^
C.10.39
3.10.Tensor
Operators
241
is forbidden. This selection rule is of In addition, the 0 transition fundamental importance in the theory of radiation; it is the dipoleselection rule obtained in the longwavelength limit of emitted photons.*
\302\2730
For 7 = 7' the WignerEckart theorem\342\200\224when appliedto the vector a particularly simple form, often known as the projection operator\342\200\224takes theorem for obvious reasons. The Projection Theorem
/
\302\253 \342\200\242
, jm'\\V\\a9
>
** jm\\J*\\\\a,
'(jm'\\J\\jm)9C.10.40 \\Jjm)
.
we C.10.26)choose
C.10.41
Proof. Noting
(a',
ymJ\302\253Va,
 J_xV+l)\\a,jm)
h
\342\200\224
= mh(a\\
jm\\V0\\a,
jm) + 2
/(j'+ m)(jm + 1)
= cJm(aW\\\\\302\253J)
by the WignerEckart theorem and V, and the matrix elements of
Ko
\302\261
C.10.42
x
doublebarmatrix element (sometimesalso calledthe reduced matrix eleFurthermore, cjm is independent of m becauseJ*V is a scalar element). operator,so we may as well write it as cy. Because doesnot dependon V, cy holds C.10.42) even if we let V and a'~>a, that is,
\302\273J
(a,jm\\J2\\a,
Returning
jm) = c/a/Ja/>.
Vq (a>j\\\\\\\\\\aj)
C.10.43
C 10 44)
to these
^Additional
242
But the righthand
/(a,
side of
by
is just of C.10.43)
<a\\
which
jm\\J2\\a,
jm)
\342\200\242
j(j + l)h2.So
jm) = ^
\342\200\242
is j C.10.44)the same as (a',m\\J9\\\\a, jm) and Moreover, the lefthand side C.10.42) C.10.43).
v
jm'\\V\\a9
/.t/i
jm\\J*\\\\a, (<x\\ J **
\\
'
PROBLEMS
1.Find
ay
=I
' . Supposean
electron is in the spin state If sy is measured, what is the of the result h /2? probability 2. Considerthe 2x2matrix defined by an + zo#a a0 zo#a where a0 is a real number and a is a threedimensionalvector with real
l^j.
\342\200\224
components.
unimodular matrix represents rotation in a three dimensions. Find the axis and angle of rotation appropriate for U in terms of a09 al9 a2, and a3. 3. The spindependent Hamiltonian of an electronpositron system in the of a uniform magneticfield in the zdirectioncan be written as presence
b. In general, a 2 X 2 unitary
a. Prove that
me,
Supposethe spin function of the system is given by
a. Isthis
what
value of
A>\302\2479
# eB/mc 0? If it is,
x+*
^X^
)
HI
what
is the expectation
h)(Szh)and
5. Let the
+ Sx(Sx h)(Sxh).
H1
where K is the
angular
2 T
+ J + J3
in
vl
is2\\
momentum
this
Problems
243
equation of motion for K and then expressionobtain the Heisenberg limit. find Euler'sequation of motion in the correspondence 6. Let ?/ = elG*aelGll*elG*y, where (a,/?,y) are the Eulerian angles.In order that U representa rotation (a,/?,y), what are the commutation rules satisfied by the Gkl Relate G to the angular momentum operators. 7. What is the meaning of the following equation:
U~lAkU=l,RklAh
where the three componentsof A are matrices?From this equation show that matrix elements (m\\Ak\\n) transform like vectors. 8. Considera sequence Euler rotations represented of by io3a
exp
\342\200\224\342\200\224
io2p
e
\\
/ expf
io3y
ei(ay)/2
^?
of (Sv) are known. Show how we may determine the state vector. Why is it to unnecessary know the magnitude of >? of b. Considera mixed ensemble spin \\ systems. upposethe ensemble S averages [Sx], [Sv], and [Sz] are all known. Show how we may construct the 2x2density matrix that characterizesthe ensemble. 10.a. Prove that the time evolution of the density operator p (in the p Schrodinger icture) is given by
Becauseof the group propertiesof rotations, we expect that this sequenceof operations is equivalent to a single rotation about some
\\
systems.
sign
11.
a pure ensembleat / = 0. Prove that it cannot evolve into a mixed ensembleas long as the time evolution is governed by the Schrodingerequation. of Consideran ensemble spin 1 systems. he density matrix is now a T 3x3matrix. How many independent (real) parameters are neededto characterize the density matrix? What must we know in addition to [Sx]9 completely? [Sy], and [Sz] to characterizethe ensemble A 12. n angularmomentum eigenstate y, m = mmax = is rotated by an infinitesimal angle e about the >>axis.Without using the explicitform of the d(j)m function, obtain an expression the probability for the new for rotated state to be found in the original state up to terms of order e2.
b. Supposewe have
j)
244
the 3 X 3 matrices G, (/ =
by
and k are the row and column indices,satisfy the angular commutation relations. What is the physical(or geometric) significanceof the transformation matrix that connectsG, to the more usual 3x3representations of the angularmomentum operator Ji with taken to be diagonal? Relate your result to J3 under infinitesimal rotations. (Note: This problem may be helpful in understanding the photon spin.) 14.a. Let J be angular momentum. It may stand for orbital L, spin S, or = Jx Lfv) satisfy the usual Jtotal.) Using the fact that Jx9 Jv, commutation relations, prove angularmomentum
JZ(J\302\261
\302\261
\"famous\"
expressionfor the
appearsin
to of a particle subjected a sphericallysymmetrical potential V(r) is given by an eigenfunctionof L2? If so, what is the /value?If not, what are the possible valuesof / we may obtain when L2 is measured? b.What are the probabilities for the particle to be found in various ml
c. Supposeit is known somehowthat \\p(x) is an energy eigenfunction with eigenvalueE. Indicate how we may find V(r). A 16. particle in a sphericallysymmetrical potential is known to be in an
respectively.
states?
eigenstate of L2 and Lz with eigenvaluesh2l(l + \\) and mh, respecProve that the expectationvaluesbetween \\lm) states satisfy
Interpret
this
result semiclassically.
\\,
Problems
245
Now try to construct Yl/2_1/2(d, by (a) applying L_ to <{>)', and (b) using L_ 71/2_i/2@,/>) = 0.Show that the two < y1/2 i/2@, lead ( procedures to contradictoryresults. This givesan argument against halfinteger /valuesfor orbital angular momentum.) 18. onsideran orbital angularmomentum eigenstate / = 2, m = 0).SupC this state is rotated by an angle ft about the >>axis. Find the and +2.(The probability for the new state to be found in m = 0, harmonics for / = 0, and 2 given in Appendix A may be spherical useful.) 19.What is the physicalsignificanceof the operators
<\302\273;
Suppose
1,
\302\2611,
\342\200\224
v+ v_
and
s Schwinger'scheme for angular momentum? Give the nonvanishing elements of K +. and 20.We are to add angular momenta j\\ = 1and j2 =1to form j = 2,1, 0 states. Using either the ladder operator method or the recursion relation, expressall (nine) (y, m) eigenkets in terms of
in
matrix
\\j\\j2m9
Write your
answeras
21. . Evaluate a
for
any
j (integer or halfinteger);then
many ways. You may, for instance, examine the rotational properties // using the spherical(irreduciof tensor language.] 22.a. Considera system with 7 =1. xplicitly write E
(irreducible)
in
3 X 3 matrix form,
b. Show that
for
j =1only,
y
it
is legitimate to replacee~lJy^/h
by
1/ sin#fh
Acos/?).
246
c. Using(b),prove
1
\\yfl
sin
)
j(lcos/3)
sin
sin
\\
cos
sin
in
23.Expressthe matrix
element (\302\2532j82Y2/32a1)81Y1)
terms of a
seriesin
24. Consider a system made up of two spin \\ particles.Observer A in specializes measuring the spin components of one of the particles and so on), while observer B measures the spin components of Eiz> six the the other particle.Suppose system is known to be in a spinsinglet state, that is, 5total = 0. a. What is the probability for observer A to obtain slz = h/2 when observer B makes no measurement?Sameproblem for slx = h/2. b. Observer B determines the spin of particle 2 to be in the s2z= h/2 state with certainty. What can we then conclude about the outcome of observer A's measurement if (i) A measuresslz and (ii) A measuresslx1Justify your answer. 25.Considera spherical tensor of rank 1(that is, a vector)
\302\261l
in
results are just what you expectfrom the transforVx z under rotations about the ^axis. 26, a. Construct a spherical tensor of rank 1 out of two different vectors U= (Ux, Uy, Uz) and V= (Vx, Vy, Vz). Explicitly write in terms of Ux , and Vx b. Construct a spherical tensor of rank 2 out of two different vectors U and V. Write down explicitly ^\\ 0 in terms of Ux v z and v 27, Considera spinless particle bound to a fixed center by a central force
your
transformation
propertiesof
T\342\204\2421<0
\302\261l
potential.
Problems
247
a. Relate, as much
(n'9/',m'\\+ ~r=
y2 using
iy)\\n,l,
m) and
(n\\
/',
m'\\z\\n,
/, m)
only the WignerEckart theorem. Make sure to state under what conditionsthe matrix elementsare nonvanishing. b. Do the same problem using wave functions \\p(x) = Rnl{r)Ylm{6^) 28 a. Write xy9 xz9 and (x2 y2) as components of a spherical(irreduci\342\200\224
Q = e(a9 m
j,
\342\200\224
= j\\Cz2 r2)\\a,\\ j
moment. Evaluate
= j)
is known as the
(where
ClebschGordanoefficients. c
may by taken to
29. A spin nucleus situated at the origin is subjectedto an external inhomogeneous electricfield.The basicelectric quadrupole interaction
quadrupole
m'= j,j
be
e(a9j9 m'\\(x2
\342\200\224
in 1, 2,...) j
 y2)\\a, j,
= j),
eQ
d2<t>
2s(sl)h
where
the
</>
dx
Laplace'sequation and
Show that
and expressA and B in terms of (d2<j>/dx2H so on.Determine the and (in energy eigenkets terms of ra),where m = \\9 + \\) and the correcorresponding energy eigenvalues.Isthere any degeneracy?
\302\261
CHAPTER4
Symmetry in QuantumMechanics
Having studied the theory of rotation in detail, we are in a position to i discuss,n more general terms, the connectionbetween symmetries, degenerand conservation laws. We have deliberately postponedthis very important topic until now so that we can discussit using the rotation symmetry of Chapter 3 as an example.
degeneracies,
DEGENERACIES
We begin with an elementary review of the conceptsof symmetry I and conservation law in classical hysics. n the Lagrangian formulation of p quantum mechanics,we start with the Lagrangian L, which is a function of a generalized coordinate qt and the correspondingeneralizedvelocityqr If g L is unchanged under displacement,
dL =
248
0.
D.1.2)
249
= 0, that
virtue
(dL/dqt)
f0.
where the canonical momentum is definedas
D.1.3)
D.1.4)
then So if L is unchanged under displacementD.1.1), we have a conserved the canonical momentum conjugate to qr quantity, i Likewise,n the Hamiltonian formulation basedon H regarded as a
function of
qt
and
pi9
we have
? ^
D.1.5)
whenever
4^ = 0. dqt
way quantity.
D.1.6)
So if the Hamiltonian does not explicitly dependon qt, which is another of saying H has a symmetry under qt > qt + Sqi9 we have a conserved Mechanics
Symmetry
in Quantum
In quantum mechanicswe have learned to associate unitary opera say Sf9 with an operation like translation or rotation. It has become o customary to call S?a symmetry operator regardless f whether the physical t to system itself possesseshe symmetry corresponding Sf. Further, we have learned that for symmetry operations that differ infinitesimally from the transformation, we can write identity
operator,
D.1.7)
where G is the Hermitian generator of the symmetry operator in question. Let us now supposethat H is invariant under Sf. We then have
sr*HSf= H.
But this
D.1.8)
is equivalent to
= [G9H] 0.
By virtue
D.1.9)
= 0;
D.1.10
250
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
translation, then momentum is a constant of the motion; if H is invariant under rotation, then angular momentum is a constant of the motion. It is instructive to look at the connection between D.1.9) and conservation of G from the point of view of an eigenket of G when G commutes with H. Suppose t0 the system is in an eigenstate of G. Then at the ket at a later time obtained by applying the timeevolutionoperator
D.1.11
In is also an eigenket of G with the same eigenvalueg'. other words,oncea ket is a G eigenket, it is always a G eigenketwith the same eigenvalue.The and proof of this is extremelysimple once we realize that D.1.9) D.1.10 also imply that G commuteswith the timeevolutionoperator, namely,
Let us now
to the
= [i/,^] 0
D.1.13
for somesymmetry operator and \\n) is an energy eigenket with eigenvalue En. Then ^\\n) is also an energyeigenketwith the same energy, because
the same energy, that is, they are degenerate.Quite often Sf is characterized by continuous parameters, say A, in which case all states of the form S^(X)\\n) have the same energy. We now considerrotation specifically.Supposethe Hamiltonian is rotationally invariant, so
with
Suppose\\n)
= D.1.14 H(&\\n)) &H\\n) = En(&\\n)). and ^\\n) represent different states.Then these are two states
[@(R)9H]=Q,
which
D.1.15
= = [J,i/] 0, [J2,i/] 0.
We
\\n;
D.1.16
can then form simultaneous eigenkets of i/, J2,and /z, denotedby j\\m). The argument just given implies that all states of the form
9(R)\\n;j,m)
have the same energy. We saw
in
D.1.17
under rotation different
Chapter 3
that
4.2.Discrete
Symmetries, Parity, or
SpaceInversion
251
D.1.18
w operator@{R), e can get different linear combinationsof \\n; j\\m').If all states of form 3)(R)\\n\\ j,m)with arbitrary @(R)are to have the same m must have j\\ m) with different energy, it is then essentialthat each of the same energy.So the degeneracyhere is Bj + l)fold,just equal to the number of possiblemvalues.This point is alsoevident from the fact that all states obtained by successivelyapplying which commutes with H, to
\\n\\
J\302\2619
same energy. As an application, consideran atomic electron whose potential is Becauser and L*S are both rotationally written as V(r)+VLS(r)L*S. invariant, we expecta Bj + l)folddegeneracyfor each atomiclevel.On the other hand, supposethere is an external electricor magnetic field, say in the zdirection. he rotational symmetry is now manifestly broken;as a result, T + l)folddegeneracyis no longer expected states characterized and the by different mvaluesno longer have the same energy.We will examinehow this splitting arisesin Chapter 5.
\\n;
Bj
lattice translation, and time reversal. The first operation we consideris parity, or space inversion. The parity operation, as appliedto transformation on the coordinate system, changesa righthanded (RH) system into a lefthanded (LH) system, as shown in Figure a However,in this bookwe consider transformation on state kets rather than on the coordinate system. Given a>,we considera s spaceinvertedtate, assumed to be obtained by applying a unitary operator tt known as the parity operator, as follows:
4.1.
a>>7ra>.
require the expectation value of x taken in inverted state to be opposite sign.
We
with
D.2.1)
respect to the space
\342\200\224
(axa>,
D.2.2)
252
RH
LH
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
new
new y
FIGURE
4.1. ighthanded R
new
(RH) and
lefthanded
(LH) systems.
=
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
D.2.3)
or
X7T
7TX,
D.2.4)
must transform
<n
under
= eiS\\x'\\
D 2 5)
= ~ 7TXX') =
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
D.2.6)
This equation says that ttx')is an eigenketof x with eigenvalue x',so it must be the same as a position eigenket  x')up to a phasefactor. It is customary to take elS= 1 by convention. Substituting this in we have 7T2\\x') = x'); ence, it1 h is, we come back to the D.2.5), samestate by applying <n twice.We easily seefrom D.2.5) tt is now not that but also Hermitian: only unitary
=1\342\200\224that
\342\200\224
7T
\342\200\224
7T.
D.2.7)
mdx/dt,so it is natural
operator? The momentum p is like expectit to be odd under parity, like x. A more t satisfactory argument considershe momentum operator as the generator of translation. Since translation followed by parity is equivalent to parity followed by translation in the oppositedirection, as can be seenfrom Figure
to
\342\200\224
1.
4.2.Discrete
then 4.2,
Symmetries, Parity, or
I Spacenversion
253
D.2.8)
1ipdx^ ~~h
from
which
D.2.9)
= p
follows
{w,p}=0or
We can now discuss behaviorof J the momentum we clearly have angular
D.2.10
[tt,L]= 0
because L = xXp,
rotation. For3x3 orthogonal matrices, we have
n (parity) n (rotation)
==
D.2.11
D.2.12
and both x and p are odd under parity. However,to show that this property also holds for spin, it is best to use the fact that J is the generator of
n (rotation) n (parity)
D.2.13
where explicitly
?
that it
operators,
(parity)
=
\\
1
0
l
t,
D.2.14)
is, the parity and rotation operations commute.In quantum mechanics, is natural to postulate the correspondingelation for the unitary operr so
D.2.15
dx'
dx'
FIGURE
4.2.
254
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
= where @{R) 1
\342\200\224
This together with also transforms in the same way as L. Underrotations, x and J transform in the same way, so they are both However, x (or p) is odd under vectors, or sphericaltensors,of rank and while parity [see D.2.3) D.2.10)], J is even under parity [seeD.2.16) Vectors that are odd under parity are called polar vectors, while vectors that are even under parity are called axial vectors, or pseudovectors. Let us now consider operators like S x. Under rotations they translike ordinary scalars,such as S#L or x#p. Yet under spaceinversion we have
it follows that iJhe/h.From D.2.15) = D.2.16 [tt,J] O or 77^77 = J. = L+ S) means D.2.11) that the spin operator (given by J
1.
\342\200\242
transform
x,
while for ordinary
D.2.17
scalarswe have
ff^LSff^ LS
T and so on. he operator
Wave Functions
D.2.18
Under Parity
Let us now look at the parity property of wave functions. First, let
= *//(x') <x'a>.
7ra),is
D.2.19
D.2.20
We
\302\261\\a).
D.2.21
= <x'7ra> +<x'a>.
But
D.2.22
we also have
D.2.23
so the state \\a) is even or odd under wave function satisfies corresponding
parity
odd parity.
;;
D.2.24)
'
4.2.Discrete
Symmetries, Parity, or
SpaceInversion
255
Not all wave functions of physical interest have definite parities in f Consider, or instance, the momentum eigenket. The D.2.24). momentum operator anticommutes with the parity operator, so the to momentum eigenket is not expected be a parity eigenket. ndeed,it is I easy to seethat the plane wave, which is the wave function for a momentum eigenket, does not satisfy D.2.24). An eigenket of orbital angular momentum is expected be a parity to To see eigenket becauseL and <n commute [seeD.2.11)]. how an eigenketof L2 and Lz behaves under parity, let us examine the propertiesof its wave function under spaceinversion,
the
senseof
D.2.25)
The transformation x'> r > r
\342\200\224
D.2.26)
/ \\m = ( i}
B1 +?l)(l m)l P
\342\200\242
(COS\302\260)e
with
1
where C.6.38),
\302\246*#
(cose)
\\
\"
'
Im
,d(cos0)
sin2/6,
III
2'/! (/ m
D.2.28)
D.2.29)
as 0 and
<f>
are changed, as in
D.2.30)
It is actually not necessary lookat Y(m\\ an easierway to obtain the same to result is to work with m = 0 and note that /, m = 0) (r = must have the same parity becauseit and (L )r commute. Let us now look at the parity propertiesof energy eigenstates. We beginby stating a very important theorem.
0,1,...,/
Theorem. Suppose
[Z/,tt]= O
and
\\n)
D.2.31
= En\\n);
D.2.32)
256
then
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
\\n)
i(l\302\261iOl*>
D.2.33)
use it1 = 1). ut B
is a parity eigenket with eigenvalues+1(just this is alsoan must energy eigenket with eigenvalue En. Furthermore, \\n) and D.2.33) representthe same state, otherwisethere would be two states with the same contradiction of our nondegenerate assumption. It therefore follows that \\n), which is the same as D.2.33) to a multiplicative up constant, must be a parity eigenketwith parity
energy\342\200\224a
+1.
As an example, let us look at the simple harmonic oscillator (SHO). The ground state 0) has even parity becauseits wave function, being The first excitedstate, Gaussian,is even under x'>
x'.
D.2.34)
af have an odd parity because is linear in x and p, which are both In state of the odd [seeB.3.2)].general,the parity of the nth excited simpleharmonic operator is given by ( 1)\". It is important to note that the nondegenerateassumption is essential here.For instance, considerthe hydrogen atom in nonrelativisticquantum mechanics. is well known, the energy eigenvaluesdependonly on the As principalquantum number n (for example,2pand 2s states are degenerate) Coulombpotential is obviously invariant under an energy
must
\342\200\224
\342\200\224the
parity\342\200\224yet
eigenket
cp\\2p)
+ cs\\2s)
momentum
D.2.35)
eigenket.Momentum
anticommutes with parity, though freeparticle Hamiltonian H is invariant under momentum eigenket (though obviously an energy eigenket)is not a parity eigenket. Our theorem remains intact we because have here a degeneracybetween p') and  p'), which have the same energy. In fact, we can easily construct linear combinations which are parity eigenkets with eigenvalues In  A/V2\(p')\302\261") terms of wavefunction language, el^'x'/hdoes not have a definite parity, but cosp'*x'//i sinp'*x'//i o. and d
\342\200\224
\342\200\224p')),
+1.
SymmetricalDoubleWellPotential
As an
invariant
a elementarybut instructive example,we consider symmetrical 4.3. he Hamiltonian is obviously inT under parity. In fact, the two lowest lying states are as shown in
4.2.Discrete
Symmetries, Parity, or
SpaceInversion
257
FIGURE
(symmetrical)
IA> Antisymmetric double well with the two lowest lying states \\S) (symand A) (antisymmetrical) shown. Symmetric
IS>
4.3.
The symmetrical
w Figure 4.3, e can see by working out the explicit solutions involving sine and cosinein classicallyallowedregions and sinh and coshin the classically T forbidden region. he solutionsare matched where the potential is disconwe call them the symmetrical state S)and the antisymmetrical state \\A). Of course,they are simultaneouseigenketsof H and m. Calculadiscontinuous;
Calculation
alsoshowsthat
which
we can infer from that the wave function of the antisymmetrical state has a greater curvature.The energy differenceis very later. tiny if the middlebarrier is high, a point which we will discuss We can form
D.2.36)
D.2.37a)
and
{\\S)\\A)).
D.2.37b)
The wavefunctions of D.2.37a) D.2.37b) largely concentratedin the and are righthand side and the lefthand side,respectively.They are obviously not i parity eigenstates;n fact, under parity \\R) and \\L) are interchanged.Note that they are not energy eigenstates either. Indeed, they are classical states. To be precise,let us assume that the examplesof nonstationary system is represented \\R) at / = 0.At a later time, we have by
\\R,to
= 0;t) =
v2
e~lE*t/h\\A))
Es)t/h
D.2.38)
258
At t
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
At time / = 7/2 = 2irh/2{EA Es), the system is found in pure L). = T, we are back to pure \\R), and so forth. Thus, in general, we have an
\342\200\224
\\L)
@
with
angular frequency
= (EA~ES)
D.2.39)
This oscillatory behavior can alsobe considered from the viewpoint in quantum mechanics. A particle initially confined to the tunneling side can tunnel through the classically forbidden region (the righthand middlebarrier) into the lefthand side,then back to the righthand side,and so on. But now let the middlebarrier become infinitely high; seeFigure 4.4. The \\S) and \\A) states are now degenerate, so D.2.37a)nd D.2.37b)re a a even though they are not parity eigenkets. nce the O also energy eigenkets system is found in \\R), it remains so forever (oscillation time between \\S) and 4)is now oo). ecause middlebarrier is infinitely high, there is no B the possibilityfor tunneling. Thus when there is degeneracy, the physically realizable energy eigenketsneednot be parity eigenkets. have a ground We state which is asymmetricaldespitethe fact that the Hamiltonian itself is symmetrical under spaceinversion, so with degeneracy the symmetry of H is not necessarily obeyedby energyeigenstates\\S) and \\A). This is a very simple example of brokensymmetry and degeneracy. Nature is full of situations analogous to this. Considera ferromagnet. The basicHamiltonian for iron atoms is rotationally invariant, but the ferromagclearly has a definite direction in space;hence, the (infinite) number of ground states is not rotationally invariant, since the spins are all aligned along somedefinite (but arbitrary) direction. A textbookexampleof a system that illustrates the actual importance of the symmetrical doublewell is an ammonia molecule, NH3; seeFigure 4.5.We imagine that the three H atoms form the three corners of an equilateral triangle. The N atom can be up or down, where the directions up and down are defined becausethe molecule is rotating around the axis as of
ferromagnet
CO
CO
r\\
FIGURE
r\\
double well with an infinitely high middle barrier.
4.4.
The symmetrical
4.2.Discrete
Symmetries, Parity,
or Spacenversion I
259
H
N
H H
(a)
FIGURE
(b)
molecule, NH3, where the three H atoms
form
4.5.
of an
An ammonia
the three
corners
equilateral
triangle.
up and down positionsfor the N atom are L of the doublewellpotential. The parity and energy are o eigenstates superpositions f Figure 4.5aand Figure 4.5bin the senseof shown
in
analogous to R and
Figure
4.5.The
energy differencebetween the simultaneous eigenstates of energy and parity correspond an oscillation to of about 1 cm, which is in the of 24,000 frequency wavelength microwave region.In fact, NH3 is of fundamental importance in maser
physics.
There are naturally occurring organic molecules, such as sugar or amino acids, which are of the i?type (or Ltype) only. Such molecules which have definite handedness re called optical isomers.n many casesthe a I oscillation time is practically the order of 104106 i?type moleculesremain righthanded for all practical purposes.It is amusing that if we attempt to synthesize such organic molecules in the laboratory, we find equal mixtures of R and L. Why we have a preponderof one type is nature's deepestmystery. Is it due to a genetic accident, like the spiralshell of a snail or the fact that our hearts are on the lefthand
infinite\342\200\224on years\342\200\224so
preponderance
side?
ParitySelectionRule
D.2.40a)
260
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
D.2.40b)
parity
D.2.41)
unless ea = e^. In other words, the parityodd operator x connects states of oppositeparity. The proof of this follows:
(p\\x\\a)
= (p\\7rl7rx7rl7T\\a) = eaep(
</?xa\302\273,
D.2.42)
which
is impossiblefor a finite nonzero (fi\\x\\a) unless ea and e^ are oppositein sign.Perhaps the readeris familiar with this argument from
D.2.43)
if
and \\pa have the same parity. This selectionrule, due to Wigner, is of ypp radiative transitions between atomic states.As we importance in discussing will discussin greater detail later, radiative transitions take place between of states of opposite parity as a consequence multipole expansion forThis rule was known phenomenologically formalism. from analysis of spectral lines, before the birth of quantum mechanics, as Laporte'srule. It was o rule is a consequencef the parityselecWigner who showed that Laporte's
parityselection
basicHamiltonian H is invariant under parity, nondegenerate cannot possessa permanent [as energy eigenstates a corollary of D.2.43)] electricipolemoment: d
If the
(n\\x\\n)
rule.
= 0.
D.2.44)
This follows trivially from D.2.43), with the nondegenerateassumpbecause a and energy eigenstates re also parity eigenstates[seeD.2.32) D.2.33) For a degeneratestate, it is perfectly all right to have an electric dipole moment. We will seean example of this when we discussthe linear Stark effect in Chapter5. Our considerationsan be generalized: c Operatorsthat are odd under matrix elements only between parity, like p or S#x, have nonvanishing states of oppositeparity. In contrast, operatorsthat are even under parity connect tatesof the same parity. s
assumption,
Parity Nonconservation
The basicHamiltonian responsibleor the socalled f weak interaction of elementary particlesis not invariant under parity. In decay processes e w can have final states which are superpositions f oppositeparity states. o Observablequantities like the angular distribution of decay productscan
4.3.Lattice
Translation
as a Discrete
Symmetry
261
such as (S)#p. It is remarkable that parity depend on pseudoscalars when conservationwas believedto be a sacredprinciple until 1956, Leeand that parity is not conserved in weak interactions and Yang speculated proposed crucial experiments to test the validity of parity conservation. Subsequentexperiments indeedshowed that observableeffects do depend on pseudoscalar uantities such as correlationbetween (S) and p. Because q parity is not conserved in weak interactions, previously thought \"pure\" nuclear and atomic states are, in fact, parity mixtures. These subtle effects have alsobeen found experimentally.
consider another kind of discretesymmetry operation, namely, lattice translation. This subject has extremely important applications in
solidstate physics. Considera periodicpotential in one dimension, where V(x\302\261a) = V(x),as depictedin Figure 4.6. ealistically,we may considerthe motion R
(a)
(b)
FIGURE infinite.
4.6. (a)
periodic potential
Periodic potential in one dimension with periodicity a. (b) The when the barrier height between two adjacent lattice sites becomes
262
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
of an electron in a chain of regularly spacedpositive ions.In general, the Hamiltonian is not invariant under a translation represented t(/) with / by Section 1.6) arbitrary, where t(/) has the property (see
Tt(/)jcr(/)= x + /,
D.3.1)
under the
D.3.2)
= T*(a)HT(a) H.
Becauser(a) is unitary, we have [from D.3.3)]
D.3.3)
[//,r(a)]=0,
r(a) is unitary,
D.3.4)
complex number of modulus Before we determine the eigenkets and eigenvalues of r(a) and examine their physical significance,t is instructive to look at a specialcase i of periodicpotential when the barrier height between two adjacent lattice sitesis made to go to infinity, as in Figure 4.6b. is the ground state for What the potential of Figure 4.6b? Clearly, a state in which the particle is completely localized in one of the lattice sites can be a candidate for the ground state.To be specificlet us assume that the particle is localizedat the nth site and denotethe correspondinget by \\n). This is an energyeigenket k with energyeigenvalue?0, amely, H\\n) = E0\\n). Its wave function (x'\\n) n is finite only in the nth site.However,we note that a similar state localized at some other site also has the same energy ?0,so actually there are denumerably infinite ground states n, where n runs from oo to + oo. Now \\n) is obviously not an eigenket of the latticetranslation when the latticetranslation operator is appliedto it, we operator,because obtain \\n +
\342\200\224
so the Hamiltonian and r(a) can be simultaneously diagonalized.Although it is not Hermitian, so we expectthe eigenvalue to be a
1.
1):
D.3.5)
So despitethe fact that r(a) commutes with //, is an eigenket of not an eigenket of r(a). his is quite consistent with our earlier T theorem on symmetry becausewe have an infinitefold degeneracy. hen W there is such degeneracy, the symmetry of the world need not be the Our task is to find a simultaneous eigenketof symmetry of energy eigenkets. H and r(a). Herewe may recall how we handled a somewhat similar situation with the symmetrical doublewell potential of the previous section.We noted that even though neither \\R) nor \\L) is an eigenket of tt, we could
\\n)\342\200\224which
H\342\200\224is
4.3.Lattice
Translation
as a Discrete
Symmetry
263
\\L)
easily form a symmetrical and an antisymmetrical combinationof  R) and that are parity eigenkets. The caseis analogous here.Let us specifically form a linear combination
00
n
e'\"~\\n),
\342\200\224
'\"e
oo
D.3.6)
where 6 is a real parameter with m < 6 < it. We assert that \\0) is a simultaneous eigenket of H and r(a). hat it is an H eigenket is obvious T because\\n) is an energyeigenketwith eigenvalue Eo, independent of n. To show that it is also an eigenket of the lattice translation operator we apply r(a) as follows:
\342\200\224
r(a)\\d)=
Note that
independent
?
\342\200\224
00
e'n6\\n oo
+ \\)=
?
\342\200\224
00
oo
/0 = e'e\\0).
D.3.7)
this simultaneouseigenket of H and r(a) is parameterized by a continuous parameter d. Furthermore, the energyeigenvalueEo is indepenof 6. Let us now return to the more realistic situation of Figure 4.6a, where the barrier between two adjacent lattice sitesis not infinitely high. We can construct a localizedket \\n) just as before with the property r(a)\\n)= However, this time we expectthat there is some leakage possible ft into neighboring lattice sitesdue to quantummechanicaltunneling. In other words,the wave function (x'\\n) has a tail extending to sitesother than the A7th site. he diagonal elementsof H in the {\\n)} basisare all equal because T of translation invariance, that is,
+1).
D.3.8)
ft, as before.Howeverwe suspectthat H is not completely diagonal in the (ft)} basis due to leakage.Now, supposethe barriers between adjacent sites are high (but not infinite). We then expectmatrix elementsof H between distant sites to be completely negligible. Let us assume that the only nondiagonal elements of importance connect imimmediate neighbors. hat is, T
independentof
(n'\\H\\n)*0 onlyifftr=ft
In
or
known
ftr=ft+l.
as the
tightbinding
D.3.9)
ap
solidstatephysicsthis assumption is
Let us define
approximation.
= <ft+l#ft) A.
D.3.10
Clearly, A is again independent of n due to translation invariance of the Hamiltonian. To the extent that \\n) and \\n') are orthogonal when ft # ft',
264
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
we obtain
H\\n)
D.3.11
00
iH$
Note that
\\n) is no longer an energy eigenket. we have done with the potential of Figure 4.6b, let us form a linear combination
As
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
oo
*>.
D.3.12
Clearly, \\6) is an eigenket of translation operator r(a) becausethe stepsin s D.3.7)till hold.A natural question is, is \\6) an energyeigenket?To answer this question,we apply H:
D.3.13
The big differencebetween this and the previous situation is that the energy eigenvalue now dependson the continuous real parameter 6.The degeneris lifted as A becomes of finite, and we have a continuous distribution between Eo 2A and Eo +2A. SeeFigure 4.7,wherewe energy eigenvalues visualizehow the energy levelsstart forming a continuous energy band as A
degeneracy
\342\200\224
is increasedfrom zero.
function
To seethe physical meaning of the parameter 6 let us study the wave F (x'\\0). or the wave function of the latticetranslatedstate r(a)\\0),
FIGURE
0 4.7.
A
Energy levels forming
a continuous
energy band
as A
is increased
from
zero.
4.3.Lattice we obtain
by
Translation
as a Discrete
Symmetry
265
Thus D.3.7).
letting
= D.3.14) (x'\\T(a)\\6) (x'a\\d) But t(^) act on (jc'. we can also let r(a) operate on \\6) and use = (x'\\r(a)\\0) eie(x'\\O),
D.3.15
so
)
We
?)t$.
with
D.3.16
period a, as we can
= eikx'uk(x')9
with
D.3.17)
= eik<x'a)uk(x'a)eikx'uk(x')eika.
D.3.18
Thus we get the important condition known as Bloch'stheorem: The wave w function of 0), hich is an eigenketof r(a),can be written as a plane wave eikxf tjmes a periodicfunction with periodicity a. Notice that the only fact we used was that \\6) is an eigenket of r(a) with eigenvalue e~lB [see In D.3.7)]. particular, the theorem holdseven if the tightbinding approxibreaks D.3.9) down. We are now in a position to interpret our earlier result D.3.13) for is a plane wave We \\0) given by D.3.12). know that the wave function characterized by the propagation wave vector k modulated by a periodic As 6 function uk{x')[see D.3.17)]. varies from it to 77, the wave vector k varies from m/a to m/a.The energyeigenvalueE now dependson k as follows:
approximation
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
D.3.19)
Notice that this energy eigenvalueequation is independent of the detailed shape of the potential as long as the tightbinding approximation is valid. Note also that there is a cutoff in the wave vector k of the Bloch wave = m/a.Equation D.3.19) function D.3.17) by definesa dispersion given A curve, as shown in Figure 4.8. s a result of tunneling, the denumerably infinitefold degeneracy is now completely lifted, and the allowed energy
\\k\\
the Brillouin zone. So far we have considered only one particle moving in a periodic In a more realistic situation we must look at many electrons potential. moving in such a potential. Actually the electrons satisfy the Pauli exclusion more systematically in Chapter 6, and they start principle,as we will discuss the band. In this way, the main qualitative features of metals, filling
known ?0+2A,
as
266
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
E0+2A
?o2A
n
Ia
o 4.8.
7T
FIGURE
ir/a.
of a semiconductors, nd the like can be understood as a consequence translation invariance supplementedby the exclusionprinciple. The reader may have noted the similarity between the symmetrical doublewellproblem of Section 4.2 and the periodic potential of this we section. omparing Figures 4.3 and 4.6, note that they can be regarded C as oppositeextremes (two versus infinite) of potentials with a finite number of troughs.
rax =
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
vK(x),
D.4.1)
then x( t) is also a possible solution in the same force field derivable from V. It is, of course, to note that we do not have a dissipativeforce important
4.4.The
267
Reverse
plt=o
p
lf=o
FIGURE
Pl/o* \"Pi/Co
trajectory
which stops at t
its motion
move and accelerate? With a magnetic field you may be able to tell the difference.Imagine that you are taking the motion picture of a spiraling electron trajectory in a magnetic field. You may be able to tell whether the motion picture is run forward or backwardby comparing the senseof rotation with the magnetic pole labeling N and S. However, from a microscopic oint of view, B is p producedby moving chargesvia an electriccurrent; if you could reverse the current that causesB, then the situation would be quite symmetrical.In terms of the picture shown in Figure 4.10, may have figured out that N you and S are mislabeled! nother more formal way of saying all this is that the A Maxwellequations, or example, f
A block sliding on a table deceleratesdue to friction) and eventually ( stops. But have you ever seen a block on a table spontaneously start to
\"Pi/Co:.
VE = 4irp, VxB c dE dt
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
4nj
xE =
c dt , D.4.2)
under
+ and the Lorentz force equation F = e[E (l/c)(vXB)]are invariant t* t providedwe also let
E>E,
V.
D.4.3)
Let us now look at wave mechanics,where the basicequation of the w Schrodinger ave equation is
1m
Suppose\\p(x, t) is a solution. We can easily verify
\342\200\224
D.4.4)
that
\\p(x,
\342\200\224
conjugation
/) is not a solution, becauseof the appearance of the firstorder time derivative. However, \\/>*(x, t) is a solution, as you may verify by complexconjugaof D.4.4). is instructive to convince ourselvesof this point for an It
268
Symmetry in Quantum
Mechanics
8
v
\"\\J
EI
ectron
traj ectory
FIGURE
4.10. Electron
trajectory
a magnet.
substituting
,t)=
into the
must
un{x)elE\302\273t/h,
/) =
u*{x)elE\302\273t/h
D.4.5)
Thus we conjecture that time reversal e Schrodingerquation D.4.4). have something to do with complexconjugation. If at / = 0 the wave
function
is given
by
D.4.6)
state is given timereversed then the wave function for the corresponding We will later show that this is indeed the casefor the wave by function of a spinlesssystem.As an example, may easily checkthis you point for the wave function of a plane wave; seeProblem8 of this chapter.
(xa)*.
on Digression
Symmetry
Operations
Beforewe begin a systematictreatment of the timereversaloperator, symmetry operations are in order. Considera symmetry operation
is natural
D.4.8)
Indeed,for
parity,
this
If is indeedthe case.
symmetry
operations such as rotations, translations, and even \\a) is rotated and j8)is also rotated in the
4.4.The
269
same manner, (/3a) is unchanged. Formally this arisesfrom the fact that, t in for the symmetry operations considered the previous sections,he correis unitary, so corresponding symmetry operator
time However, in discussing reversal,we seethat requirement D.4.8) be too restrictive. Instead, we merely impose the weaker requirement that
turns
D.4.9)
out to
\\0\\a)\\
= \\(p\\a)\\.
D.4.10)
way;
D.4.11
worksequally well. We
section because pursue the latter from our earlier discussion basedon the Schrodingerequation we inferred that time reversal has something to do with complexconjugation. possibility in this Definition. The transformation > fi> = 0\\a)9 \\a)
j8> > jB> = 6\\/3)
D.4.12)
is said to be antiunitary
if
= <j85) </?a>*,
d{cx\\a) +
c2j8\302\273
= cfO\\a) + c?0j8>.
In such a case operator 8 is an antiunitary the alone defines an antilinear operator. We now claim that an antiunitary operator can be written as 0 = UK, D.4.14)
where U is a unitary operator and K is the complexconjugate operator that forms the complexconjugate of any coefficientthat multiplies a ket (and stands on the right of K). Before checking D.4.13) us examine the let of the K operator. Suppose have a ket multiplied by a complex we property
number
c.We then
have
Kc\\a)
= c*K\\a).
D.4.15)
One may further ask,What happensif Under (la')}? the action K we have
a'
a
D.4.16)
Notice that K acting on the base ket does not change the base ket. The
270
Symmetry in Quantum
Mechanics
0 0
D.4.17)
10/
and there is nothing to be changed by K. The reader may wonder, for instance,whether the Sy eigenketsfor a spin \\ system change under K. The answer is that if the Sz eigenketsare usedas base kets,we must change the becausethe S eigenketsA.1.14) undergo under K Sv eigenkets K
/
D.4.18)
On the other hand, if the S eigenketsthemselvesare usedas the base kets, we do not change the Sy eigenketsunder the action of K. Thus the effectof K changes with the basis.As a result, the form of U in D.4.14) depends also on the particular representation (that is, the choiceof base kets) used. Gottfried puts it aptly: \"If the basisis changed, the work of U and K has to be reapportioned.\" to 9 = UK and D.4.13), first checkproperty D.4.13b let us Returning We have
B(Cl\\a)
D.4.19)
so D.4.13b) indeedholds. Before checking D.4.13a),assert that it is we safer to work with the action of 6 on kets only. We can figure out always how the bras changejust by looking at the correspondingets.In particular, k it is not necessaryto consider6 acting on bras from the right, nor is it to necessary define dK We have
e
a a a
D.4.20)
4.4.The
As
271
a'
a\"
= </?!<*>*,
D.4.21)
so this checks. In order for D.4.10) be satisfied, it is of physical interest to to and antiunitary. Other considerjust two types of transformation\342\200\224unitary via are related to either of the preceding trivial phasechanges. possibilities The proof of this assertionis actually very difficult and will not be discussed
further
TimeReversalOperator We are finally in a position to present a formal theory of time to be distinguished reversal. Let us denote the timereversaloperator by from 0, a general antiunitary operator.Consider
0,
where
0a)is the timereversedstate.Moreappropriately, 0a)should be called the motionreversedstate. If a)is a momentum eigenstate p'),we J expect to be  p') up to a possible phase.Likewise, is to be reversed 0a)
\342\200\224
a)>0a),
D.4.22)
We now deducethe fundamental property of the timereversalopera by looking at the time evolution of the timereversedstate. Consider physical system represented a ket by say at / = Then at a slightly later time / = S/, the system is found in
a),
0.
where H is the Hamiltonian that characterizesthe time evolution.Insteadof the preceding we say at / = 0, and then let equation, suppose first apply the system evolveunder the influenceof the Hamiltonian H.We then have
(iff
\\
1\342\200\224SMa>,
D.4.23)
0,
at 8t
\342\200\224
Ha>.
D.4.24a)
If motion obeys symmetry under time reversal, we expect the preceding state ket to be the same as
a,/0= 0;/=\302\253/>
D.4.24b)
272
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
that
is, first considera state ket at earlier time t = 8t, and then reverse p
\342\200\224
4.11. Mathematically,
D.4.25
If the preceding relation is to be true for
any
= /7/0> 0/7/>,
D.4.26
where the blank ket  ) emphasizesthat D.4.26)s to be true for any ket. i We now argue that 0 cannot be unitary if the motion of time reversal is to make sense.Suppose0 were unitary. It would then be a legitimate to cancel the z's in D.4.26), nd we would have the operator equation
_
Consider an energy eigenket \\n)
corresponding
ZJQk
_ ?\\ ZJ
(A
yi\\
D.4.27),
with energy eigenvalue En. The corretimereversedstate would be 0w),and we would have, because of
H@\\n)
@H\\n)
(En)Q\\n).
D.4.28
This equation says that 0w) is an eigenketof the Hamiltonian with energy of eigenvalues En. But this is nonsensicaleven in the very elementarycase a free particle. know that the energy spectrum of the free particle is We T positive semidefinite\342\200\224from 0 to +oo. here is no state lower than a
\342\200\224
Momentum
beforereversal
Momentum Momentum
after
beforereversal
reversal
\342\200\224o
at
Momentum
after
f=
reversal
(b)
time reversal at time t
FIGURE
(a)
= 0 and / = + St.
4.4.The
273
particle at rest (momentum eigenstatewith momentum eigenvaluezero); the energy spectrum ranging from oo to 0 would be completelyunacceptable. We can also see this by looking at the structure of the freeparticle w Hamiltonian. We expectp to change sign but not p2; yet D.4.27) ould
\342\200\224
imply that
__
^^\342\200\224H. 2m
D.4.29)
@/7/> = i@H\\ > D.4.30) Now antilinear property D.4.13b). at last we can cancel the i 'sin D.4.26) by to leading, finally, via D.4.30) D 4 31) the expresses fundamental property of the Hamiltonian Equation D.4.31) under time reversal.With this equation the difficulties mentionedearlier [see to a D.4.27) D.4.29)]re absent, and we obtain physically sensibleresults. From now on we will always take 0 to be antiunitary. We mentioned earlier that it is best to avoid an antiunitary operator on bras from the right. Nevertheless,we may use acting
\302\256H=H\302\256
becomes D.4.26)
All these arguments strongly suggest that if time reversal is to be a in D.4.26) useful symmetry at all, we are not allowed to cancel the hence, had better be antiunitary. In this casethe righthand side of
i's
\302\251
</?0a>,
which
D.4.32)
is always to be understood as
\302\253j8).(ea\302\273
D.4.33)
and never as
\302\253/?@)\302\273.
D.4.34)
In fact, we do not even attempt to define This is one placewhere the Dirac braket notation is a little confusing. After all, that notation was invented to handle linear operators, not antilinear operators. With this cautionary remark, we are in a position to discussthe behavior of operatorsunder time reversal.We continue to take the point of view that the operator is to act on kets
(/?0.
D.4.35)
is often convenientto talk about particular, observables are odd or even under time reversal. We start with an important
namely,
<j8\302\256a>
identity,
(al\302\251\302\2561*\302\2511!/?),
D.4.36)
where
\302\256
274
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
unitary
nature of
let us define
D.4.37)
w By dual correspondence e have
D.4.38)
Hence,
D.4.39)
which proves the identity. In particular, for Hermitian
(P\\A\\a)
A observables we get
= (&\\@A@l\\p).
D.4.40)
We
D.4.41)
Note that
follows:
this
equation, together with D.4.40), gives a phaserestriction on A taken with respect to time reversed states as
s a),o that
(a\\A\\a)
D.4.43)
where (fi^4fi) is the expectation value taken with respect to the timereversed state. As an example, let us look at the expectation value of p. It is reasonableto expectthat the expectation value of p taken with respectto the timereversedstate be of oppositesign.Thus
= (apa) Ep5),
D.4.44)
= p0p')
Equation D.4.46) eigenket with eigenvalue
with agrees
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
\302\251p\302\251\021\302\251^')
= (p'Hp'>.
\342\200\224
D.4.46)
i 0p')s a momentum
p'.
4.4.The
275
= x') x')
(up to a phase)
D.4.47)
A A AO\\
We
(ll\\
a\\x\\a)
(axa).
I I \\
/ D.4.48) commutation
relation
= [xt9Pj]\\) ih8tJ\\)9
where the blank ket  ) stands for we D.4.49), have
which any
D.4.49)
ket. Applying
0 to both
sidesof
ih9
D.4.51)
Note that the
by virtue of the fact that reason for taking to
This can be given as yet another otherwise, we will be forced to o abandon either D.4.45) r D.4.47)! Similarly, to preserve
0 is antiunitary.
be
antiunitary;
commutation
[jt,Jj\\=ihe,jkJkt
the angularmomentum operator must
D.4.52)
time
be odd under
This is consistentfor spinless we system where J is just x X p. Alternatively, couldhave deducedthis relation by noting that the rotational operator and the timereversaloperator commute (note the extra /!).
Wave Function
Supposeat some given time, say at / = 0, a spinlesssingleparticle system is found in a state represented \\a). Its wave function (x'a) by appearsas the expansion coefficientin the position representation
\\a)
jd3x'\\K')(x'\\a).
D.4.54)
Applying
the timereversaloperator
D.4.55)
0x')is x')itself. We
276
Symmetry in Quantum
Mechanics
D.4.56)
Y\342\204\242.
inferred earlier by looking at the Schrodinger wave equation [seeD.4.5)]. The angular part of the wave function is given by a spherical harmonic With the usual phaseconventionwe have Now YimF,4>) is the wave function we D.4.56) deduce
for
\\l,
D.4.58)
If we study the probability current density B.4.16) a wave function of for type C.6.22) going like R{r)Ytm, we shall concludethat for m > 0 the current flows in the counterclockwisedirection, as seen from the positive zaxis. wave function for the correspondingimereversedstate has its t The probability current flowing in the oppositedirection becausethe sign of m
A is reversed. ll this
is very
a nontrivial consequencef timereversalinvariance, we state an o important theorem on the reality of the energy eigenfunctionof a spinless
As
particle.
and Theorem. Suppose Hamiltonian is invariant under time reversal the energy eigenket \\n) is nondegenerate;then the corresponding energy is real {or,more generally, a real function times a phasefactor eigenfunction independentof x).
the
first
note that
H<d\\n)
\302\256\\n)
= SH\\n)= En@\\n),
D.4.59)
so \\n) and have the same energy. The nondegeneracy assumption us to conclude that \\n) and S\\n) must representthe same state; prompts otherwise there would be two different states with the same energy En, an
obvious contradiction! Let us recall that the wave functions for and respectively.They must be the 0ft)are
(x'\302\253) (x'\302\253)*>
<x'\302\253>
\\n)
and
same\342\200\224that
is,
<x'\302\253>*
D.4.60)
for all practical more precisely,hey can differ at most by a t factor independent of x. phase
purposes\342\200\224or,
Thus if we have, for instance, a nondegeneratebound state, its wave function is always real. n the other hand, in the hydrogen atom with / =?0, O m =? 0, the energy eigenfunctioncharacterizedby definite /, m) quantum numbers is complexbecause is complex;this does not contradict the
(\302\253,
Y\342\204\242
4.4.The
277
theorem because\\n9l9m) and \\n,l, m) are degenerate.Similarly, the wave function of a plane wave elp'x/his complex,but it is degeneratewith e~ipx/h We seethat for a spinless system, the wave function for the timereversed state, say at / = 0, is simply obtained by complexconjugation. In or the terms of ket \\a) written as in D.4.16)in D.4.54), 0 operator is the K itself becauseK and 0 have the same effect complexconjugate operator We when acting on the baseket \\a') (or x')). may note, however,that the situation is quite different when the ket a) is expandedin terms of the 0 momentum eigenket because must change p') into  p') as follows:
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
a) =
It is apparent that the momentumspace wave function of the timereversed state is not just the complex conjugate of the original momentumspace wave function; rather, we must identify </>*( p') as the momentumspace wave function for the timereversedstate. This situation once again ilillustrates the basic point that the particular form of 0 dependson the particular representation used.
\342\200\224
Time Reversalfor a Spin \\ System The situation is evenmore interesting for a particle with in particular. We recall from Section 3.2 that the eigenket of S#h can be written as eigenvalue h/2
h;
spin\342\200\224spin
\\,
with
+) = e'WV'W*+>>
D.4.62)
angles fi and
a,
h;
+ +) = elS:a/helSvp/h@\\) = n\\h]
that
).
D.4.63)
D.4.64)
In general, we saw earlier that the product UK is an antiunitary operator. and D.4.64) with set equal to UK, and noting that K Comparing acting on the base ket  + ) gives just ), we seethat
D.4.63)
+
2S y
h
K,
D.4.65)
where r\\ standsfor an arbitrary phase(a complex number of modulus unity). Another way to be convinced of D.4.65) verify that if x(n;+ ) is the is to + twocomponent eigenspinorcorrespondingto n; ) [in the sensethat
278
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
D.4.66)
e\302\253^/A+^
= e/^/*> +> D.4.67) a position to work out the effectof 0,written as = + _^
D.4.68
0 onceagain:
D.4.69
or (where operator) for any spin orientation. This is an extraordinary result. It is crucial to note here that our conclusionis completely independent of the choice of phase; D.4.70)holds no matter what phase convention we may use for 17. In contrast, we may note that two successivepplications of 0 to a spinless a state give
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
02=l,
D.4.70)
\302\2512=+l
D.4.71
Thus the
f generalizesor arbitrary
D.4.72a) 02y halfinteger) =  \\j halfinteger) D.4.72b) 02y integer) = + \\j integer). W of 02 is given by ( 1JJ. e first note that D.4.65) eigenvalue
\342\200\224
to
Q = neMy/hK.
D.4.73)
Fora ket
\\a)
expandedin terms of
\\j9
D.4.74)
4.4.The
But
279
D.4.75) e2Mv/*Umy = (_iJ^m), as is evident from the propertiesof angularmomentum eigenstates under rotation by 277. In D.4.72b), integer) may stand for the spin state \\j D.4.76)
of a twoelectron system or the orbital state /,m) of a spinless particle.It is is an integer. Likewise,\j halfinteger) may stand, important only that \ for example, or a threeelectronsystem in any configuration.Actually, for a f system made up exclusivelyof electrons,any system with an odd (even) number of electrons\342\200\224regardless of their spatial orientation (for example, relative orbital angular momentum)\342\200\224is odd (even)under @2; they neednot
even be J2 eigenstates! We make a parenthetical remark on the phase convention. In our earlier discussion basedon the position representation,we saw that with the usual convention for spherical harmonics it is natural to choosethe arbiphase for /,ra) under time reversal so that
arbitrary
= 0/,m) (1)\"V,m).
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
D.4.77)
Someauthors find
refers to / or s (for an integer spin system).We may for is this compatiblewith D.4.72a) a spin \\ system when we ask, naturally visualize \\j\\ m) as being built up of \"primitive\" spin \\ objectsaccording to is Wigner and Schwinger.It is easy to seethat D.4.72a) indeedconsistent to we choose in D.4.73) be + /. In fact, in general, we can take 17 provided of regardless whether for
any
(j
D.4.78)
T s chapter. he reader hould be warned,however, that this is not the only convention found in the literature. See, or instance,Frauenfelder and f ( F it Henley1974.) orsomephysical applications, is more convenient to use other
j\342\200\224either
= i2m\\j,
elementsimpleis not the phase convention that makesthe s timereversal operator ropertiessimple.We emphasizeonceagain that p
operator matrix
J\302\261
op
eigenstates Having worked out the behavior of angularmomentum under time reversal, we are in a position to study once again the expectation values of a Hermitian operator.Recalling D.4.43), obtain under time we reversal (canceling i2m factors) the
<a,7, m\\A\\a9 7, m) =
\302\261
(a,y,  m\\A\\a9
7, m).
D.4.80)
280
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
of Now supposeA is a component of a spherical tensor T^k\\ Because the it is sufficient to examinejust the matrix elementof WignerEckart theorem, I to the q = 0 component.n general, T{k) (assumed be Hermitian) is said to be even or odd under time reversal depending how its q = 0 component on satisfies the upper or lower sign in
.
for Equation D.4.80) A , j9
m\\T\342\204\242\\a9
D.4.81
j9
m\\T^\\a9
 m).
D.4.82
Due to
phase.We
= ,77,0O^.0@,77,0)
(
l)kT0(k)
+ (q*0components),
(\342\200\224
D.4.83
and
a,
1)*,and the q # 0 comgive vanishing contributions when sandwiched between (a9j9rn\\ j9 m). The net result is
a, 7, m>. D.4.84
As an
example,aking k=l9 the expectationvalue (x) taken with respectto t of eigenstates 7, m vanishes.We may argue that we already know (x) = 0 from parity inversion if the expectationvalue is taken with respectto parity But eigenstates[see D.2.41)]. note that here \\a9 7, m) need not be parity For eigenkets! example, the \\j9m) for spin \\ particlescould be cs\\s1/2)
Considerchargedparticlesin an externalelectricor magneticfield.If we have only a static electric field interacting with the electric charge, the interaction part of the Hamiltonian is just
F(x)= e4>(x),
D.4.85
of
where <>(x) is the electrostaticpotential. Because <j>(x) is a real function the timereversaleven operator x, we have
D.4.86
does not lead to an interesting case, D.4.86) parity conservation law. The reason is that
even if
Unlike the
4.4.The
281
timereversal quantum number.\" As we already mentioned, requirement does, reality of D.4.86) however,lead to a nontrivial phase and a nondegeneratewave function for a spinlesssystem [see D.4.59)
restriction\342\200\224the
o Another farreachingconsequencef timereversalinvariance is the H and 0 commute, and let \\n) and be Kramers degeneracy. Suppose the energy eigenket and its timereversedstate, respectively.It is evident from D.4.86) \\n) and @\\n) belong to the same energy eigenvalue that = QH\\n) = EJd\\n)). The question is, Does \\n) represent the En(H@\\n) If can differ at most by a phase same state as 0ai)? it does, \\n) and factor. Hence,
0\302\253) 0\302\253)
D.4.60)].
D.4.88)
Applying
\302\2562\\n)
= &elS\\n) = e~lS@\\n) =
But this
so we are led to conclude that \\n) and which have the same energy, must correspond distinct to is, there must be a This of degeneracy. means, for instance, that for a system composed an odd in number of electrons an externalelectricfield E, each energy levelmust be at least twofold degenerateno matter how complicatedE may be.Consideralong this line have interesting applications to electrons in crystals where oddelectron evenelectronsystems exhibit very different behavand Historically, Kramers inferred degeneracyof this kind by looking at explicit solutionsof the Schrodingerequation; subsequently,Wigner pointed out that Kramers degeneracyis a consequencef timereversalinvariance. o Let us now turn to interactions with an external magnetic field.The Hamiltonian H may then contain terms like
always
\342\200\2241,
Considerations
behaviors.
D.4.90) (B = VXA), where the magnetic field is to be regarded external.The operators S and as p are odd under time reversal; these interaction terms therefore do lead to
SB,
pA + Ap,
D 4 91)
a trivial example, for a spin \\ system the spinup state  + ) and its timereversedstate  ) no longer have the same energy in the presence of an external magnetic field. In general, Kramers degeneracy in a system containing an odd number of electronscan be lifted by applying an external magnetic field. Notice that when we treat B as external, we do not change B under time reversal; this is becausethe atomic electron is viewed as a closed quantummechanical system to which we apply the timereversaloperator.
As
\342\200\224
282
Symmetry
in Quantum
Mechanics
This should not be confused with our earlier remarks concerning the invariance of the Maxwellequations D.4.2) nd the Lorentz force equation a under t > t and D.4.3). we were to apply time reversalto the whole There world, for example, even to the currents in the wire that producesthe B field!
\342\200\224
PROBLEMS
their degeneracies, massdistinguishable particles): for the following systems(assume equal a. Three noninteracting spin \\ particles in a box of length L. b. Four noninteracting spin \\ particles in a box of length L. vector 2. Let J^J denotethe translation operator (displacement d); ^(h, <?),
a. ^ and (d and d' in different directions). and ^(n',<//)h and h' in different directions). b. ( c. and d.^(h, and 3.A quantummechanicalstate ^ is known to be a simultaneous eigen<\302\256(h,<f>)
are the axis and angle of rotation, operator.Which, if any, of the following
</>
^
77.
3TA
<J>)
77.
What
can you say about the eigenvalues of A and B for state Illustrate your point using the parity operator (which can be chosento
satisfy
771\") and the momentum operator. spin \\ particle is bound to a fixed center by a sphericallysymmetrical
= 77 ~1=
4.
potential.
your result in (b) is understandable in view of the transformation propertiesof the operator S#x under rotations and under spaceinversion (parity). 5. Because weak (neutralcurrent)interactions there is a parityviolating of potential between the atomic electron and the nucleus as follows:
c. Show that
a. Write
function
^/J^1/2'\021^1/2.
where S and p are the spin and momentum operatorsof the electron, and the nucleus is assumed to be situated at the origin. As a result, the ground state of an alkali atom, usually characterized by \\n9l9j\\m) actually contains very tiny contributions from other eigenstates as
Problems
283
follows:
n, /, /, m)
m)
n'l'j'm'
w On the basisof symmetry considerations lone, hat can you say about a w m'), hich give rise to nonvanishing contributions? Suppose (n\\ the radial wave functions and the energy levelsare all known. Indicate
/',/',
Cn>ifm*.
Do we
get
further
restrictions on
0
Vo
a.
b\\
is very high comparedto the quantized energies f o for obtain an approximate expression the energy splitlowlying states, betweenthe two lowestlyingstates. 7. a. Let i/(x,) be the wave function of a spinless t particle corresponding to a plane wave in three dimensions.Showthat i/*(x, is the wave function for the plane wave with the momentum direction
Assuming
that Vo
splitting
\342\200\224t)
answer. a 10. . What is the timereversed corresponding 2)(/?)y, state to m)l b.Usingthe propertiesof time reversal and rotations, prove
tify
eigenvalue of x(n) (in terms of the polar and azimuthal anglesC and 7 that characterize n) verify that /a2x*(n) is the twocomponent eigenspinor ith the spin direction reversed. w 8.a. Assuming that the Hamiltonian is invariant under time reversal, prove that the wave function for a spinlessnondegenerate system at any given instant of time can always be chosento be real, b.The wave function for a planewave state at t = 0 is given by a complexfunction eip x/h. Why doesthis not violate timereversal in variance? 9.Let <j)(p') be the momentumspace wave function for state that is, I 4>(p')= (p'la)sthe momentumspace wave function for the timereversedstate or given by <>(p'), <K~\"P')> ^(p')* ^(\"\"P')?
\342\200\242
reversed.
a),
0a)
your
V(x)
284
Symmetry in Quantum
Mechanics
reversal invariance prove for any energy eigenstate. (This is known as quenching of orbital an ei If the wave function of such a nondegenerate gular momentum.) is expandedas genstate
22
/ m
40,
of phase restrictions do we obtain on F/m(r)? 12. he Hamiltonian for a spin 1system is given by T
what
kind
Solve this problem exactly to find the normalizedenergyeigenstatesand Hamiltonian of this kind actually apeigenvalues. (A spindependent in crystal physics.)Is this Hamiltonian invariant under time appears reversal? How do the normalized eigenstates you obtained transform under time reversal?
CHAPTER5
Methods Approximation
Few problems in quantum mechanics\342\200\224with either timeindependent or be solved exactly. Inevitably we are Hamiltonians\342\200\224can timedependent forced to resort to some form of approximation methods. One may argue to that with the advent of highspeedcomputers it is always possible obtain the desiredsolution numerically to the requisite degreeof accuracy; neverit remains important to understand the basic physics of the solutions even before we embark on ambitious computer approximate of calculations. This chapter is devoted to a fairly systematic discussion solutions to boundstate problems. approximate
nevertheless,
E.1.1)
285
286
Approximation Methods
where the V = 0 problem is assumed to have been solved in the sensethat both the exact energyeigenkets\\n@)) and the exact energyeigenvaluesE^0) are known:
H0\\n^)= E^\\n((\302\273).
We
E.1.2)
full
E.1.3)
where V is known as the perturbation; it is not, in general, the fullpotential For operator. example, supposewe considerthe hydrogen atom in an external electricr magnetic field. The unperturbed Hamiltonian Ho is o taken to be the kinetic energy p2/2m and the Coulomb potential due to the o O presencef the proton nucleus e2/r. nly that part of the potential due to the interaction with the external E or B field is representedby the perturbation V. it is Insteadof E.1.3) customary to solve
\342\200\224
(H0+ \\V)\\n)
where
= En\\n)9
E.1.4)
X is a continuous real parameter. This parameter is introduced to keep track of the number of times the perturbation enters.At the end of the calculation we may set X >1to get back to the fullstrength case.n other I words,we assumethat the strength of the perturbation can be controlled. The parameter X can be visualized to vary continuously from 0 to 1,the X = 0 case to corresponding the unperturbedproblem and X = 1correspondcorresponding
w\302\260>
In to the fullstrength problem of E.1.3).physical situations where this we a approximation method is applicable, expectto see smooth transition of into En as X is \"dialed\" from 0 to into \\n) and The method rests on the expansion of the energy eigenvaluesand in energy eigenkets power of X. This means that we implicitly assume the of the energy eigenvaluesand eigenkets in a complex Xplane analyticity around X = 0.Of course,if our method is to be of practical interest, good approximations can better be obtained by taking only one or two terms in
E$\302\273
1.
the
expansion.
The TwoStateProblem
let us
Beforewe embark on a systematicpresentation of the basicmethod, the expansion in X might indeedbe valid in the exactly solubletwostate problem we have encountered many times already. Sup
seehow
5.1. TimeIndependent
Perturbation
Theory: Nondegenerate
Case
287
that
+ XK12l@>><2@)+XK212(O)>A(O), E.1.5) where l@)) and 2@))are the energyeigenketsfor the X = 0 problem, and we considerthe case Vn = V22 = 0. In this representation the H may be by represented a square matrix as follows: H=
21
xk12
z
E.1.6)
where we have used the basisformed by the unperturbed energy eigenkets. The V matrix must, of course, e Hermitian; let us solve the casewhen Vl2 b and V2l are real:
Vn
= Vl*2,
V2l
= V2*;
E.1.7) E.1.8)
hence, by Hermiticity
= V2l.
This can always be done by adjusting the phaseof 2@))relative to that of T l@)). he problemof obtaining the energy eigenvalueshere is completely analogous to that of solving the spinorientationproblem, where the anais analogue of E.1.6) ' ai H = o o#a = 0 a3 E.1.9)
aoa3
where we assumea = (ax,0, is small and ao,ava3 are all a3) eigenvaluesfor this problem are known to be just are E.1.6)
X2F12
real.The
E.1.10
By
E.1.11
Let us supposeXF12 small compared with the relevant energy scale,the is differenceof the energyeigenvaluesof the unperturbed problem:
We
E.1.12
can then use
.
\\/l
+e
=l+ey+
e2
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242
E.1.13
presenceof
288
Approximation
Methods
E.1.14)
(?f These are expressions that we can readily obtain using the general forto be developedshortly. It is also possible write down the energy formalism to in analogy with the spinorientationproblem. eigenkets The reader might be led to believe that a perturbation expansion this is not always existsfor a sufficiently weak perturbation. Unfortunately the A necessarily case. s an elementaryexample,considera onedimensional probleminvolving a particle of mass m in a very weak squarewellpotential of depth Vo (V=Vo for a < x < a, V=0 for \\x\\> a). This problem
E=
We might
Bma2/h2)\\XV\\2,
E.1.15)
E.1.15)
regard the square well as a very weak perturbation to be addedto the freeparticle Hamiltonian and interpret result as the energy shift in the ground state from zero to XF2.Specifically,because is this quadratic in F, we might be tempted to associate as the energy shift of the ground state computed according to secondorder erturbation theory. p if t However, this view is false because this were the case,he system would also admit an E < 0 state for a repulsivepotential casewith X negative, which would be sheernonsense. Let us now examine the radius of convergenceof seriesexpansion If we go back to the exact expression and regard it as a of function of a complex variable X, we see that as X is increased from zero, branch points are encountered at
E.1.15)
E.1.14).
E.1.11)
case is
=1
l If
this
@)_ ?@)
Seethe
5.1. TimeIndependent
Perturbation
Theory: Nondegenerate
Case
289
E.1.18
the sense that the closurerelation = holds. LJh@))(h@) Furthermore, we assumehere that the energyspectrum is nondegenerate;n the next section we will relax this assumption. We are i interestedin obtaining the energyeigenvaluesand eigenketsfor the problem defined by To be consistent with we should write as
The set
{ @))} is complete in n
E.1.4).
E.1.18)
E.1.4)
E.1.19
\\n)x
this correct but more cumbersomenotation. continuous parameter A is increased from zero, we expectthe for the nth eigenket to depart from its unperturbed energy eigenvalue En value so we define the energy shift for the nih levelas follows:
the energy eigenvalues E^X) and energy eigenkets are functions of the continuous parameter A; however,we will usually
that
dispensewith
E^\302\260\\
We may
\302\253@)).
be tempted to invert the operator Ho; however,in general, the inverse operator l/(?w@) HQ) is ill defined becauseit may act on Fortunately in our case Aw)w) has no componentalong on the as can easily be seenby multiplying both sidesof by
\342\200\224
{) ?
\342\200\224
E.1.20
E.1.21
E.1.21)
\302\253@)),
Ef\302\256
(XV\342\200\224
(\302\253@)
left:
E.1.22
Supposewe define the complementaryprojectionoperator
n
E.1.23
it multiplies
<f>n
on
Explicitly,
1
17@)
_ ff
*,E ^ ^
\342\200\236\302\273.'
17@)
<J*w>)<*m. _ F@)
E.124
Also from
Jn>.
E.1.25
290
We may
Approximation Methods
as E.1.21)
as However,this cannot be correct because X > 0, we must have \\n) > \\n@)) and A^>0. Nevertheless, even for X =? 0, we can always add to \\n) a solution to the homogeneous equation E.1.18), namely, cn\\n@)), so a suitable final form is
\\n)
= cn(X)\\n^) +
^(XKAw)#i>,
E.1.27
where
\\imcn(X)=l.
Note that
For reasonswe will see later, usual normalization convention Rather, we set
it
E.1.28
E.1.29
is convenient to depart
from the
(n\\n)=l.
E.1.30
even for X # 0. We can always do this if we are not worried about the overall normalization because only effectof setting cn # 1is to introduce the a common multiplicative factor. Thus, if desired,we can always normalize the ket at the very end of the calculation. It is also customary to write
E.1.31
^(O)_
and similarly
E.132 1 1
1
so we have
E.1.33
E.134
We
)
Everything dependson the two equations in Our basic strategy is to expand \\n) and A^ in the powersof
and
then
5.1. TimeIndependent
Perturbation
Theory: Nondegenerate
Case
291
and match the appropriate coefficients.This is justified becauseE.1.34) hold for all values of X between 0 and We
1.
beginby writing
n n
'
'
*
\342\200\224n
Substituting
powersof
we obtain
0(X2):
E.1.37)
only up to
we E.1.36),get
so to evaluate the energy shift up to order X^ it is sufficient to know when order X^\021. We now look at E.1.34); it is expandedusing
\302\253>
(\\nw)
+ X\\n{1)) +
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242)\342\200\242
E.1.38
X,
we have
**0
with \\n(l)), it
0(X):
n
E.1.40
Knowing using
as E.1.39) follows:
A(^\\
X2term
in
ket equation
also E.1.38)
0(X2): kB))=
E^H
E.1.41
292
Approximation
Methods
Clearly, we can continue in this fashion as long as we wish. Our operator method is very compact; it is not necessaryto write down the indiceseach time. Of course,o do practical calculations we must use at the end the t form of as given by E.1.23). explicit To seehow all this works, we write down the explicit expansion for the energy shift
<j>n
=Z7
\342\200\224n
W I2
where
Vnk
^(
1^
^n
142)
= (n@)\\V\\k@))
* (n\\V\\k),
E.1.43
goesas follows:
kets. elements are taken with respect to unperturbed we apply the expansion to the twostate problem we The expansion for the perturbed ket recover the earlier expression
matrix
when
E.1.14).
Vkn
p @) _ p @)
rnrXkn
+ x
^k )
\".
E.1.44)
Equation E.1.44) that the nth level is no longer proportional to the says unperturbed ket \\n@)) but acquires components along other unperturbed energy kets; stated another way, the perturbation V mixes various unperenergy eigenkets. A few general remarks are in order. First, to obtain the firstorder energy shift it is sufficient to evaluate the expectation value of V with of i respectto the unperturbed kets.Second,t is evident from the expression the secondorder that energy shift E.1.42) two energy levels, say the zth level and the jth level,when connected by V tend to repeleach other; the lower one, say the /th level,tends to get depressed a result of mixing with as the higher th level by ^72/(^7@) ?,@))> while the energy of the th level of goesup by the sameamount. This is a specialcase the nolevel crossing which statesthat a pair of energy levels connected perturbation theorem, by do not crossas the strength of the perturbation is varied. m Supposethere is more than one pair of levelswith appreciable atrix elements but the ket whose energy we are concerned refers to the with, for ground state; then each term in E.1.42) the secondorder energy shift is This means that the secondordernergy shift is always negative negative. e
unperturbed
\302\253),
5.1. TimeIndependent
mixing.
Perturbation
Theory: Nondegenerate
Case
293
for the ground state; the loweststate tends to get even lower as a result of
will is clearthat perturbation expansionsE.1.42) E.1.44) and is sufficiently \" small.\" A more specificcrite?/0)) can be given for the case in which Ho is simply the kineticenergy p operator(then this RayleighSchrodinger erturbation expansion is just the Born series): t an energy Eo < 0, the Born seriesconvergesif and only if A neither Ho + V nor Ho V has bound states of energy E < Eo (R. G.
It
converge if
criterion
Ff//(jE/0)\342\200\224
\342\200\224
Renormalization
we see ket. Recalling the normalization conventionwe use, E.1.31), that the ket \\n) is not normalizedin the usual manner. We can renormalperturbed ize the perturbedket by defining
are
in
E.1.45
where Zn is simply a constant with left we obtain [because f o
ZY2
What
E.1.31)]
js/(n\\n)N
1.Multiplying
(ai@) on
the
satisfiesthe usual norZn can be regardedas the probability for requirement the perturbed energy eigenstateto be found in the corresponding unperNoting energy eigenstate.
normalization
E.1.46
E.1.30),
N(n\\n)N
unperturbed
= Zn(n\\n)=\\,
E.1.47)
we have
\021
= (n\\n) =
+0(X3),
E.1.48a
so up to order X2, we get for the probability of the perturbed state to be found in the correspondingnperturbed state u
\342\200\2247
E.1.48b
in
is E.1.48b)to
294
Approximation Methods
\"leakage\"to states other than /7@)). Notice that Zn is less than 1,as expectedon the basisof the probability interpretation for Z. It is also amusing to note from E.1.42) to order X2, Z is related that to the derivativeof En with respectto E^0) as follows:
E.1.49)
We understand, of course,that in taking the partial derivative of En with we must regard the matrix elementsof V as fixed quantities. respectto Result is actually quite general and not restricted to secondorder
E^\302\260\\
E.1.49)
perturbation theory.
Elementary Examples
To illustrate the perturbation method we have developed, us look let The first one concerns simple harmonic oscillatorwhose a examples. unperturbed Hamiltonian is the usual one:
at
two
E.1.50 2 Supposethe spring constant k moo2 is changed slightly. We may represent the modification by adding an extra potential
2m
\\
\342\200\224
V={emu2x2,
\342\202\254
where is a dimensionless parameter such that e <^ From a certain point of view this is the silliestproblem in the world to which to apply perturbatheory; the exact solution is immediately obtained just by changing to as follows: eco, E.1.52 yet this is an instructive example becauseit affords a comparison between the perturbation approximation and the exact approach. We are concernedhere with the new groundstate ket 0) in the o presencef V and the groundstateenergy shift Ao:
perturbation
1.
E.1.51
^
and
A
0)
=v + Y
K
L1MJ
/c
^0 0
E 1 53b^
this
em^
<o<\302\260vio<\302\260>>
?mwM
<2^jc20<\302\260>>
^.
2y2
chapter)
E.1.54
5.1. TimeIndependent
All
Perturbation
Theory: Nondegenerate
Case
that
295
other matrix elementsof form Vk0 vanish. Noting are and energy denominators in E.1.53a) E.1.53b) everything to obtain
\342\200\2242hco,
E.1.55a
and
A
=F
F@) =
E.1.55b)
terms of original unperturbed energy eigenkets (^@))}, cquires a a component along the secondexcited state. The absenceof a component our along the first excitedstate is not surprising because total H is invariant under parity; hence, an energy eigenstate is expected to be a parity
eigenstate. A comparison with the exact method can easily be made for the energy shift as follows:
hco
~2
hco
E.1.56)
V
in
completeagreement with
of absence
the groundstatewave
1
where
h
x2/2x20
E.1.57)
mco
E.1.58)
Substitution
leads E.1.52) to
x0 o
1/4
'
E.1.59)
hence,
1
1/4
1 1
771/4 ,/JC
x2/2x20
.1/4
4 JC 0 V2
1^
E.1.60)
296
Approximation
Methods
(x 2@)) = 2V2(x
x x0
'
2l
\\
1 1 1
2V2tt1/4
x2f2xl
2 + 4
E.1.61
2. and H2(x/x0)is a Hermitepolynomial of order As another illustration of nondegenerate perturbation theory, we A oneelectron discussthe quadratic Stark effect. hydrogen outsidethe closed atom or a hydrogenlike atom with onevalence electron field subjectedto a uniform electric in (sphericallysymmetrical) The the positive zdirection. Hamiltonian H is split into two parts,
atom\342\200\224the
shell\342\200\224is
2m
. V0(r)
and
e E z
V
\342\200\224>
bound by acquire a finite lifetime. However,we can still formally use perturbation theory to calculate the shift in the energy.(The imaginary part of this shift, which we shall ignore here, would give us the lifetime of the state or the width of the corresponding resonance.)]
oc as z particles n Ho can, of course, scape ow, and all formerly bound states e
E.1.62)
It is assumedthat the energy eigenketsand the energy spectrum for the unperturbed problem(Hoonly) are completely known.The electron spin turns out to be irrelevant in this problem,and we assumethat with spin of n This degrees freedom ignored, o energy level is degenerate. assumption does hold for n ?^ 1levelsof the hydrogen atoms, where Vo is the pure not Coulombpotential; we will treat such casesater. he energy shift is given T l
by
^^\342\200\224 ____
E zkk
zkj
E.1.63)
where we have used k rather than n to avoid confusion with the principal to is espected be a parity quantum number n. With no degeneracy,
hence, eigenstate;
zkk
0,
E.1.64)
as we saw in Section4.2. Physicallyspeaking,there can be no linear Stark effect, that is, there is no term in the energy shift proportional to E because atom possessesvanishing permanent electricipole, the the a so d shift is quadratic in  E  if terms of order 31E or higher are ignored. energy e 3 Let us now look at zkj, which appearsin where k (ory) is the collectiveindexthat standsfor (ai, /, m) and {nf, m'). irst, we recall F the selection [see rule C.10.39)]
(n',I'm'z n, Im)
=0
=m
E.1.65)
5.1. TimeIndependent
that
Perturbation
Theory: Nondegenerate
Case
297
follows from angular momentum (the WignerEckart theorem with T^l0) and parity considerations. There is another way to look at the raselectionrule. In the presence of F, the full spherical symmetry of the Hamiltonian is destroyed by the external electric that selectsthe positive zdirection, but V (hence the field total H) is still invariant under rotation around the zaxis;in other words, we still have a cylindrical symmetry. Formally this is reflectedby the fact
that
[F,Lz] = 0.
\342\200\224
E.1.66
of This means that Lz is still a goodquantum number even in the presence V. As a result, the perturbation can be written as a superposition of of This eigenkets Lz with the same m m = 0 in our case. statement is true for all orders, in particular, for the firstorder ket. Also, because the secondorder energy shift is obtained from the firstorder ket [seeE.1.40)] we can understand why only the m = 0 terms contribute to the sum. The polarizabilitya of an atom is definedin terms of the energy shift of the atomic state as follows:
A=aE2.
E.1.67)
Let us considerthe specialcaseof the ground state of the hydrogen atom. Even though the spectrum of the hydrogen atom is degenerate for excited states, the ground state (with spin ignored) is nondegenerate, so the forof nondegenerate perturbation theory can be applied.The ground formalism state 0@))is denotedin the (/?, /, m) notation by A,0,0),so
y l<*zl,0,0)
where the sum over k includesnot only all bound states \\n,l,m) (for n > 1) but also the positiveenergy continuum states of hydrogen. There are many ways to estimate approximatelyor evaluate exactly the sum in E.1.68) various degrees sophistication.We present here with of the simplest f all the approaches. o the were Suppose denominator in E.1.68) constant.Then we could obtain the sum by considering
k*0
E l</c<\302\260>zi,o,o>2= E
all
= <l,0,0z2l,0,0>,
E.1.69
where we have used the completeness relation in the last step. But we can evaluate (z2) for the ground state as follows: easily and using the explicit form for the wave function
we obtain
E.1.70)
where a0 stands for the Bohr radius. Unfortunately
the
expressionfor
298
Approximation
Methods
but polarizability a involves the energy denominator that dependson we know that the inequality e2 @) i /7@)> _ 17@) , ZT(O)_ @)> ^0 E.1.71) k 2a0 As holds for every energy denominator in E.1.68).a result, we can obtain an upper limit for the polarizability of the ground state of the hydrogen atom, namely,
E?\302\260\\
\342\200\224
16tf It
turns
.
E.1.68)
/ E.1.72)
due
which
to A.
we can evaluate exactly the sum in using a method and J. T. Lewis (Merzbacher 1970, 424, for example), Dalgarno with the experimentallymeasuredvalue. This gives also agrees out
that
9a3
43.
E.1.73)
by
We
the
obtain the same result (without using perturbation theory) Schrodinger quation exactly using parabolic coordinates. e DEGENERATECASE
solving
eigenkets
eigenkets.
like
because
Vnk
E.2.1)
becomessingular
must modify
if Vnk is nonvanishing and E^0) and E[0) are equal.We the method of the previous section to accommodate such a
situation.
5.2.TimeIndependent
Perturbation
Case
299
our Whenever there is degeneracywe are free to choose base set of kets.We should, by all means, exploit this freedom. Intuitively unperturbed we suspectthat the catastrophe of vanishing denominators may be avoided our basekets in such a way that V has no offdiagonalmatrix by choosing elements (such as Vnk = 0 in In other words, we should use the linear combinations of the degenerateunperturbed kets that diagonalizeH in the subspacespanned by the degenerateunperturbed kets.This is indeed the correct to use. procedure Supposethere is a gfold degeneracy before the perturbation V is switched on. This means that there are g different eigenkets all with the same unperturbed energy E$\\ Let us denote these kets by {\\m@))}. In general, the perturbation removesthe degeneracyin the sensethat there will be g perturbed eigenkets all with different energies. them form a set Let As X goesto zero /> * /@)>, and various /@)> are eigenketsof Ho all with the sameenergy Ef?\\ However,the set /@)> neednot coincide with even though the two sets of unperturbed eigenkets the same span {m@))} degenerateubspace,which we call We can write s
E.2.1)).
{/>}.
D.
in where the sum is over the energy eigenkets the degenerateubspace. s in Beforeexpanding X, there is a rearrangement of the Schrodinger Let t equation that will make it much easiero carry out the expansion. Po o be a projectionoperator nto the space defined by {m@))}. define We W Pi = 1 Po to be the projectiononto the remaining states. e shall then write the Schrodinger quation for the states  /> as e 0 = (E Ho \\V)\\l)
\342\200\224
+ (E Ho W)P1\\[). E.2.2) We next separateE.2.2) two equationsby projecting into from the left on
KV)P0\\l>
 = (E  ?g> Po and Pu
with E.2.2)
We
is not singular
(E
 ?g> 
\\P0V)P0\\t)
 XPoVP^t) = 0
PX{E
E.2.3)
E.2.4)
\\PXVP^)
Px
 H0  /)
or written
out explicitly to
orderX when
is expandedas  /) =  /@)) +
300
Approximation
Methods
X2 that there is a term of order in E.2.7) resultsfrom the subX we shall find that it producesa term of order in the state P0\\l). to order X and eigenTo order X we obtain the equation for the energies functions to order zero,
Although
substitution,
(E
 ?g> 
\\PoVPo)(Po\\l(O)))
= 0.
E.2.8)
This is an equation in the g dimensional degenerateubspaceand clearly s of are means that the eigenvectors just the eigenvectors the g x g matrix and the eigenvalues EA) are just the roots of the secularequation P0VP0 E.2.9) det[V (E Eg>)] = 0
 
where V = matrix of P0VP0with matrix elements(m@)  Vm'@)). Explicitly in matrix form we have
V \\2
\\ \\ \\
B@)
\\
E.2.10)
\\
\\
The rootsdeterminethe eigenvalues are g altogether\342\200\224and by them into E.2.10), can solve for (m@)/@)) for each/ up to we substituting an overall normalization constant.Thus by solving the eigenvalueproblem, we obtain in one stroke both the firstorder energy shifts and the correct zerothordereigenkets. otice that the zerothorder ets we obtain as k N X 0 are just the linear combinationsof the various  m@))'s diagonalize that the perturbation V, the diagonal elementsimmediately giving the firstA^x)\342\200\224there
\342\200\224\302\273
ordershift
A/(D
E.2.11
Note alsothat if the degenerateubspace were the whole space, would we s have solved the problemexactly in this manner. The presencef unpero \"distant\" eigenketsot belonging to the degenerateubspace n will s show up only in higher orderand higher for the energy eiand higher for the energy eigenvalues. eigenkets and secondorder looksjust like the firstorder energy shift [see Expression in that case E.1.37)]the nondegenerate except herewe have to make sure that the base kets used are such that V does not have nonvanishing offu diagonal matrix elementsin the subspacespannedby the degeneratenIf unperturbed eigenkets. the V operator is already diagonal in the baseket we representation are using, we can immediatelywrite down the firstorder
unperturbed orders\342\200\224first
E.2.11)
5.2.TimeIndependent
shift
Perturbation
Case
301
case.
by taking the
expectationvalue of
V,
just
as in the nondegenerate
the
order X. We
E.2.12)
PqVPqVi and the eigenvectors to first order re E\\l) = E$ + Xvr We assume a The eigen energies PofO))is that the degeneracy completely resolvedso that Efp E^ = X(v, We are all nonzero. can now apply nondegenerate perturbation theory vj) to E.1.39)the g x g dimensional Hamiltonian that appearsin E.2.12). to The resulting correction the eigenvectors Po\\^) is
=
or more explicitly
2
~ vi
~~ Vj
, F(U)
'
2
eigenvector
vj
2 k*D
M. E.2.14)
Thus, although the third term in the effective Hamiltonian that appearsin is E.2.12)of orderX2, it is divided by energy denominators of order X in the correction the eigenvector, to which then gives terms of order forming X in the vector. If we add together E.2.6) E.2.14), get the eigenand we X. accurate to order As in the nondegenerate case,it is convenient to adopt the norand normalization convention (/@)/)= We then have, from E.2.3) E.2.4), = A/ = XA/A) + X2Af2) + The Xterm just reproduces \\(fO)\\V\\t) As for the X2term, we obtain AzB) = </<0) /A)> = {f^V^f^) V + {/^M/yP). ince vectors Po//O)>are eigenvectors of V, the corS the correction to the vector, E.2.14), no contribution to the secondorder gives energy shift, so we find using E.2.6)
1.
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242.
E.2.11).
V kl
E.2.15)
Our procedure worksprovided that there is no degeneracyin the roots of secularequation E.2.9). Otherwisewe still have an ambiguity as to which linear contribution of the degenerate nperturbed kets the peru perturbed kets are reducedin the limit X 0.Put in another way, if our method is to work, the degeneracy should be removed completely in first A How order. challenge the experts: must we proceed the degeneracy for if is not removed in first order,hat is, if some of the roots of the secular t Problem 12 this chapter.) of equation are equal? (See
\342\200\224>
302
Approximation Methods
perturbation
Let us now summarize the basicprocedureof degenerateperturbatheory: and construct the perIdentify degenerateunperturbed eigenkets matrix V, a g X g matrix if the degeneracyis gfold. perturbation 2. Diagonalize the perturbation matrix by solving, as usual, the appropriatesecular equation. 3.Identify the roots of the secular equation with the firstorder energy shifts; the base kets that diagonalize the V matrix are the correct zerothorder kets to which the perturbedkets approach in the limit X > 0. nonde4. For higher ordersuse the formulas of the corresponding generate perturbation theory exceptin the summations, where we excludeall contributions from the unperturbed kets in the degen
1.
degenerate
D. subspace
As an example of degenerate perturbation theory, let us study the effect of a uniform electric field on excitedstates of the hydrogen atom. As is well known, in the Schrodinger theory with a pure Coulomb potential with no spin dependence,he bound state energy of the hydrogen atom t on the principal quantum number n. This leadsto degeneracy dependsonly for all but the ground state becausethe allowed values of / for a given n satisfy ^4 J 0 < / < n. E.2.16) To be specific,for the n = 2 level, there is an / = 0 state called 2s and three 1 = 1 (m = As states called 2/?, all with the same energy, e2/$a0. we apply a uniform electric field in the zdirection, the appropriate per/rm
_x
\302\2611,0)
= \302\253E, E.2.17) B which we must now diagonalize. eforewe evaluate the matrix elements in detail using the usual (nlm) basis, let us note that the perturbation has E.2.17) nonvanishing matrix elementsonly betweenstatesof opposite and / = 0 in our case. urthermore, in order F parity, that is, between1=1 for the matrix elemento be nonvanishing, the mvalues must be the same t z because behaveslike a sphericaltensor of rank onewith sphericalcomV
component
perturbation
operatoris given
by
{magneticquantum number)
matrix
= Bp,m 0\\V\\2 s)
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
E.2.18
5.2.TimeIndependent
Explicitly,
Perturbation
Case
303
E.2.19)
It is sufficient to concentrate our attention on the upper lefthand corner of the squarematrix. It then looksvery much like the ox matrix, and we can the energy shifts we get immediately write down the
answer\342\200\224for
V(\302\2611}
\302\261
3ea0 E
E.2.20)
=
\302\261)
,m= 0)
\302\261
0\302\273.
E.2.21
Schematicallythe energy levels are as shown in Figure Notice that the shift is linear in the appliedelectric strength, field hencethe term the linear Stark effect. One way we can visualize the existencef this effect is to note that the energy eigenkets .2.21) not o are E and are therefore allowed to have nonvanishing electric parity eigenstates permanent dipole moments, as we can easily seeby explicitly evaluating (z).Quite generally,for an energy state that we can write as a superposition of oppositeparity states,it is permissibleo have a nonvanishing permanent t electricipolemoment, which gives rise to the linear Stark effect. d An interesting question can now be asked.If we look at the \"real\" Due to hydrogen atom, the 25 level and 2p levelare not really degenerate. the spin orbit force, 2p3/2 is separatedfrom 2pl/2, we will show in the as next section,and even the degeneracybetween the 2sl/2 and 2pl/2 levels that persists in the single particle Dirac theory is removed by quantum electrodynamics effects (the Lamb shift). We might therefore ask, Is it realistic to apply degenerateperturbation theory to this problem? A comcomparison with the exact result shows that if the perturbation matrix elements
5.1.
A2s. m=0>l2p,m=0\302\273
3lellf la0
No
change for
I2p,m=\302\2611>
31 IE la0 el
m (I2s. =0>+\\2p,m=0\302\273
5.1.
effect
as an
example of
304
Approximation
Methods
are much larger when compared to the Lamb shift splitting, then the energy shift is linear in E for all practical purposes and the formalism of On extreme,if the degenerate perturbation theory is applicable. the opposite matrix elementsare small compared to the Lamb shift splitperturbation then the energy shift is quadratic and we can apply nondegenerate of perturbation theory; seeProblem 13 this chapter.This incidentally shows that the formalism of degenerateperturbation theory is still useful when the energy levelsare almost degeneratecompared to the energy scaledefined by the perturbation matrix element. In intermediate cases we must work harder; it is safer to attempt to diagonalizethe Hamiltonian exactly in the spacespannedby all the nearby levels.
splitting,
THE
EFFECT
E.3.1)
E.3.2)
whenevera moving charge is subjected an electric field, it to effectivemagnetic field given by
But
\"feels\"
an
(^)
E.3.3)
5.3.Hydrogenlike
Effect
305
i given by
E3.4)
eS mec,
1
dVc
mec
dr
1 1 dVc
2 2 mzecz
XI7/(e) dr
E.3.5)
(LS).
When this
it
seento have the correct but the magnitude turns out to be too sign, large by a factor of two. Thereis a classical xplanation for this due to e after L. H.Thomas),but we shall not spin precessionThomasprecession { bother with that (Jackson1975, example). simply treat the spinfor We
is
The
await
E.3.5).
We are now in a position to apply perturbation theory to hydrogenic and 5.2).The atoms using VLS as the perturbation (V of Sections5.1 Hamiltonian Ho is taken to be unperturbed
instance).
E3.6)
where the central potential Vc is no longer of the pure Coulomb form for alkali atoms.With just Ho we have freedom in choosing the basekets: Set The eigenketsof L2,LT,S2,
1:
S,.
306
Approximation
Methods
resultsof this, after a lot of hard algebra, give us just the J2, eigenketsas the zerothorder unperturbed kets to be used!
In degenerate perturbation theory, if the perturbation is already diagonal in the representation we are using, all we need to do for the firstorder energy shift is to take the expectationvalue.The wave function in the twocomponent form is explicitly written as
/.
=
\302\256}i=l\302\261ll2<m
Rnl(r)Wr'\302\261lu'm
nlj
1 II dV\\
tf_f
, , J l+ 2
\302\246
I
1
^A ^
\\
1 dV
r.1
E.3.9)
[seeC.7.65)]
= hLi
2
\\(/+ l)
E.3.10)
is Equation E.3.9) known as Lande'sinterval rule. To be specific, considera sodium atom. From standard atomic notation, the groundstate configuration is spectroscopy
(lsJBs)\\2pNCs).
E.3.11)
j.
The inner 10 electronscan be visualizedto form a sphericallysymmetrical electron cloud.We are interested in the excitation of the eleventh electron from 3s to a possible higher state. The nearest possibilityis excitation to 3p. Because central potential is no longer of the pure Coulomb form, 3s and the 3/7 are now split. The fine structure brought about by VLS refers to even a finer split within 3/?,between 3pl/2 and 3/?3/2, where the subscript efers to r we observe two closelyseparated as Experimentally, yellow the sodium D at 5896 A, the other at 5890 A; see Figure 5.2. Noticethat 3p3/2 lieshigher because radial integral in E.3.9)positive. the is To appreciatethe order of magnitude of the finestructuresplitting, let us note that for Z ^
lines\342\200\224known lines\342\200\224one
dr I nl, /
\\
^
a3 UQ
E.3.12)
5.3.Hydrogenlike
Effect
307
Doublet or \"Fine\"
structure
3/2 3P:
1/2
/\\=5890A
/\\=5896A
becauseVc(r)
Schematic diagram of 35 and 3>p lines. The 3s and 3p degeneracy is lifted is now the screened Coulomb potential due to coreelectrons rather than pure Coulombic; Vrs then removes the 3px/1 an<^ 3P3/2 degeneracy.
FIGURE
5.2.
just on the
splitting
of the electron, the Compton wavelength of the electron, and the Bohr radius are related in the following way:
H
So basis of dimensionalconsiderations. the finestructuresplitwhich is of order (e2/al)(h/mecJ, is to be comparedwith Balmer r It splittings of order e2/a0. is useful to recall here that the classical adius
:ao::l:137:(l37J,
hc
E.3.13)
137'
then
E.3.14)
related to typical Balmer split
are e2 a
via
\\
1
137
~3
which
m;c
E.3.15)
explainsthe origin of the term fine structure. There are other effects t similar orders of magnitude. Specifically, he relativisticmasscorrection of from the expansion arising
2c2 is of the r
\342\200\224
2m^
8m
E.3.16)
sameorder.
discusshydrogen or hydrogenlike (oneelectron)atoms in a Zeemaneffect,sometimescalled the anomalous magnetic Zeeman effect with the electron spin taken into account. Recall that a
We now
field\342\200\224the
308
uniform
Approximation Methods
E.3.17)
ForB in the positive zdirection(B= 2?z), = \\(ByxBxy)
E.3.18
sufficeswhere B stands for B. part from the spin term, the interaction A Hamiltonian is generated by the substitution
p>p~\342\200\224.
E.3.19
<5320)
We therefore have
Because
it
is legitimate to replacep*A by
A*p
whenever
? [')l,
E.3.21
VA(x) = 0,
which
E.3.22
= lBLz
and
E.3.23)
),
E.3.24)
SB=mc
\342\200\224BSZ.
mec
E.3.26
v 7
+ >>2) The quadratic B2(.x2 is unimportant for a oneelectron atom; the term is important for the ground state of the helium atom where analogous ?(tot> an(j ^(tot) j3Otj1 yanigh reader may come back to this problem in when he or she computesdiamagneticsusceptibilities Problems 18 and 19 of this chapter.
j^
5.3.Hydrogenlike
Effect
309
To summarize,omitting the quadratic term, the total Hamiltonian is made up of the following three terms:
0 2m
~\"~
E.3.27a)
dVc(r)LS
dr
IILS C
r
2c2 2m2ec
E.3.27b)
E.3.27c)
Noticethe factor 2 in front of Sz; this reflects the fact that the gfactor of the electron is 2. SupposeHB is treated as a small perturbation. We can study the our effectof HB using the eigenketsof HQ+ J2,/, basekets. Noting
eigenkets\342\200\224as
E.3.28)
as +
e\\B
2mec
E.3.29)
1
x
_1
2/ + 1 2/ + 1
=m +
\342\200\224
2'
2/
E.3.30)
The expectation value of Sz can then easily be computed:
2
In
B/+ 1)
ehB m
2m ec
shift
___
mh
E.3.31)
this
field),
We
seethat
the energy
1 E.3.32) B/ of E.3.32)proportional to m. To is
we present another method for
this,
310
deriving
Approximation Methods
We E.3.31). recall that the expectation value of Sz can also be We get [see obtained using the projection theorem of Section C.10.45)
3.10.
l\302\261l/2,m
i=
mh
1/2
l\302\261
m<J2 + S
=/ 1/2
\302\261
mh mh
E.3.33)
is in completeagreement with E.3.31). In the foregoing discussion magnetic field is treated as a small the PaschenBack perturbation. We now considerthe opposite a magnetic field so intense that the effect of HB is far more important than that of HLS,which we later add as a small perturbation. With Ho + HB only, the good quantum numbers are Lz and Sz.Even J2 is no good becausespherical symmetry is completelydestroyed the strong by B field that selectsa particular direction in space,the zdirection.Weare left with cylindrical symmetry is, invariance under rotation around the zaxis. the LZ,SZ eigenkets \\l,s = \\,mhms) are to be used as our So basekets.The effectof the main term HB can easily be computed:
which
extreme\342\200\224the limit\342\200\224with only\342\200\224that
~e\\B\\
2m ec
E.3.34)
The
we originally had with Ho [see is E.3.27a)] now reducedby HB to states with the same (m7) + Bm5), namely, (m/)+(l) and (ra/ + 2)+( 1). learly we must evaluate the expecC value of L*Swith respectto \\mhms)\\
m{ and ms
\342\200\224
2B/+ degeneracy in 1)
expectation
i/n
= h2mtms,
where we have used
E.3.35)
E.3.36)
Hence,
\\nLS/m,m,
= h2m,ms I 1 dVc
2mzecz
\\
r dr
E.3.37)
5.3.Hydrogenlike
Effect
311
TABLE
Dominant interaction
51
No good
Always good
Almost good
WeakB
Strong
J2 (orLS)
HB
J2 (orLS)
L2,S2,/Z
*The exception is the stretched configuration, for example, p3/2 with m = + \\. Here Lz and Sz are both good; this is because magnetic quantum number 72, m = m{ 4 ms can be satisfied in only one way.
In many elementary books there are pictorial interpretations of the weakfieldresult E.3.32) the strongfieldresult E.3.34), we do not but and bother with them here. e simply summarize our results in Table 51, W where weak and strong B fields are \"calibrated\" by comparing their magnitudes w I*1 ehB/2mecith (l/137Je2/^o table almost good simply means good to the extent that the lessdominant interaction could be ignored. Specifically,let us look at the level scheme of a p electron 1= 1 Pi/2)In the weak B casethe energy shifts are linear in B, with slopes (/?3/2, determined by
^s
1+ 2/1 1 +
m
As we now
same
in this
mvalue\342\200\224for
\302\2615
is a rank
connection note the operatorLz + 2SZ that appearsin HB[E.3.27c) 1tensoroperator T^=^ with sphericalcomponent q = 0.In the and intermediate B region simpleformulas like E.3.32) E.3.34) the for to values are not possible;is really necessary diagonalize the it expectation In appropriate2x2matrix (Gottfried 1966, 37173). the strong B limit the energy shifts areagain proportional to as we seein E.3.34), the are determinedby m{ + 2ms. slopes
the
\302\2615;
fi;
Van An
important, nice application of the RayleighSchrodingerpertheory is to calculate the longrangeinteraction, or van der Waals9 force, between two hydrogen atoms in their ground states.It is easy to show that the energy between the two atoms for large separation r is attractive and varies as r~6. Considerthe two protons of the hydrogen atoms to be fixed at a distancer (along the zaxis) with xx the vector from the first proton to its and electron r2 the vector from the secondproton to its electron; seeFigure
perturbation
312
Approximation Methods
r 2
zaxis
FIGURE 5.3. Two hydrogen atoms with their protons and their electrons at displacements r, from them.
()
(+) separated
by
a fixed
distance r
Hcan be written as
H=H0
2 2 2 2
r + r2 The lowestenergysolution of Ho is simply the product of the groundstate wave functions of the noninteracting hydrogen atoms r r +
r2ri
E.3.39)
Now for large r the Bohr radius a0) expand the perturbation powersof r, /r to obtain
(:\302\273
V in
/ 1
\\
E.3.40)
The lowestorder~3term in E.3.40) r ~3 t correspondso the interaction of two electric dipoleserl and er2 separated r. The higherorderterms represent by higherordermultipole interactions, and thus every term in V involves > 0 for each hydrogen atom. Hence, or f with sphericalharmonics in E.3.40) firstorder perturbation energy matrix element each term the = 0, since the ground state f/0@) wave function E.3.39) /, = 0 (and has = 0 for / and m # 0).The secondorder perturbation
Y\342\204\242 /\342\200\242
^v
will
be nonvanishing. We immediately seethat this interaction varies as s it is negative. This 1/r6 1/r6; ince longrange attractive van der Waals' potential is a general property of the interaction between two
Ej\302\256>
E^\302\260\\
which gives a lower and upper bound on *Seethe treatment in SchiffA968), pages 261263, the magnitude of the van der Waals' potential from and from a variational calculation. Also note the first footnote on page 263 of Schiff concerning retardation effects.
E.3.41)
5.4.Variational
Methods
313
5.4. ARIATIONAL V
METHODS
The perturbation theory developed in the previous section is, of course,of no help unless we already know exact solutions to a problem whose Hamiltonian is sufficiently similar. The variational method we now discuss is very useful for estimating the ground state energy Eo when such exact solutions are not available. We attempt to guessthe groundstate energy EQ by considering a w T \"trial ket\" 0), hich tries to imitate the true groundstate ket 0). o this end we first obtain a theorem of great practical importance. We define H such that <00>
normalized.
E.4.1) ;
v
where we have accommodatedthe possibilitythat 0) might not be normalWe can then prove the following. Theorem.
H>E0.
E.4.2)
This means that we can obtain an upper bound to Eo by consideringvarious kinds of 0). he proof of this is very straightforward. T Proof. Even though we do not know the energy eigenket of the Hamiltonian H, we can imagine that 0) can be expanded as
P>=
A
I *><*0>
00
=0
E4.3)
= Ek\\k).
\342\200\224
E.4.4)
Eo + Eo to evaluate H
E
oo
E.4.5a)
I
>E0,
E0
\\<kfi)
E.4.5b)
E.4.5c)
314
\342\200\224
Approximation Methods
is where we have used the fact that Ek Eo in the first sum of E.4.5b) necessarily positive.It is alsoobvious from this proof that the equality sign t in E.4.2)olds only if 0) coincides h exactly with 0),hat is, if the coef(k\\0) all vanish for k # 0. The theorem E.4.2) quite powerful becauseH provides an upper is bound to the true groundstateenergy. Furthermore, a relatively poor trial if ket can give a fairly goodenergy estimate for the ground state because
coefficients
<A:6>~0(e)for?#0,
then from
E.4.6)
E.4.7)
we E.4.5) have
H Eo~0(e2).
We
in a moment.Of course, he method doesnot say t about the discrepancybetween H and EQ; all we know is that H is larger than (or equal to) Eo. Another way to state the theorem is to assert that H is stationary anything with
respectto the
variation
+ S6>; 6>*6>
*
E.4.8)
we commit
w\302\2732.
is, 8H= 0 when 0) coincideswith 0).By this we mean that if + 8J0) is used in placeof 6) in E.4.5)nd we calculate //, then the error a 0)
that in
estimating the
true
The variational method per sedoesnot tell us what kind of trial kets are to be used to estimate the groundstate energy. Quite often we must appeal to physical example, the asymptotic behavior of wave W function at large distances. hat we do in practiceis to characterize trial kets by one or more parameters Xv and compute H as a function of
intuition\342\200\224for
\\x,
then minimize
X2,...,
//.
them
groundstate energy function by this method. For example, supposesomehas the foresight to guessthat the wave function for the ground state of the hydrogen atom must be of the form
somebody
If the wave function for the trial ket already has a functional form of the exact groundstate energy eigenfunction,we of courseobtain the true
<x0>ccer/fl,
E.4.10
where a is regarded as a parameter to be varied. We then find, upon Not the minimizing H with E.4.10), correct groundstateenergy e2/2a0.
5.4.Variational
Methods
315
the minimum is achieved when a coincideswith the Bohr surprisingly, radius a0. As a secondexample,we attempt to estimate the ground state of the infinitewell (onedimensionalbox)problem defined by 0, for jc< a E.4.11) > oo, for jc
a.
/
But suppose we did not know vanish at x = a\\ furthermore,
\302\261
h2
\\
E.4.12)
\342\200\242n2
\\2m)
\\
4a2}
the wave function must for the ground state the wave function cannot have any wiggles.The simplest analytic function that satisfiesboth requirements is just a parabola going through x =
these. Evidently
= a2
2X
 x2
\302\261
a:
E 4 13)
H where we have not bothered to normalize 6). ere there is no variational parameter. We can compute H as follows:
TJ
\\
n
10
It
[&a mi
E.4.14)
with such a simole trial function we can come within of the true groundstateenergy. 1.3% A much better result can be obtained if we use a more sophisticated trial function. We try
is remarkable that
A\\
E.4.15)
ft
H=
which
(X
+ 1)BX + 1)
 1) BX
[4ma
E.4.16)
has a minimum at
X.
E.4.17)
316
not far from
X
Approximation Methods
?0^1.00298?0.
E.4.18)
used.
with E.4.15) the correct groundstateenergy gives fantastic result considering the simplicity of the trial func
How well does this trial function imitate the true groundstate wave function? It is amusing that we can answer this question without explicitly evaluating the overlap integral @0).Assuming that 0) is normalized, we have [from E.4.1)E.4.4)]
=
Ar
f0 =
\\(kfi}\\2Ek
where 9E0 is the energy of the secondexcitedstate; the first excitedstate and (k = 1)gives no contribution by parity conservation.Solving for @0) we using E.4.18), have
? ()
E.4.19)
gr @0)2>
77
\302\260
min
= 0.99963.
E.4.20)
Departure from
orthogonal to
then
unity
E.4.20)
= <O6> cos0,
0<1.1\302\260,
E.4.21)
t correspondso
E.4.22)
so 0) and 0) are nearly \"parallel.\" One of the earliest applications of the variational method involved in the groundstate energy of the helium atom, which we will discuss Section 6.1. can alsouse the variational method to estimate the energiesof first We excitedstates; all we need to do is work with a trial ket orthogonal to the
exact, if known, or an approximate one groundstate wave function\342\200\224either obtainedby the variational method.
So far
in this
do not contain
explicitly. In nature, however, there are many I quantummechanical systems of importance with time dependence.n the
time
5.5.TimeDependent
Picture
317
remaining part of
this
with two
E.5.1)
where Ho doesnot contain time explicitly.The problem V(t) = 0 is assumed to be solved in the sense that the energy eigenkets \\n) and the energy eigenvaluesEn defined by are completely known.* We may be interested in situations where initially only one of the energyeigenstatesof populated. example, with As time goes on, however,states other than /) are populated because we are no longer dealing with \"stationary\" problems;the timeK(/)=?0 evolution operatoris no longer as simple as e~lHt/h when H itself involves time. Quite generally the timedependentpotential V(t) can cause transito statesother than The basicquestion we addressis, What is the as a function of time for the system to be found in /i), with probability
Ho\342\200\224for
/)\342\200\224is transitions
E.5.2)
/).
More generally, we may be interested in how an arbitrary state ket changes as time goeson, where the total Hamiltonian is the sum of Ho and V(t). Supposeat t = 0, the state ket of a physical system is given by
n
E.5.3)
We wish to find
E.5.4)
where the ket on the left side stands for the state ket in the Schrodinger picture at / of a physical system whose state ket at / = 0 was found to be The astute reader may have noticed the manner in which we have o The separatedthe time dependencef the coefficientof \\n) in E.5.4). factor eiEnt/h even ^ y js absent. This way of writing the time present makesit clear that the time evolution of cn(t)is due solely to dependence the presence f V(t); cn(t) would be identicallyequal to cn@) and hence o independentof t if V were zero.As we shall see in a moment, this separation is convenient becausecn(t) satisfiesa relatively simple differenequation.The probability of finding \\n) is found by evaluating
\302\253s
differential
c2
In
notation
^@)),
Ej,\302\260\\
Approximation Methods
Before we discussthe differential equation for cn(t),we discussthe we interaction picture.Suppose have a physicalsystem such that its state ket A coincideswith \\a) at t = t0, where t0 is often taken to be zero. t a later w time, we denotethe state ket in the Schrodingerpicture by \\a,to;t)s, here the subscript S reminds us that we are dealing with the state ket of the
Schrodinger icture. p
We now define
where  )f stands for a state ket that represents same physical situation the in the interaction picture. At t = 0,  )f evidently coincides with  )s. For in we define observables the interaction o operators(representing bservables) picture as = eiH Aj In particular,
E.5.5)
where V without a subscriptis understood to be the timedependent potential in the Schrodingerpicture. The readermay recall here the connecbetween the Schrodingerpicture and the Heisenberg picture:
connection
The basicdifferencebetween E.5.8) E.5.9) the one hand and E.5.6) on and and E.5.7) n the other is that H rather than Ho appearsin the exponeno
exponential.
= elHt/hAse~lHt/h.
E.5.8)
E.5.9)
characterizes
derive the fundamental differential equation that charthe time evolution of a state ket in the interaction picture. Let us take the time derivative of E.5.5) ith the full H given by w
We now
E.5.1):
see
ih
\342\200\2241\302\253,
E.5.10
'o\">
0/ = K/K'o;0/'
E.5.11
is a Schrodingerlike equation with the total H replacedby Vf. In other words to\\ t)f would be a ket fixed in time if Vf were absent.We can alsoshow for an observableA (that doesnot contain time t explicitly in the Schrodinger icture) that p
which
a,
which
^^
E.5.12
5.5.TimeDependent
Picture
319
5.2
picture
Interaction
Stateket
No change
determined by
Evolution determined
Observable Evolution
respects,the interaction picture, or Dirac picture, is interbetweenthe Schrodingerpicture and the Heisenberg picture; This should be evident from Table 5.2. In the interaction picture we continue using \\n) as our base kets. Thus we expand  )f as follows:
In many
intermediate
E.5.13
With t0
the
multiplying
a position to write the differential equation for finally both sidesof E.5.11)(n\\ from the left, we obtain by cn(t).Multiplying
We
set equal to 0, we seethat the cn(t)appearing here are the same as as cn{t)introduced earlier in E.5.4), can easily be verified by multiplyboth sidesof E.5.4)y b using E.5.2).
elH\302\260t/h
are
in
ih
\342\200\224
dt (n\\a,
t0;
t),.
E.5.14
using :nEm)t/h
as [from E.5.13)]
eiw\"m'c m
(t)
E.5.15
where
nm
\342\200\224
co mn'
E.5.16
r t
Explicitly,
cl
ih 22
V, 33
\\
E.5.17)
I
This is the basic coupled differential equation that must be solved to obtain of finding \\n) as a function of t. the probability
320
Approximation Methods
most cases e have to resort to perturbation expansion to solve the w in as we differential equationsE.5.17), will discuss the next section. coupled There is, however, a problem of enormous practical importance, which can be solved twostate problem with a sinusoidal oscillatingpoten
rare.In
exactly\342\200\224a
potential.
(E2>El)
where y and we have
to
E.5.18)
= V2* = ye'\"' = V =0
E.5.19)
We thus have a timedependent potential that connectsthe two energy o eigenstates f Ho.In other words, we can have a transition between the two states 1> 2>. / =0 An exact solution to this problem is available.If the lower level is populated so that [seeE.5.3)] E.5.20) c2@)= 0, then the probability for being found in each of the two states is given by (Rabi's formula, after I. I. Rabi, who is the father of molecular beam techniques)
?\302\261
initially\342\200\224at
\342\200\224only
\\c2(t)\\2
sin'
11
h1
1/2
t
where
E.5.22)
as the reader may verify by working out Problem 30 of this chapter. Let us now lookat \\c2\\2 a little more closely.We see that the probability for finding the upper state E2 exhibitsan oscillatory time dedependence with
\\
(<oco21)
E.5.23)
5.5.TimeDependent
Picture
321
(O21
==
h
potential\342\200\224usually
E.5.24)
due to an to the angular nearly equal is frequency characteristicof the twostate system. Equation E.5.24) thereknown as the resonancecondition. a little closely and It is instructive to look at at resonance: exactly
field\342\200\224is
E.5.21a) E.5.21b)
co
= co21
t\\
E.5.25)
as c2(OI2 a function of seeFigure 5.4.From twolevel system absorbs energy from the timedecreases from unity as c2(O2 grows. dependentpotential V(t); q@2 At / = 7r^/2y, only the upper state is populated.From t = 7rh/2y to t = irh/y, the system gives up its excess (upper)state] energy[of the excited to V(t)\\ \\c2\\2 decreases nd \\cx\\2 increases. absorptionemissionycleis This a c repeatedindefinitely, as is also shown in Figure 5.4,soV(t)can be regarded as a sourceor sink of energy; put in another way, V(t) can cause a o to 2) (absorption) r from 2) to We transition from (emission). will come ack to this point of view when we discussemissionand absorption of b radiation. The absorptionemission cycle takes place even away from resoresonance. However, the amplitude of oscillation for 2) is now reduced; doesnot go down all the way to 0.In c2(Olmax*s no longer 1and of co.This curve has a resonance Figure 5.5we plot c2@lmaxas a peak centeredaround co = co21, and the full width at half maxima is given by
We
/ = 0 to
can plot
t
= 7rh/2y, the
and c1(/)2
1)
1)
functi\302\260n
0
nh
t I2Y
irk
iy =
FIGURE
S2
Emission Absorption Absorption 5.4. Plot of and \\c2(t)\\2 against time t exactly at resonance = y/h. The graph also illustrates the backandforth behavior between and
q(/)2
co
o>21
and
1)
2).
322
Approximation Methods
\\cz(t)\\ max
Full width
at
half
maximum
0)
FIGURE 5.5. Graph of c2(/)lmax resonant frequency.
as a
function
of <o, where
<o
<o21
corresponds to the
4y//i. It is worth
noting that the weaker the timedependentpotential (y small), the narrower the resonance peak.
The twostate problem defined by E.5.18) many physical applihas As a first example,consider spin \\ a a bound electron to a /independent uniform magnetic field in the zdirection and, in addition, a /dependent agnetic field rotating in the jcyplane: m
system\342\200\224say \342\200\224subjected
B
with
/independent
+y sin<o/)
E.5.26)
Bo and Bx constant. We can treat the effectof the uniform /indepenfield as Ho and the effectof the rotating field as V. For
mec we have
f
E.5.27)
ehB0 2m ec
ehBx
+ (I+X IIXI)
2m ec
\302\273/(i\\
E.5.28) where we have usedthe ketbra forms of 2Sj/h C.2.1)]. e < 0,?+ With [see has a than and we can
+ ><
>< +
+iidentify
)],
higher energy
?_,
+>
\342\200\224
\302\273
>
E.5.29)
\302\2731>
5.5.TimeDependent
Picture
323
The to make correspondence the notation of E.5.18). angular frequency with characteristic of the twostate system is
21= which
r^. mec
Bx = 0
E.5.30)
problem Even though the expectationvaluesof (Sx ) already treated in Section in direction (seenfrom change due to spinprecession the counterclockwise the positive zside),c+12 of and \\c_ remain unchangedin the absence the rotating field. We now add a new feature as a result of the rotating field: and c+2 \\c_\\2 do change as a function of time. This can be seen by
2.1.
\\2
identifying
2m ec
+Y,
co
\302\273
co
E.5.31)
to make correspondenceo the notation of E.5.18); timedependent our t interaction E.5.28)preciselyof form E.5.18). fact that \\c+(t)\\2 and is The vary c_@2 in the manner indicated by Figure 5.4 for co = co21 and the for E.5.29), example,implies that the spin \\ system undercorrespondence of a succession spinflops,  + )  ), in addition to spin precession. Semiclassically, spinflopsof this kind can be interpreted as being due to the by driving torque exerted rotating B. The resonancecondition is satisfiedwhenever the frequency of the rotating magnetic field coincideswith the frequency of spin precession determined by the strength of the uniform magnetic field. We seethat the probability of spinflopsis particularly large. In practice, a rotating magnetic field may be difficult to produce experimentally. Fortunately, a horizontally oscillatingmagnetic is just as good. o seethis, we first note that T instance, in the such an oscillating field can be decomposed a counterclockwise into compoand a clockwiseomponent as follows: c
\342\200\224
undergoes
*\302\261
field\342\200\224for
jcdirection\342\200\224
component
E.5.32)
We
can obtain the effect of the counterclockwisecomponent simply by reversing the sign of co. Supposethe resonancecondition is met for the counterclockwise component
co~co21.
Under a typical experimentalcondition,
1\302\2531,
E.5.33) E.5.34)
324 which
Approximation
Methods
impliesfrom
co21;
E.5.35)
condition is met for the counterclockas a result, whenever the resonance c completely component, the effectof the clockwiseomponent becomes s negligible,sinceit amounts to co > to, and the amplitude becomesmall in magnitude as well as very rapidly oscillating. The resonance problem we have solvedis of fundamental importance
counterclockwise
\342\200\224
in
B experiments. y varying the frequency of oscillating field, it is possibleto make a very precisemeasurementof magnetic moment. We have basedour discussionon the solution to differential equations E.5.17); problem this can alsobe solved, perhapsmore elegantly, by introducing the rotating axis
Van
Vleck.
Maser
us
we may recall from Section two parity eigenstates \\S) close together such that \\A) is slightly higher. Let \\iei be the electricipoleoperator of the molecule.From symmetry considerations e w d that expect \\iei is proportional to x, the position operator for the N atom. The basic interaction is like iw#E, where for a maser E is a timedepenfield electric in a microwavecavity: E = Emaxzcoso/. t E.5.36)
which\342\200\224as 4.2\342\200\224has
and
\342\200\224
timedependent
It is legitimate to ignore the spatial variation of E because wavelength in the the microwaveregion is far larger than molecular dimension. he frequency T co is tuned to the energy differencebetween A) and \\S):
CO
~ Es)
h
E.5.37)
by
= <^l^>= <S^/S>0,
(S\\x\\A)
parity:
E.5.38)
= (A\\x\\S) # 0.
E.5.39)
This means that there is a timedependentpotential that connects \\S) and earlier is now applica\\A}9 and the general twostate problem we discussed
applicable.
We are now in a position to discusshow masers work. Given a molecular beam of NH3 containing both \\S) and \\A), we first eliminate the \\S) component by letting the beam go through a region of timeindependent
5.6.TimeDependent
Perturbation
Theory
325
e field.Suchan electric separates\\S) from field inhomogeneous lectric in much the same way as the inhomogeneous agnetic field in the Sternm Gerlachexperimentseparates  +) from  A pure beam of ^4) then enters a microwave cavity tuned to the energy difference EAES.The dimension of the cavity is such that the time spent by the molecule just is As a result we stay in the first emission of Figure 5.4; e w (tt/2)/i/7. phase have ^4)in and \\S) out. The excessnergy of ^4)is given up to the timee dependentpotential as ^4) turns into \\S) and the radiation (microwave) field gains energy. In this way we obtain Microwave Amplification by Stimulated Emissionof Radiation, or MASER.
).
There are many other applications of the general timedependent twostate problem,such as the atomic clockand optical pumping. In fact, it is amusing to seethat as many as four Nobel Prizes in physics have been awarded to those who exploitedtimedependenttwostate systems of some form.*
5.6. IMEDEPENDENTERTURBATIONTHEORY T P
Dyson Series
like the twoleveltimedepenthe exception of a few problems of the previous section, exact solutions to the differential problem equation for cn(t) are usually not available. We must be content with obtained by perturbation expansion: approximate solutions to
With
timedependent
E.5.17)
where c{*\\
in
c{^\\
the strength parameter of the timedependentpotential. The iteration method used to solve this problem is similar to what we did in timeindeperturbation theory. If initially only the state / is populated, we by approximate cn on the righthand side of differential equation c^ = 8ni (independentof t) and relate it to the time derivative of c?\\ integrate the differential equation to obtain c{*\\ plug c^] into the righthand side [of again to obtain the differential equation for c^\\ and so on. This is how Dirac developedtimedependentperturbation theory in 1927. Instead of working with cn(t), we propose to look at the time evolution operator Ur(t, t0) in the interaction picture, which we will define later. e obtain a perturbation expansion for Ur(t, /0),and at the very end W
timeindependent
...
cnU)= c^ + c^ + c^+,
E.6.1)
signify
E.5.17)
E.5.17)]
*Nobel Prize winners who took advantage of resonance in the twolevel systems are Rabi A944) on molecular beams and nuclear magnetic resonance; Bloch and Purcell A952) on B
field in atomic nuclei and nuclear magnetic moments; Townes, Basov, and Prochorov A964) on masers, lasers, and quantum optics; and Kastler A966) on optical pumping.
326
Approximation Methods
Ur
to
simple problemsin nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, all this might look superfluous;however,the operator formalism we develop is very powerful becauseit can immediately be appliedto moreadvanced probsuch as relativisticquantum field theory and manybodytheory. The timeevolutionoperator in the interaction picture is defined by
problems,
in
, to)\\a,
tQ\\
to)f.
E.6.2) E.6.3)
Differential equation E.5.11) the state ket of the interaction picture is for equivalent to
j;
We must solve
this
operator
differential
condition
initial
First, let us note that the differential equation together with the condition is equivalent to the following integral equation:
initial
Ur(t,t0)=ljfvr(t')U,(t'tt0)dt'.
We
E.6.5)
this
equation by iteration:
df lj?'v,O\U,(t\",to)dl
fWv. 0
l0
'
\302\2530
'0
+lx /'*'/'*\"
h
X /\"'\"\"
dt(n)V,{t')V,{t\") V,{t(n))
\342\200\242 \302\246
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242
E.6.6)
This seriesis known as the Dyson series after Freeman J. Dyson, who appliedthis method to covariant quantum electrodynamics(QED).*etting S asidethe difficult question of convergence,we can compute Uf(t,t0) to any finite orderof perturbation theory.
*Note that in QED,the timeordered product is introduced, and then this perturbation seriescan be summed into an exponential form. This exponential form im= U(t, h)U{tly t0) (Bjorken and Drell 1965,17578). immediately gives U(t, t0)
f\">\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242)
(/'>
5.6.TimeDependent
Perturbation
Theory
327
Transition Probability
Once Uf(t,t0) is given, we can predict the time developmentof any state ket. For example, if the initial state at t = 0 is one of the energy of eigenstates //0, then to obtain the initial state ket at a later time, all we need to do is multiply by Ur(t,0):
E.6.7)
We E.5.13)].will
In fact, (n\\Uf(t,Q)\\i) is nothing more than what we calledcn(t) earlier [see say more about this later. We earlier introduced the timeevolution operator U(t,t0) in the Let us now explorethe connection picture (seeSection Schrodinger
UF(t9
2.2).
=
So we have
eiH\302\260t/hU(t9
to)eiH\302\260'<>/h\\a9
to\\
to)F.
E.6.8)
eigenstates
= E.6.9) UF(t910) eiH*t/hU(t9 to)e'tH^/h. Let us now look at the matrix element of Ur(t910)between energy eigenof Ho:
(n\\UF(t,
to)\\i)
= e\302\253E\"'E''oVh(n\\U(t9
to)\\i).
E.6.10
We
recall from Section that (n\\U(t9t0)\\i) is defined to be the transition 2.2 amplitude. Henceour (n\\Uf(t,t0)\\i) here is not quite the same as the transition amplitude defined earlier. However, the transition probability defined as the squareof the modulus of (n\\U(t9t0)\\i) is the same as the analogous quantity in the interaction picture
\\{n\\Uj{t, tQ)\\i)\\2
= \\(n\\U(t,
to)\\i)\\2.
E.6.11
Parenthetically, we may remark that if the matrix elementsof Ur are taken between initial and final states that are not energy example, between \\a') and \\b') (eigenketsof A and 2?,respectively), here[H09A] # 0 w have, in general, B and/or[i/0, ] #
eigenstates\342\200\224for
0\342\200\224we
as the reader may easily verify. Fortunately, in problems where the interacpicture is found to be useful, the initial and final states are usually taken to be Ho eigenstates. Otherwise,all that is neededis to expand \\a'), '),and so on in terms of the energyeigenketsof Ho.
interaction
328
Approximation Methods
physical
Coming back to (n\\Uf(t9 to)\\i), we illustrate by consideringa physiThe state situation where at t = t0, the system is known to be in state ket in the Schrodinger icture \\i, to\\ t)s is then equal to \\i) up to a phase p the factor. In applying the interaction picture, it is convenient to choose factor at t = t0 so that phase
/).
I/ / / \\ l^ktrkktA/c
\342\200\242
= p'E,to/*\\j\\11 /
*~
\342\200\242>
(*)f)M) I .\\J
\\ ~J
\302\273
A. ?*
which
means that
in
At
i;
f\\
=TT(f
t \\\\j\\
(^ A 1d\\
the expansion
\\i
tr,' t\\
=Yc (t)\\n\\
E 6 15)
E.6.16
go back to the perturbation expansion for Ur(t,t0)[see We can also expand cn(t) as in E.6.1), where c^ is first order in E.6.6)]. is secondorder in Vr(t), and so on.Comparing the expansion of Vt(t\\ c?2) we obtain [using E.5.7)] both sidesof E.6.16),
SO)
@ = **,
of (independent t)
E.6.17)
E.6.18
?=
with
is obtained by
\\\\
Constant Perturbation
As an application of turned on at / =
E.6.19
0:
x @, V(t)= \\VT; v 7
T7/
,. * * (independent of /),
A A
4\\
for / c for t
ie r E.6.20)
_.v
v y
5.6.TimeDependent
Even
though
Perturbation
Theory
329
on the operator V has no explicit dependence time, it is, in made up of operators like x, p, and s.Now supposeat t = 0, we general, have only />. ith t0 taken to be zero, we obtain W
@) @
c(l)= ^
Yl
\342\200\224V *
e'\"\"'1 'Mil*'
\\
dt'
*\302\246 \302\273
EnE,
or
E.6.21)
/.(l)2s=_
4IF
sin2
2 ft
E.6.22) E.6.22)
E.6.22)
The probability of finding \\n) depends only on \\Vm\\2 but also on not the energy difference En Et, so let us try to see how looksas a function of En. In practice, we are interested in this way of looking at when there are many states with E En so that we can talk about a continuum of final states with nearly the same energy.To this end we define
E.6.23)
of
co
We see Figure 5.6. see that the during of the middle peak, centered around co = 0, is t2 and the width is height As is proportional to 1//. / becomes large, c^1}@2 appreciable only for those final statesthat satisfy
which
function
for fixed
f,
:.
\\
E.6.24)
If we call A/ the time interval during which the perturbation has been turned on, a transition with appreciable robability is possible p only if where by we mean the energy change involved in a transition with appreciableprobability. If A/ is small, we have a broaderpeak in Figure and 5.6, as a result we can toleratea fair amount of energy nonconservation. On the other hand, if the perturbation has beenon for a very long time, we have a very narrow peak,and approximateenergy conservationis required for a transition with appreciable probability. Note that this \"uncertainty relation\" is fundamentally different from the x p uncertainty relation of
?\302\261E
\342\200\224
E.6.25)
330
Approximation Methods
An
It
o>
An
It
0)
for
a fixed
/, where in
o>
(En
E,)/h
we
I Section There x and p are both observables.n contrast, time in nonrelativistic quantum mechanicsis a parameter, not an observable. For those transitions with exact energy conservation En = En we have
n
1.6.
E.6.26)
>\"\302\246
after a time interval / is quadratic, not linear, which V has been on. This may appear during There is no causefor alarm, however.In a realistic unreasonable. intuitively situation where our formalism is applicable, there is usually a group of final states,all with nearly the same energy as the energy of the initial state /). In other words, a final state forms a continuous energy spectrum in the of neighborhood Er We give two examples along this line. Considerfor instance, elasticscattering by some finite range potential (seeFigure 5.7), which we will consider detail in Chapter 7. The initial state is taken to be in a plane wave state with its propagation direction oriented in the positive t zdirection;he final state may also be a plane wave state of the same energy but with its propagation direction, in general, in a direction other than the A positive zdirection. nother example of interest is the deexcitationof an excitedatomic state via the emission of an Auger electron. simplest The exampleis a helium atom. The initial state may be BsJ,where both the electronsare excited;the final state may be (Is) (that is, one of the electrons still bound) of the He+ ion, while the second electron escapeswith a I positive energy E\\ see Figure 5.8.n such a case we are interested in the
\\n)
5.6.TimeDependent
Perturbation
Theory
331
same energy
Nearly
the
+zdirection
FIGURE
5.7.
by
some finite
range potential.
Bs):
Is
(Is)Bs)
1
of two
(IsJ
FIGURE
of helium
atom.
total
probability\342\200\224that
transition
stateswith
En
n >En
E.6.27)
Ei
It
within
is customary to define the density of final states as the number of states energy interval (E,E + dE) as
as E.6.27)
P(E)dE.
E.6.28)
irA>i2
= 4 Isin'
As /
(EnE,)t
2h
\\vm
\\EnE,
TTt
p(En)dEn. E.6.29)
sin'
(EHEt)t
2h
\\En~Ei
E.6.30)
332
which
Approximation
Methods
follows from
lim
^^ 8{x).
=
\\Vni\\2
E.6.31)
It
the Sfunction:
Fn = F
E.6.32)
for large valuesof / is a consequence of the fact that the total transition probability is proportional to the area w under the peak of Figure 5.6, here the height varies as t2 and the width
transition
probability is proportional to
this linearity
in
varies as
It
transition
the is conventional to consider transition is, the transitells E.6.32) us that the total probability per unit time. Expression transition rate, defined by
rate\342\200\224that
1//.
is constant in / for large t. Calling E.6.33) wt_+[n], where [n] stands for a
group of final states with energy similar to /, we obtain
()
?
n
E.6.33)
E^E,
E.6.34)
independent of /, provided the firstorder timedependent perturbation theory is valid. This formula is of great practical importance; it is called Fermi's olden rule even though the basic formalism of /dependentperg perturbation We as theory is due to Dirac* sometimeswrite E.6.34)
V,,
\342\200\224
17
77
\\
/c c ^c\\
with
where
it
must
be understood
expressionis integrated
jdEnP(En).
We should also understand what is meant by \\Vm\\2. If the final states form a quasicontinuum,the matrix elements Vm are often similar if \\n) \\n) are similar. However, it may happen that all energy eigenstates with the same En do not necessarily have similar matrix elements.Consider,for example,elasticscattering. The \\Vm\\2 that determines the scattering cross sectionmay dependon the final momentum direction.In such a case the *Editorial Note. Dr. Edward Teller,
in teaching
1955 which the editor was in attendance), mentioned that this was actually Fermi's golden (in rule 2. Since Teller did not subscribe to golden rule 1,he classwas not informed what rule 1 t was. However, golden rule 1 is given in E. Fermi 1950,136 148. and
a quantum
mechanics
classat
Berkeley in
5.6.TimeDependent
Perturbation
Theory
333
group of final stateswe should considermust have not only approximately the same energy, but they must also have approximately the same momenc direction.This point becomes learer when we discussthe photoelectric effect. Let us now look at the secondordererm, still with the constant t From we perturbation of E.6.20). E.6.17) have
momentum
\342\200\224\\YV
V Ui c L vnmvmij ('dt'e^**''(*'dt\" J m
e\"*\342\204\242'
\"
dt'ftl
E636)
The first term on the righthand sidehas the same ^dependence c^ [see as If this E.6.21)]. were the only term, we could then repeat the same argument as before and conclude that as t > oo, the only important contribution
arisesfrom
contribution
contribution gives riseto a rapid oscillation,which doesnot give a contributo the transition probability that grows with t. With cA) and cB) together, we have
w.
En
~ Et. Indeed,when
Em
differs from
En
and
Ei9
the
second
jrni *
V^*
ZmJ
E: E p(En) F
Vnm Vmi
=F
E.6.37)
following physicalinterpretation. We visualizethat the transition due to the secondorder term takes placein two steps.First, /> makesan energy nonconservingtransition to w); subsequently, \\m) makes an energy nonconservingtransition to n), where between \\n) and /) there is overall energy conservation.Such energy nonconserving transitions are often called virtual transitions. Energy need not be conserved for those virtual transitions into (or from) virtual intermediate states.In contrast, the firstorder term Vm is often said to representa direct energyconserving \"real\" transition. A specialreatment is needed VnmVmi ?= 0 with Em ~ Er if t The best way to treat this is to use the slowturnon method V>evtV, in which we will discuss Section 5.8 and Problem of this chapter. The net result is to change the energy denominator in E.6.37) follows: as
31
ie.
E.6.38)
Harmonic Perturbation
where i^ may
still
V(t) dependon
E.6.39)
we have already
334
Approximation Methods
^dependenttwolevelproblems. discussing
Again
initially.
this
kind in
Section
5.5 in
assume that only one of the eigenstates of Ho is populated is assumed be turned on at t = 0, so to Perturbation E.6.39)
(D^Zi (\\rmei\302\273t'+rn]eit*t')eit*\302\253t'dt'
n
Jq
CO
CO
\342\200\224
co + co m
E.6.40)
where i^J actually stands for (ifif)nr We seethat this formula is similar to T the constant perturbation case. he only change neededis
F
co m
\342\200\224
E.6.41
\342\200\224
So as t > oc,
\\c\\
'\\
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
E.6.42a E.6.42b
is important because E.6.42a), second of the and vice versa. We see that we have no energyconcondition satisfied by the quantummechanical system alone; rather the apparent lack of energy conservation is compensated the by \"external\" potential energy given out energy taken away In the first case(stimulated emission), V(t).Pictorially, we have Figure the quantummechanical system gives up energy hco to V; this is clearly possibleonly if the initial state is excited.In the secondcase (absorption), the quantummechanicalsystem receivesenergy h co from V and ends up as an excitedstate. Thus a timedependentperturbation can be regarded an as
Clearly, wheneverthe
term
first term
is unimportant,
energyconservation
to\342\200\224or
from\342\200\224the
5.9.
E.6.43)
'
n
w.
E.6.44)
E.6.45)
5.7. Applications
Field
335
0)
ho)
00
En
\"
FIGURE
(possible
5.9. (i) Stimulated emission: Quantummechanical only if initial state is excited), (ii) Absorption: Quantum from V and ends up as an excited state.
which
is a consequencef o
DC
\302\253>
E.6.46
\302\273
we and (rememberi/~r\\n) (n\\iT), Combining E.6.43) E.6.45), have rate emission for / _ absorption rate for n [/]
\302\273[n]
'
E.6.47)
the absorption case we let / stand for final states. Equation which expresses E.6.47), symmetry between emission and absorption, is
where
known
as detailed balancing. To summarize, for constant perturbation, we obtain appreciable transition probability for \\i) > \\n) only if En~ Er In contrast, for harmonic transition perturbation we have appreciable probability only if En El hu or En =* El + hco (absorption). (stimulated emission)
\342\200\224
e
mec
VA
which
is justified if
= 0;
E.7.2)
336
Approximation Methods
specifically,we work
with A
= 2^40ecosl
\342\200\224
ftx\342\200\224
co?I
E.7.3)
where e and h are the (linear) polarization and propagation direction. b o Equation E.7.3)bviously satisfiesE.7.2) ecausee is perpendicular to the propagation direction h. We write
cos(hx = co/)
and treat
in
\342\200\224
i[e'\"<\302\253A)hxi\302\253/
^i(\302\253/c)h.x+/\302\253/]
E.7.4)
a E.7.3)s
(e/mec)Am\\>
E.7.5)
Comparingthis result
with
we E.6.39), seethat
the e~/w'termin
mec]
\\mec
E.7.6)
is responsible absorption, while the e+/w'termis responsible stimufor for emission. Let us now treat the absorption casein detail. We have
stimulated
eA
mec and
277
i+n
e2
2 2 \\A0\\2\\(n\\ei{o)/c)(hx)E'p\\i)\\28(En
mLecL
n
ft
Etha). E.7.8)
The meaning of the 6functionis clear. \\n) forms a continuum, we simply If integrate with p(En).But even if \\n) is discrete,because\\n) cannot be a ground state (albeit a boundstate energy level), its energy is not infinitely sharp; there may be a natural broadening due to a finite lifetime (see Section t 5.8);here can also be a mechanism for broadening due to colliIn such cases, regard 6(co coni) as we
collisions.
\342\200\224
monochromatic;
Finally, the incident electromagneticwave itself is not perfectly monochroin fact, there is always a finite frequency width. We derive an absorption crosssection as by (Energy/unittime) absorbed the atom (/ > n) Energy
flux
5.7. Applications
Field
337
theory gives us
2 ^max
T>
\\
E.7.12)
at c ^A, Putting everything together, we get (remembering that absorbed by atom for each absorption process)
\302\260abs
B = VXA.
E.7.13)
h <o
= energy ab
Etfico) ~ huB^/h)(e2/m2ec2)\\Ao\\2\\(n\\ei(u/c)(hx)ip\\i)\\2S(EnAir2h
p2
= has Equation E.7.14) the correct dimension [l/(M2/T)](M2L2/T2) = e2/hc 1/137 = L2 if we recognize that a and (dimensionless) 8(En Et ha)) = (l/^M(cow/ co),where 5(cowz co) has time dimension T.
\342\200\224 \342\200\224 \342\200\224 \342\200\224
ElectricDipoleApproximation
The electricdipoleapproximation (El approximation)is basedon the fact that the wavelength of the radiation field is far longer than the atomic s dimension, o that the series(remember co/c= l/X)
\"
E.7.15)
can be approximated its leading term, The validity of this for a light by atom is as follows: First, the hco of the radiation field must be of order of atomic level spacing,so
n
1.
Kao/Z)
chR^ion
atom
This leads to c
CO
137/?atom
Ze2
E.7.17)
In other words,
E7.18)
for light atoms (small Z). Because matrix elementof x is of orderR atom' the
338
that
Approximation Methods
of x2, of order Rlionv and so on, we seethat the approximation of by replacing E.7.15) its leading term is an excellentone. Now we have
(n\\el(\"/c)(hx)hp\\i)*E(n\\p\\i).
E.7.19)
must
H~] = _ m
\342\200\224^L
E 120)
we have
= imwn[(n\\x\\i}.
E.7.21)
o Because f the approximation of the dipoleoperator, approximation this schemeis called the electricipole approximation.We may here recall d the rule Since [seeC.10.39)] selection for the dipolematrix element. x is
m!
a sphericaltensor of rank 1with q = we must have m1 m = = 0,1 0 0 transition). If e is along the yaxis,the sameselection /' y (no rule applies.On the other hand, if e is in the zdirection, q = 0;hence,
\342\200\224
\302\2611,
\302\2611,
\342\200\224>
\342\200\224
m.
With
E.7.14)
the electric dipoleapproximation, the absorption crosssection now takes a simpler form upon using and as
\302\260abs
= 4^2\302\253^J<\"WOI25(<\302\260
In other words,oabs treated as a function of co exhibits a sharp 5functionto like peak whenever /ico corresponds the energylevelspacing at co ^ (En Et)/h.Suppose /) is the ground state, then coni is necessarily
\342\200\224
positive; integrating
E.7.23)
as
.
It
E.7.24)
E725)
is
then
straightforward
ReicheKuhnsum rule,
//
\\
CO
\342\200\236
mx2
E.7.26)
5.7. Applications
Field
339
Noticehow
has disappeared. Indeed,this is just the oscillation sum rule f in classical already electrodynamics(Jackson1975,or instance). this was one of the first examples of how \"new quantum Historically, mechanics\" led to the correct classicalresult. This sum rule is quite remarkable becausewe did not specify in detail the form of the Hamiltonian.
h
known
PhotoelectricEffect
We now consider the photoelectric is, the ejection of an electron when an atom is placedin the radiation field.The basicprocessis considered be the transition from an atomic (bound) state to a continuum to state E > 0.Therefore, /) is the ket for an atomic state, while \\n) is the ket for a continuum state, which can be taken to be a planewavestate ky), an approximation that is valid if the final electron is not too slow.Our earlier formula for oabs(u)can still be used, exceptthat we must now integrate 8(coni co)together with the density of final states p(En). Our basic task is to calculate the number of final states per unit energy interval. As we will see in a moment, this is an example where the matrix element dependsnot only on the final state energy but also on the momentum direction. We must therefore considera group of final states with both similar momentum directions and similar energies. To count the number of states it is convenient to use the box normalization convention for planewavestates.We considera planewave state normalized if when we integrate the square modulus of its wave function for a cubicbox of side L, we obtain unity. Furthermore, the state is assumedto satisfy the periodic boundary condition with periodicityof the side of the box. he wave function must then be of form T
effect\342\200\224that
\342\200\224
E727)
where the allowed valuesof kx must satisfy
kx
with nx
=
\342\200\224r?,...,
E.7.28)
ky
kz. Noticethat as L * oo, kx, ky, and kz becomecontinuousvariables. The problemof counting the number of states is reducedto that of We counting the number of dotsin threedimensionallattice space. define n
such that
n2z.
and
E.7.29)
340 As
Approximation Methods
L * oc, it is a good approximation to treat n as a continuous variable; Let in fact it is just the magnitude of the radial vector in the lattice space. us considera smallvolumeelement such that the radial vector falls within n and n + dn and the solidangle element dti; clearly,it is of volume n2 dndti. The energy of the finalstateplane wave is related to kf and hence to n\\ we
have
h2k2
tf
n2B7rJ
Furthermore, the directionof the radial vector in the lattice spaceis just the direction of the final state, so the number of states in the interval between E and E + dE with direction into dQ> being k^ is (remember dE = (h2kf/me) dkf) given by*
momentum
3m
We
can now put everything together to obtain an differential crosssection for the photoelectriceffect:
expressionfor the
2\"*g f
h2B7ry
,.
E.7.32)
To be specific,let us consider ejection of a K shell (the innermost the electron causedby absorption of light. The initialstate wave function shell) is essentially the same as the groundstate hydrogen atom wave function that except the Bohr radius aQ is replacedby aQ/Z.Thus
=e
X
L3/2
(i
e Zr/a0
3/2
a0
E.7.33)
E.7.34)
Integrating by
because e is perpendicular to h. On the other hand, V acting on e~lkf'x brings down /k^, which can be taken outside the integral. Thus to evaluate E.7.33), we need to do is take the Fourier transform of the all atomic wave function with respectto
\342\200\224
E.7.35)
This is equivalent to taking one state per cube d3xd3p/B7rhK
in phase
space.
5.8.Energy
341
N
FIGURE
5.10. olar P
e and
and
The final answer is (see Problem39 of this chapter for the Fourier transform of the hydrogen atom wave function)
mcco
in
</>
E.7.36)
Figure
If we introduce the coordinate system shown the differential crosssectionin terms of 6 and
)
9
using
= kjsirfdcos2^
E.7.37)
DECAYWIDTH
Our considerationso far have beenrestricted to the question of how states s other than the initial state get populated.In other words, we have been concernedith the time developmentof the coefficientcn(t) with n # /. The w question naturally arises,What happensto ct(t) itself? To avoid the effect of a sudden change in the Hamiltonian, we propose to increasethe perturbation very slowly. In the remote past W (t > oo) the timedependentpotential is assumedto be zero. e then
342
turn
Approximation Methods
gradually
full
value; specifically,
= er]tV
E.8.1)
where V is assumedto be constant and tj is small and positive.At the end and of the calculation, we let tj > 0 (seeFigure 5.11), the potential then constant at all times. becomes In the remote past, we take this time to be oc, so the state ket in Our basic aim is to evaluate the interaction picture is assumed to be ct(t). However, before we do that, let us make sure that the old formula of the goldenrule (seeSection 5.6)can be reproduced using this slowturnon method.Forcn(t)with n # /, we have [using E.6.17)]
\342\200\224
/).
n
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
Vm
tj
+i
ni
E.8.2)
probability is therefore given
2qt
To lowest nonvanishing
by
order, the
transition
\\vm
'
)
E.8.3)
or
2
~
\\
2T)t
E.8.4)
unity, but
We now let
tj
\302\273
0.Clearly, it
Iim
is all
right
to
replaceevt by
note
E.8.5)
n>o
v(t)
FIGURE
5.11. of Plot
5.8.Energy
343
E.6.17).
Encouragedby
c@)=
this
We have
(!)
Iim
E86)
cjx\\
h
\342\200\224
cB)=
\\2\302\253,
\342\200\224\\
T\\V
I2 2r,t
/
\\
ft
,
f
11/ 
\"'
2t,2
E87)
E.8.8)
= Now considerthe time derivative of c, [dc((t)/dt cj,which we have from and letting tj E.8.8). dividing by c, (thus replacing e71'and Upon we get by unity),
\302\2730
C:
7\"
I
n
7] m
E89)
is E.8.9)formally correct up to secondorderin V. Note here that Expansion is now independent of t. Equation E.8.9) a differential is ci(t)/ci(t) equation that is to hold at all times.Having obtained this, it is convenientto = W renormalize ci so that c,@) 1. e now try the ansatz
with
consistentwith
We
A,,
but
becausethe E.8.9)
side of
344
Approximation Methods
other words,
?,*?,. +A,
\342\200\242\342\200\242\302\246
E.8.11
as a result of perturbation. That is, we have calculated the levelshift using timedependentperturbation theory. Now expand,as usual, = *?>+ *?>+ , E.8.12) Af we with and compareE.8.10) E.8.9); get to first order
E.8.13)
f this is just what we expectrom tindependentperturbation theory. Beforewe look at Ap\\ recall But c_*0 X
Urn
\342\200\224\342\200\224
+ IE
= Pr. /ttS(jc). X
E.8.14
()
? j%?\\VmMEtEm).
from the
E.8.15a
golden rule, so we
E.8.15b
can identify
m
\"<\342\200\224=
T ^ \\VmMEiEm)= \\lm[^\\.E.8.16)
as E.8.10)
+
E.8.17)
=
then
lm(A,.),
E.8.18)
Therefore, Fz characterizesthe rate at which state disappears. It is worth checkingthe probability conservation up to secondorder in V for small /:
m
i)
E.8.20)
where E.8.16) beenused.Thus the probabilitiesor finding the initial has f state and all other states add up to Put in another way, the depletion of state \\i) is compensated the growth of states other than \\i). by
1.
Problems
345
To summarize, the real part of the energy shift is what we usually associatewith the level shift. The imaginary part of the energy shift is, the apart from [seeE.8.18)], decaywidth. Note also
2
= r,
E.8.21)
where rt is the mean lifetime of state /) because To seewhy F, is called width, we look at the Fourier decomposition
E.8.22)
E.8.23)
Usingthe Fourier inversion
\\f(E)\\2
formula, we get
\342\200\224
1\342\200\2242
E.8.24)
Therefore, Tt has the usual meaning of full width at half maximum. Notice that we get the timeenergyuncertainty relation from E.8.21)
AfA?~/i,
where we
E.8.25)
the uncertainty in the energy with Tt and the mean identify lifetime with Af. Even though we discussedthe subject of energy shift and decay width using the constant perturbation V obtained as the limit of when tj > 0, we can easily generalize our considerationso the harmonic t in All we must do is to let discussed Section perturbation case
En(m) in
E.8.1)
5.6.
\" Ei ~* En(m)
Ei
\302\261
E.8.26)
due to
and and E.8.2), E.8.8), E.8.15), so on.The quantummechanicaldeof unstable states we have developedhere is originally and Weisskopf in 1930.
description
Wigner
PROBLEMS
1.A
order.
346
Approximation Methods
b. Solve this
(a).
2. In
nondegenerate timeindependentperturbation theory, what is the probability of finding in a perturbed energy eigenstate (\\k)) the correcorresponding unperturbed eigenstate (A:@)))? Solve this up to terms of
3.Considera particle in
a twodimensionalpotential < 0 forO <x< L,0 y < L, oc otherwise. Write the energy eigenfunctionsfor the ground and first excited states. We now add a timeindependentperturbation of the form < forO <x< L,0 y < L, _ 0 otherwise. Obtain the zerothorderenergyeigenfunctionsand the firstorderenergy shifts for the ground and first excited states. 4. Consider an isotropic harmonic oscillator in two dimensions.The Hamiltonian is given by
\\
order g2.
wco
2 a. What are the energies of the three lowestlyingstates? Is there any degeneracy? b.We now apply a perturbation
m
where 5 is a dimensionless number much smaller than unity. real Find the zerothorder energyeigenket and the correspondingnergy e to first order[that is, the unperturbed energy obtained in (a) plus the firstorder energy shift] for each of the three lowestlyingstates. c. Solve the HQ+ V problem exactly. Comparewith the perturbation results obtained in (b). [You may use {n'\\x\\n) =yfh/2mu(Jn+18n, n + l 5. EstablishE.1.54) the onedimensionalharmonic oscillator given by for with E.1.50) an additional perturbation V =\\emu>2x2. Show that all other matrix elements VkQ vanish. 6. A slightly anisotropicthreedimensional harmonic oscillator has co2 = ay A chargedparticle moves in the field of this oscillatorand u>x is at the same time exposed a uniform magnetic field in the xto direction. ssuming that the Zeeman splitting is comparableto the A splitting producedby the anisotropy, but small comparedto hio, cal\342\200\224
Problems
347
order energies f the components the first excited the o of state.Discussvarious limiting cases.(From Merzbacher,Quantum 2 e, 1970. Mechanics, 1 Reprintedby permissionof Ellis Horwood,
culate to first
\302\251
electric field in the zdirection.Obtain an approximate expresfor the induced electric dipole moment of the ground state by consideringthe expectation value of ez with respectto the perturbed can state vector computed to first order.Show that the same expression also be obtained from the energy shift A = a\\E\\2/2 of the ground state computedto secondorder.(Note:a stands for the polarizability.)
\342\200\224
elements(or expectationvalues) given below.If vanishes, explain why it vanishes using simplesymmetry (orother) arguments. a. (n = 2,/ = m = 0 x n = 2,/ = 0,m = 0). b.(n = 2,/ = m = 0 pz n = 2,/ = 0,m = 0). o [In (a) and (b), nlm) standsfor the energy eigenket f a nonrelativistic hydrogen atom with spin ignored.] 9 c.(Lz) for an electron a central field with /=2>m= 7 = 4. in 2>' = 0S^e) S^e+) = 0) for an sstate posid.(singlet,ms ms triplet,
spin. Ignore
1, 1,
9.A
tronium.
(ignore
the perturbation. You need not evaluate the energy shifts in detail, but show that the original threefold degeneracy is now completely
diagonalize
under time reversal and becausethere is no longer any degeneracy, we expect each of the energy eigenstates obtained in (a) to go into itself (up to a phasefactor or sign) under time reversal. Checkthis point explicitly. 10. onsidera spinlessparticle in a twodimensionalinfinite square well: C < @ forO <x<a,0 y otherwise. \\ oo
b. BecauseV
removed.
is invariant
<a,
are the energyeigenvaluesfor the three lowest states? Is there degeneracy? b.We now add a potential
any
a. What
348
Approximation Methods
Taking this as a weak perturbation, answer the following: (i) Isthe energy shift due to the perturbation linear or quadratic in X for each of the three states? for (ii) Obtain expressions the energy shifts of the three lowest statesaccurate to order X. (You neednot evaluate integrals that
may
11.
(iii) Draw an energy diagram with and without the perturbation for the three energy states.Makesure to specifywhich unperturbed state is connected to which perturbed state. The Hamiltonian matrix for a twostate system can be written as
XA
XA
appear.)
Eo
\\p2
Solve this problem exactly to find the energy eigenfunctions and and the energyeigenvaluesEx and E2.  Assuming that X A  E21, solve the same problem using timeindependentperturbation theory up to first order in the energy eigenfunctions and up to secondorder in the energy eigenvalues. Comparewith the exact results obtained in (a). are Supposethe two unperturbed energies \"almost degenerate,\"that
\\px
\342\200\224
\302\253:
E\302\261
is,
Show that the exact resultsobtained in (a) closelyresemble what you expect by applying degenerate perturbation theory to this set exactlyequal to E2. problemwith 12.This is a tricky problem becausethe degeneracybetween the first and ( the secondstate is not removed in first order. eealso Gottfried 1966 S T Problem 1.) his problem is from Schiff 1968, Problem 4. A 397, 295, system that has three unperturbed states can be representedby the
would
E\302\256
perturbedHamiltonian
matrix
t
Ex
0 a where E2> The quantities a and b are to be regardedas perturbaEv that are of the same order and are small compared with E2 Ev Usethe secondorder ondegenerate perturbation theory to calculate n
\342\200\224
perturbations
Problems
349
13.
14.
15.
the perturbedeigenvalues. Is this procedure correct?)Then diagonalize ( the matrix to find the exact eigenvalues.Finally, use the secondorder perturbation theory. Compare the three results obtained. degenerate Computethe Stark effectfor the 2Sl/2and 2Pl/2levelsof hydrogen for a field e sufficiently weak so that eea0is small compared to the fine structure, but take the Lamb shift 8 (8 = 1057 MHz)into account (that is, ignore 2P3/2 in this calculation).Show that for eea0 5, the energy shifts are quadratic in e, whereas for eea0 8 they are linear in e.(The radial integral you need is Bs\\r\\2p) = 3]/3a0.)Briefly discuss the (if consequences any) of time reversal for this problem.This problem is Problem 73. from Gottfried out the Stark effect to lowest non vanishing order for the n = 3 Work level of the hydrogen atom. Ignoring the spinorbit force and relativistic correction (Lamb shift), obtain not only the energy shifts to lowest z nonvamshing orderbut also the correspondingerotkorder eigenket. Supposethe electron had a very small intrinsic electric dipolemoment analogous to the spin magneticmoment (that is, \\iel proportional to a). interaction as a small perturbation, Treating the hypothetical discussqualitatively how the energy levels of the Na atom (Z = would be altered in the absenceof any external electromagneticfield. Are the level shifts first order or secondorder? State explicitly which states get mixed with each other. Obtain an expression the energy for shift of the lowest level that is affected by the perturbation. Assume that only the valenceelectron is subjected the hypothetito throughout
\302\253: :\302\273
1966,
\342\200\224[ieimE
ll)
hypothetical
interaction.
a sphericallysymmetric
for all s states, ground and excited. relation for the ground state of a threedimensional oscillator, the hydrogen atom, and so on. isotropic (Note:This relation has actually beenfound to be useful in guessing the form of the potential betweena quark and an antiquark.) 17.a. Suppose the Hamiltonian of a rigid rotator in a magnetic field t P perpendicularo the axis is of the form (Merzbacher 1970, roblem
b. Check this
171)
A\\}
+ BLZ + CLy
if terms quadratic in the field are neglected. ssuming B^> C, use A perturbation theory to lowest nonvanishing orderto get approximate
energy eigenvalues.
350
Approximation Methods
b. Considerthe matrix
elements
(n'lm\\mfs\\xy\\nlm f
,m s)
of a oneelectron(for example,alkali) atom. Write the selectionrules for A/, Am,, and Am5. Justify your answer. 18. ork out the quadratic Zeeman effect for the groundstate hydrogen W = atom [(x0> (\\/pral)e~r/ao]due to the usually neglected e2A2/ in W 2mec2'tQvm the Hamiltonian taken to first order. rite the energy
shift
as
for and obtain an expression diamagnetic ing definite integral may be useful: o
susceptibility,
x (The follow
e~arrndr =
\342\200\224'\342\200\224.
ao with Zeff as obtainedby the variational method.The meax suredvalue of the diamagneticsusceptibilityis 1.88 10 cm /mole. in Usingthe Hamiltonian for an atomic electron a magnetic field, for determine, a state of zeroangular momentum, the energy change to order if the system is in a uniform magnetic field represented B by the vector potential A = 2B x r. Defining the atomic diamagnetic susceptibility \\ by E = ?xB2, calculate \\ atom in the ground state and comparethe 21 helium result with the measuredvalue. 20.Estimate the groundstateenergyof a onedimensionalsimpleharmonic
\342\200\22416> f\302\260r
oscillatorusing as a trial
function
with
p to be varied. (You
00
may
use
1
0
= e~axxndx
n\\
\342\200\224^
a\"*
^ + (X jc)^= 0,
xp
> 0 for
> jc 00
Problems
351
as a trial function. (Caution: d\\p/dx is discontinuous at Numerical data that may be useful for this problem are:
x = 0.)
31/3=1.442, 51/3=1.710, 32/3= 2.080, m 2/3 = 2.145. The exact value of the lowest eigenvaluecan be shown to be 1.019. 22.Considera onedimensionalsimple harmonic oscillator whose classical angular frequency is coo.For / < 0 it is known to be in the ground state. For/ >0 there is also a timedependentpotential
V(t)
= F0xcoscot
for where Fo is constant in both spaceand time. Obtain an expression the expectation value (jc) as a function of time using timedependent order. Is this procedure perturbation theory to lowest nonvanishing +1 valid for co coo? [You may use (n'\\x\\n) =]Jh/2mcoo(}/n 8n>jn + i
\342\200\224
23.A
onedimensionalharmonic oscillator is in its ground state for t < 0. For/ >0 it is subjected a timedependentbut spatially uniform force to in (not potential!) the jcdirection,
to first order, obtain the probability of finding the oscillator in its first excitedstate for t > 0. Show that the / > 00 (r finite) limit of your expression indepenis of time. Is this reasonable surprising? or b. Can we find higher excitedstates? [You may use
independent
24. Considera particle bound in a simple harmonic oscillator potential. Initially (t < 0),it is in the ground state.At / = 0a perturbation of the
form
r), the system will probability that, after a sufficiently long time have made a transition to a given excitedstate. Consider final states. all 25.The unperturbed Hamiltonian of a twostate system is represented by
(t:\302\273
?2\302\260
V(t)={, \\Xcosco?
\302\260
'
XcoAs<\302\260')
(Xreal). v
'
352
Approximation Methods
a. At t = 0 the
system
is known to be in the
first
state, represented by
1 0,
E\302\256
Using timedependentperturbation theory and assuming that for to 2 is not close + hco, derive an expression the probability that the system be found in the secondstate represented by
as a function of t (t > 0).
.1
\342\200\224
b.Why is this procedurenot valid when is closeo hcol t 26.A onedimensionalsimpleharmonicoscillatorof angular frequencyco is
E\302\256 E\302\256
\302\261
but
At t
probability
oo, the oscillatoris known to be in the ground state. Usingthe timedependent perturbation theory to first order, calculate the probthat the oscillator is found in the first excitedstate at t = + oo. Challenge for experts:F(t) is so normalized that the impulse
\342\200\224
(ivr/co)
JF(t)dt
imparted to the oscillatoris always the
yet for r
negligible.
Isthis
:\302\2731/co,
the influence of
sometimeindependentpotential. The energy levelsand the correspondeigenfunctionsfor this problem are assumedto be known. We now subjectthe particle to a traveling pulserepresented a timedependent by = A8(xct).
oo the particle is known to be in the ground state whose energy eigenfunctionis (jc/)= ut(x).Obtain the probability for finding the system in some excited state with energy eigenfunc(x\\f) = uf(x) at t = + oo. b. Interpret your result in (a) physically by regarding the 5function pulseas a superpositionof harmonic perturbations; recall
\342\200\224
potential,
a. Supposeat t =
eigenfunction
r\302\260\302\260
due1\"
oo
\342\200\224
Problems
353
28.A
hydrogen atom in its ground state [(/?,/, m) = A,0,0)]is placed A between the platesof a capacitor. timedependentbut spatial uniform i electric (not potential!)s appliedas follows: field
Emphasize the role played by energy conservation,which holdseven as the perturbation has beenon for a
E= @
<
0,
(Eo in the positive zdirection).
t:\302\273
Using firstorder timedependent perturbation theory, compute the r in each of the three 2p probability for the atom to be found at = or 0). Repeat the problem for the 2s state: states: (w, /, m) = B,0,0). need not attempt to evaluate radial integrals, You (w,/,m) but perform all other integrations (with respectto angles and time). 29.Considera composite F system made up of two spin \\ objects. or t < 0, the Hamiltonian doesnot dependon spin and can be taken to be zero F by suitably adjusting the energy scale. or t > 0, the Hamiltonian is
B,1,
\302\2611
given by
H\342\200\224),
b. 30.
Find, as a function of time, > for / < the probability for being found in each of the following states and  a. By solving the problem exactly. By solving the problem assuming the validity of firstorder timedependentperturbation theory with H as a perturbation switchedon at / = Underwhat condition does(b) give the correct results? Considera twolevelsystem with Ex<E2. There is a timedependent potential that connects the two levelsas follows:
Supposethe system is in 
\342\200\224h),
H\342\200\224
0.
):
++),
0.
2l = ye~i0)t
At t
(y real). is,
= 0,it is known that only the lower level is *!(<>)= 1, c2@)= 0. a. Find \\cx(t)2 and c2@2 ^>0by exactly solving
f\302\260r
populated\342\200\224that
the
differential equation
coupled
ihtk=
? Vkn{t)e^\"'cn,
(ii)
co
(A:
= 1,2).
b. Do the
same problem using timedependentperturbation theory to lowest nonvanishing order. Comparethe two approaches small for values of y. Treat the following two cases separately:(i) co very
different from
<o21 and
closeo t
co21.
Approximation Methods
(a):(Rabi'sformula)
(id
 co21O4
sin 2 7_ 2
, +
(co
~
^
1/2
co21)
the slowturnonof perturbation V W1' (see Baym 1969, contribution from the second term in E.6.36). 257) can generate 32. . Considerthe positronium problemyou solvedin Chapter3,Proba 3. In the presencef a uniform and static magnetic field B o the along the zaxis, Hamiltonian is given by
\342\200\224\302\273
31.how that S
Problem
H = i4SiS2+
\342\200\224
\\mx)
S2z).
Solve this problemto obtain the energy levelsof all four statesusing degeneratetimeindependent erturbation theory (insteadof diagonp alizing the Hamiltonian matrix). Regard the first and the second for terms in the expression H as Ho and V, respectively. ompare C resultswith the exact expressions your
E= E=
where
h2A triplet
\302\261
1+ 4
eB
\\mechAj
m for singlet
triplet m
=0 =0 =
\302\261
1,
to causetransitions (via stimulated emissionand betweenthe two m = 0 states by introducing an oscilabsorption) magnetic field of the \"right\" frequency. Shouldwe orient the magnetic field along the zaxisor along the jc (or y) axis?Justify (The original static field is assumedto be along the zyour choice. axis throughout.) c.Calculate the eigenvectorso first order. t 32'. Problem32 above, but with the atomic hydrogen Hamiltonian Repeat
oscillating
pure triplet
(singlet)with m
H = i4SiS2+
where
the hyperfine term S2 is the proton spin. [Note the that of the positronium case].
in
\\mx)
B
is the
ASjS^$\\
electronspin, while
than
problemherehas lesssymmetry
Problems
355
to be an El transition. Supposethe magnetic number of the atom decreases one unit. What is the by quantum angular distribution of the emitted photon? Also discussthe polarof the photon with attention to angularmomentum conservafor the whole (atom plus photon) system. and 34. Consideran atom made up of an electron a singly charged(Z=1) triton CH). the system is in its ground state (ai = / = 0). Initially b Supposethe nuclear chargesuddenly increasesy oneunit (realistically an electron an antineutrino). This means that the triton and by emitting nucleus turns into a helium (Z = 2) nucleusof mass 3 CHe). btain the O for the system to be found in the ground state of the probability resulting helium ion. The hydrogenicwave function is given by
The
is process known
polarization
conservation
1,
1 ( z\\ 3/2e
V77\"
a o)
35.The
/ 1, = 0) is subjectedto a
F(x,t) = V0cos(kz
\342\200\224
cot).
for Usingtimedependentperturbation theory, obtain an expression the transition rate at which the electron is emitted with momentum p. Show, in particular, how you may compute the angular distribution of the ejectedelectron (in terms of 6 and defined with respectto the zaxis). Discussbriefly the similarities and the differencesbetween this problem and the (more realistic)photoelectriceffect.(Note:For the initial wave function see Problem 34.If you have a normalization problem, the final wave function may be taken to be
<f>
1
very large, but you should be able to show that the observable effectsare independent of L.) 36.Derive an expressionfor the density of free particle states in two t dimensions,hat is, the twodimensionalanalog of
with
3/ mk\\
dEdQ,
p2
2m
Your answer should be written as a function of k (or E) times dEd<t>, where is the polar angle that characterizesthe momentum direction in two dimensions. 37. A particle of massm constrained to move in one dimension is confined
<f>
356
within
Approximation
Methods
0 < x < L by an
infinitewall
potential
38. Linearly polarized light of angular frequency co is incident on a oneelectron \"atom\" whose wave function can be approximated by the ground state of a threedimensionalisotropicharmonic oscillator of angular frequency co0.Show that the differential cross section for the ejection of a photoelectronis given by
(Checkyour dimension!)
4ah2kj dti
m2coco o mco0
exp
\\
CO
mcoo
Xsin20cos2<J>exp
\\
cos6
provided the ejectedelectron of momentum hkf can be regardedas being in a planewave state. (The coordinate system usedis shown in Figure 5.10.) 39 Find the probability <Mp')2d3p' the particular momentum p' for the in groundstate hydrogen atom. (This is a nice exercise threedimenFourier transforms. To perform the angular integration choose the zaxisin the direction of p.) 40. Obtain an expression rBp>ls) the hydrogen atom. Verify that for for it is equal to 1.6 10 s. X
\302\260f threedimensional
CHAPTER6
IdenticalParticles
of This short chapter is devoted to a discussion some striking quantummechanical effects arising from the identity of particles.We also consider some applicationsto atoms more complex than hydrogen or hydrogenlike
atoms.
blue and the other red and then examinehow the red moves and how the blue particle movesas time passes. particle In quantum mechanics,however, identical particles are truly indiswe This is because cannot specifymore than a complete set of indistinguishable. f observablesor each of the particles;in particular, we cannot commuting label the particle by coloring it blue. Nor can we follow the trajectory because would entail a position measurement at each instant of time, that which necessarily disturbs the system; in particular the two situations (a) and (b) shown in Figure 6.1 cannot be distinguished\342\200\224not even in principle. For simplicity considerust two particles.Supposeone of the parj which we call particle is characterized by /c'}, where k' is a particles,
color ne of them o
1,
357
358
Identical
Particles
Two different paths, (a) and (b), of a twoelectron system, for example, in FIGURE which we cannot assert even in principle through which of the paths the electrons pass.
6.1.
(a)
(b)
we collectiveindex for a complete set of observables. Likewise, call the ket of the remaining particle \\k\.") The state ket for the two particles can be
written in
productform,
\\k')\\k\,")
where it is understoodthat the first ket refers to particle 1 and the second ket to particle 2.We can also consider where particle
though
F.1.1)
E \\k\") and particle 2 by /c'). ven particles are indistinguishable, it is worth noting that are and F.1.2) distinct kets for /c'=?k\". In fact, with mathematically k' =hk\", they are orthogonal to each other. Supposewe make a measurement on the twoparticle system. We may obtain kf for one particle and k\" for the other. However,we do not know a priori whether the state ket is \\k')\\k\,") \\k\\\k'),") that linear combinationof the two. Put in another way, all kets of
1 is characterized by
the
two
F.1.1)
or\342\200\224for
matter\342\200\224any
form
cx\\k')\\k\")
+ c2\\k\\\k')")
F.1.3)
lead to an identical set of eigenvalueswhen measurementis performed. This is known as exchangedegeneracy.Exchangedegeneracypresentsa difficulty unlike the singleparticle case,a specificationof the eigenvalueof a because, set d complete of observablesoesnot completelydetermine the state ket.The is quite ingenious. But before proceeding way nature avoids this difficulty
further,
We
let us develop the mathematicsof permutation symmetry. define the permutation operator Pl2 by
Pl2\\k')\\k\")
= \\k\\\k>).")
F.1.4)
Clearly,
P21= P12 and
/>?=!.
F.1.5)
6.1. Permutation
having k\"
Symmetry
359
interchanging 1and 2. In practicewe often encounter an observablethat has particle labels. Forexamplein for a twoelectronsystem, Sx (S2)standsfor the spin of particle1B). For simplicity we considera specificcase where operator the twoparticle state ket is completely specified by the eigenvaluesof a A singleobservable for each of the particles:
k\"\\
particle 2
Si^
Ax\\a')\\a\")
= a'\\a')\\a\") = a\"\\a')\\a\9")
F.1.6a)
and
A2\\a')\\a\") A denote the particle labels,and Ax and A2 are A observables for particles1 and 2, respectively.Applying Pl2 to we both sidesof F.1.6a),have
F.1.6b
the
= PnAipi2l\\*\\\a')") = a'lOl*')F1/7)
This is consistentwith
F.1.6b) if only
pnAipnl = A2
F.1.8)
m such particles.The observables, as momentum and position operators, ust necessarily appear symmetrically in the Hamiltonian\342\200\224for example,
It follows that Pl2 must change the particle labelsof observables. Let us now considerthe Hamiltonian of a system of two identical
F.1.9
Herewe have separatedthe
mutual interaction between the two particles from their interaction with some other external potential. Clearly, we have
pnHPn=H
F.1.10 F.1.5).
for H made up of observables for two identical particles.BecausePl2 we can say that P12 is a constant of the motion. The commutes with It therefore of Pl2 allowedare +1and becauseof eigenvalues follows that if the twoparticle state ket is symmetric (antisymmetric) to start with, it remains so at all times. If we insist on eigenketsof P12, two particular linear combinations are selected:
i/,
1
\\k'k\+m\302\261r(\\k')\\k\")+\\k\")\\k')),")
F.1.11a
360
Identical
Particles
and
\\k'k\_") We
j={\\k')\\k\\\k\")\\k>)).
F.1.11b
s S12 Ml + Pn), A12 i(l Pn)If we apply Sl2(Al2) an arbitrary linear combination of \\k')\\k\ to and \\k\\\k'),") the resulting ket is necessarily symmetric (antisymmetric). This can easily be seenas follows:
 
as follows:
F.1.13
can to Our consideration be extended a system made up of many identical We define particles.
= \\k')\\k\>\\kJ)\\kl+l)\\k1).... F.1.14
Clearly, P* = \\
F.1.15
Pt
are
+1 and
\342\200\2241.
It
is
general
[PiJtPkl]*0.
\\k')\\k\\\k'\")")
F.1.16
It is worth explicitly working out a system of three identical particles. = kets of form there are 3! 6 possible First,
F.1.17
where
and k'\" are all different. Thus there is sixfold exchange that the state be totally symmetrical or totally antisymmetrical, we can form only one linear combination each. xplicitly, E we have
k\\
k\",
Y degeneracy. et if we insist
\\k'k\"k'\" >
\302\261
= p{\\k')\\k\\\k'\"")
v6
>
\302\261
\\k\\\k')\\k'\"
\\k\\\k'\")\\k')\302\261\\k'\")\\k\")\\k') \\k'\\\k')\\k\")\302\261\\k')\\k'\")\\k\")}.")
F.1.18
6.2.Symmetrization
that
Postulate
361
there are altogether six independent state kets.It thereforefollowsthat there are four independent kets that are neither totally symmetrical nor totally antisymmetrical. We could also introduce the operator P123 by
defining
= P173(\\k')\\k\\\k'\")\\k\\\k'\")\\k').")
Note that Pl23= PuPn because
F1.19)
F.1.20)
In writing F.1.18)assumed we that k\\ k\", and k'\" are all different. If two of the three indicescoincide,it is impossibleto have a totally antisymmetrical state.The totally symmetrical state is given by I
F.1.21)
where the normalization factor is understood to be cases e have a normalization factor w
moregeneral
1
2Nl
\"
>
F122)
the number of times /c(l))
occurs.
Nt
6,2, YMMETRIZATIONOSTULATE S P
nature takes advantage of totally symmetrical or totally antisymmetrical states. It turns out that systems containing TV identical particles are either totally symmetrical under the interchange of any pair, in which case the particles are said to satisfy BoseEinstein (BE)statistics, hence known as bosons,or totally antisymin which case the particles are said to satisfy FermiDirac (FD) known as fermions.Thus statistics,hence
antisymmetrical,
Pjj\\N Pij\\N
iV
identical fermions),
F.2.1a) F.2.1b)
where Ptj is the permutation operator that interchangesthe / th and the th particle, with i and arbitrary. It is an empirical fact that a mixed
symmetry
362
Identical Particles
Even more remarkableis that there is a connectionbetween the of a particle and the statistics obeyedby it:
spin
F.2.2a) F.2.2b)
7r\302\261,7T\302\260
f Hereparticlescan be composite;or example, a 3He nucleus is a fermion just as the e~ or the proton; a 4He nucleus is a bosonjust as the
meson.
This spinstatisticsonnectionis, as far as we know, an exact law of c with no known I exceptions. n the framework of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, this principle must be acceptedas an empirical posIn the relativistic quantum theory, however, it can be proved that postulate. halfinteger spin particles cannot be bosons and integer spin particles cannot be fermions. An immediate consequence f the electron being a fermion is that o the electron must satisfy the Pauli exclusionprinciple,which states that no two electronscan occupy the same state. This follows becausea state like for s \\k')\\k') is necessarilyymmetrical, which is not possible a fermion.As is well known, the Pauli exclusionprinciple is the cornerstone of atomic and molecular physicsas well as the wholeof chemistry. To illustrate the dramatic differencesbetween fermions and bosons, let us considertwo particles, each of which can occupy only two states, characterized by k' and k\". For a system of two fermions, we have no there choice; is only one possibility: nature
F.2.4)
\\k')\\k\,")
\\k\\\k'),") in
\\k')\\k'),
\\k\\\k\").")
F.2.5)
for the fermion caseit is impossible both particles to the same state. In the bosoncase,for two out of the three allowed occupy kets, both particlesoccupy the same state. In the classical MB)statistics ( b case, oth particlesoccupy the same state for two out of the four allowed kets. In this sensefermions are the least sociable;hey avoid each other to t make sure that they are not in the same state; in contrast, bosonsare the most sociable,they really love to be in the same state, even more so than
We
seethat
6.3.TwoElectron
System
363
The differencebetweenfermionsand bosonsshow up most dramatiat low temperatures; a system made up of bosons,such as liquid 4He, exhibits a tendency for all particles to get down to the same ground state at
dramatically
c extremelylow temperatures.This is known as BoseEinsteinondensation,a feature not sharedby a system made up of fermions.
^= E TiC(msl9ms2)(xl9rnsl;x29ms2\\a).
If the Hamiltonian commuteswith
F.3.1)
?
be an eigenfunctionof S?oV and
[St2ot,//]=0,
then the energy eigenfunctionis expected to if is written as
\\p
F.3.2)
F.3.3)
triplet (symmetrical)
then the
\342\200\224
v2
(x+\"X+)
singlet (antisymmetrical),
~~ where x+ corresponds to mS2 = 2) Notice that the triplet functions are all symmetrical; this is reasonablebecausethe ladder spin operatorSx_ + 52_ commuteswith Pl2 and the + + ) state is even under
F.3.4)
x^si^h
)
We
note
F.3.5)
F.3.6)
364
Identical
Particles
Clearly, Pl2 can be written as where p^Pace)just interchanges the position coordinate, while P$m) just interchanges the spin states.It is amusing that we can expressP$m) as
F.3.7)
F.3.8)
which follows because
h2
(triplet)
2= 3h2
{
\342\200\224\342\200\224
F.3.9)
(singlet)
It follows from
that F.3.3)
letting
\\a)>Pl2\\a)
amounts to
F.3.10
\\<f>(xl9x2)\\2d3x1d3x2.
F.3.12
To seethe meaning of this more closely, let us considerthe specific case where the mutual interaction between the two electrons [for example, t can x2),S1S2]be ignored.If there is no spin dependence,he VpaiT(\\x1 wave equation for the energyeigenfunction $ [seeF.1.9)],
\342\200\224
h2 ,
1m
F.3.13
is now separable.We have a solution of the form co/1(x1)co5(x2) the times spin function. With no spin dependenceS2ot necessarily(and trivially) commutes with //, so the spin part must be a triplet or a singlet, which have definite symmetry propertiesunder Pffim\\ The space part must then be
written
combinationof co/i(x1)co5(x2)
6.3.TwoElectron
System
365
and coA(x2)oiB(xl):
i)]
F.3.14)
where the upper sign is for a spin singlet and the lower is for a spin triplet. The probability of observingelectron 1in d3xx around xx and electron2 in d3x2 around x2 is given by
d3xxd3x2. \302\2612Re[co/4(x1)co5(x2)co*(x2)co*(x1)]} The last term in the curly bracket is known as the exchangedensity. We immediately seethat when the electrons are in a spintriplet the probability of finding the secondelectron at the same point in state, space vanishes. Put another way, the electrons tend to avoid each other when their spins are in a triplet state.In contrast, when their spinsare in a singlet state, there is enhancedprobability of finding them at the same point in spacebecause the presence the exchangedensity. of of the question of identity is important only when the exchange Clearly, density is nonnegligible or when there is substantial overlap between function coA and function coB. To seethis point clearly, let us take the extreme case where co^(x)2where x may refer to xx or x2) is big only in ( A and \\coB(x)\\2 is big only in region B such that the two regions are region widely separated.Now choosed3xx in region A and d3x2 in region B; see The Figure 6.2. only important term then isjust the first term in F.3.15),
F.3.15
K(Xl)2<ofl(x2)2,
which
F.3.16)
is nothing more than the joint probability density expectedfor classicalparticles. In this connection, recall that classicalparticles are well necessarily localizedand the question of identity simply doesnot arise. Thus the exchangedensityterm is unimportant if regions A and B do not overlap. There is no need to antisymmetrize if the electrons are far apart
FIGURE
\\o)B(x)\\2
6.2.
is large
^(x)!2is large
in region A while
366
Identical
Particles
and the overlap is negligible.This is quite gratifying. We never have to billion electrons, about the question of antisymmetrization with 10 nor is it necessary take into account the antisymmetrization requirement to between an electron in LosAngelesand an electron in Beijing.
worry
6A THE HELIUMATOM
F of the helium atom is rewarding for severalreasons. irst of all, it is we simplestrealistic problem where the question of identity\342\200\224which in e an important role. econd, ven though it encountered Section S is a simplesystem, the twoparticleSchrodingerequation cannot be solved analytically; therefore, this is a nice placeto illustrate the use of perturbatheory and also the use of the variational method. The basic Hamiltonian is given by
A study
the
6.3\342\200\224plays
perturbation
2m
2m
rx
\342\200\224x2;
r2
ru
= x2,and r12^ xx where seeFigure 6.3. upposethe S e2/ri2\"termwere absent.Then, with the identity question ignored, the wave function would be just the product of two hydrogen atom wave functions with Z = 1changed into Z = 2. The total spin is a constant of the motion, so the spin state is either singlet or triplet. The spacepart of the wave function for the important casewhereone of the electrons is in the ground state and the other in an excited state characterizedby (nlm) is
r^lxj,
a*2
where the upper (lower) sign is for the spin singlet (triplet).We will come back to this general form for an excitedstate later. For the ground state, we need a specialtreatment. Herethe conis characterized by (IsJ,that is, both electronsin n =1,/ = 0. configuration
Electron 1 Electron 2
FIGURE
6.3.
6.4.The
Helium
Atom
367
The space function must then necessarilybe symmetric and singlet function is allowed.So we have
only
the spin
^
ITflg
F4.3)
wave
function
with
= 2.Not surprisingly,
this
\"
unperturbed\"
gives
= 2X4
for the groundstate energy, which
experimental
2a0)
F.4.4)
obtaining
is about 30%bigger than the experimenvalue. in This is just the starting point of our investigation because obtainwe the above form F.4.3), have completely ignored the last term in O that F.4.1) describesthe interactionbetween the two electrons. ne way to the problem of obtaining a better energy value is to apply approach as firstorder perturbation theory using F.4.3) the unperturbed wave funcand e2/r12 the perturbation. We obtain as
function
^V
F4.5)
l+
=
r22
\342\200\224
oo
y 2r1r2cos
where r> (r<) is the larger(smaller)of rx and r2 and y is the angle between integration is easily performed by expressing xx and x2. The angular P7(cosy)in terms of Ylm{Bl, (f>x) and Yjn(Q1, <J>2) using the addition theorem of sphericalharmonics:
Arrr
^ yrVx^^r^i^i)=
/
F.4.7)
1
477
(Air)8l(fim0.
F.4.8)
to
r\\
A%
\"'2
\342\200\242/,
128 z5'
F.4.9)
368
Identical
Particles
Combining everything,
we have (for Z = 2)
it
ao I
128
a0
2a
Adding this
F.4.10)
energy shift to
we F.4.4), have
F.4.11)
Comparethis
with
the experimentalvalue,
?exp=78.8eV.
F.4.12)
This is not bad, but we can do better! We propose to use the variational method with Z, which we call Zeff, as a variational parameter. The physical reasonfor this choices that the effectiveZ seenby one of the i electronsis smaller than 2 becausethe positive charge of 2 units at the by origin (seeFigure 6.3)is \"screened\" the negatively charged cloud of in the other electron; other words, the other electron tends to neutralize the F positive charge due to the helium nucleus at the center. or the normalized trial function we use
= <Xl,x2p>
From
this
Z3
F.4.13)
+ 0
0
we obtain
2 2
H=
2m
2m
12
a of H is at
F.4.14)
F.4.15)
This is smaller than
F.4.16)
is already very close considering the crudenessof the trial wave function. Historically, this achievement was consideredto be one of the earliestsignsthat Schrodinger's mechanicswas on the right track. We wave
which
6.4.The Helium
Atom
359
FIGURE atom.
100 6.4.
\"I\"
^1J
Cnlm
Singlet
Triplet
splittings
of
(ls)(nl) for
the helium
cannot get this kind of number by the purely algebraic (operator)method. The helium calculationwas first doneby A. Unsoldin 1927.* Let us briefly considerexcitedstates.This is more interesting from the point of view of illustrating quantummechanicaleffectsdue to identity. We consider We write the energy of this state as just
(Is)(\302\253/).
F.4.17
e2/rl2.
rl2
F.4.18
where / and known respectivelyas the direct integral and the exchange integral, are given by
/,
\342\200\224,
12
F.4.19a
F.4.19b
Figure 6.4. The physical interpretation for this is as follows: In the singlet case the space function is symmetric and the electrons have a tendency to come closeto each other. Therefore, the effect of the electrostatic repulsion is more serious; ence, higher energy results.In the triplet case,he space a h t function is antisymmetric and the electrons tend to avoid each other. Helium in spinsingletstates is known as parahelium, while helium in spintripletstates is known as orthohelium. Each configuration splits into
A. Unsold, Ann. Phys.
The upper(lower)sign goeswith the spinsinglet (triplet) state.Obviously,/ is positive; we can alsoshow that J is positive.Sothe net result is such that for the same configuration, the spin singlet state lies higher, as shown in
82A927) 355.
370
Identical
Particles
S)Bp)
^
\"
Para
ortho 3P2,i,o
s)Bs)
para 1So
ortho
3Si
ii
6.5.
for lowlying
configurations
of the helium
the para state and the ortho state, the para state lying higher. For the ground state only parahelium is possible.SeeFigure 6.5for a schematic energy level diagram of the helium atom. It is very important to recall that the original Hamiltonian is b spinindependent ecausethe potential is made up of just three Coulomb terms.There was no S1#S2term whatsoever.Yet there is a spindependent
effect\342\200\224the
from
electronswith parallel spins have a lower arises statistics. FermiDirac of This explanation of the apparent spin dependence the helium The atom energy levels is due to Heisenberg. physical origin of ferromagdisof the electron spins extendedover microscopic netism\342\200\224alignment also believed to be essentially the same, but the propertiesof
energy\342\200\224that
distances\342\200\224is
from first
princi
principles.
TABLEAUX YOUNG
keeping track of the requirement imposedby permutation symmetry, there is an extremely convenient bookkeeping technique known as Young a tableaux, after A. Young, an English clergyman who published fundamenThis paper on this subject in 1901. section is meant to be an introduction to Young tableaux for the practicalmindedreader. do not necessarily We presentall derivations; this is one of those caseswhere the rules are simpler than the derivations. To illustrate the basic techniques involved, we consideronceagain the spin states of a twoelectron system. We have three symmetric states to orientationsof the spintriplet state and corresponding the three possible an antisymmetric state corresponding the spin singlet. The spin state of to an individual electron is to be represented a box. e use 1 for spin up W by
fundamental
6.5.Permutation
and _2jfor
A
Symmetry
371
tableau,CD, and an antisymmetric tableau, states of a twoelectron system, ED is the Young tableau for a spin triplet, while R is the Young tableau for a spin R singlet. eturning now to jJLj and _2j,we can build up the threetripletstates as follows:
We define a symmetric When applied to the spin
spin down. These boxesare the basicprimitive objectsof SUB). a singlebox represents doublet.
11 12
2 2
We
symmetry
F.5.1)
when we put boxes do not consider 2 1 because symmehorizontally, is understood.So we deducean important rule: Doublecounting is avoided if we require that the number (label)not decrease going from the
spinsingletstate,
F.5.2)
is the only symmetric
C possibility. learly
requirement of antisymmetry;
state.Furthermore,
eliminate the unwanted symmetry states,we therefore requirethe number (label)to increaseas we go down. We take the following to be the general rule. In drawing Young tableau, going from left to right the number cannot decrease; going down the number must increase. deducedthis rule by considering the spin We states of two electrons, ut we can show this rule to be applicable the b to construction of any tableau. Considernow three electrons. e can construct totally symmetric W
spin
statesby the
following
rule:
111 112 12 2
2 2 2
F.5.3)
This method gives four states altogether. This is just the multiplicity of the = 2 state, which is obviously symmetric as seenfrom the m = f case, where all three spins are aligned in the positive zdirection. What about the totally antisymmetric states? We may try vertical tableau like
1 1 1
or
2 2
372
Identical
Particles
But these are illegal, becausethe numbers must increaseas we go down. for This is not surprising becausetotal antisymmetry is impossible spin states of three electrons;quite generally, a necessary (but, of course,not sufficient) condition for total antisymmetry is that every state must be we different. In fact, in SUB) cannot have three boxesin a vertical column. We now define a mixed symmetry tableau that lookslike this: Such a tableau can be visualized as either a single box attached to a or symmetric tableau [as in Equation F.5.4a)] a single box attached to an antisymmetric tableau [as in Equation F.5.4b)].
_
.
1
F.5.4a)
I
1
F.5.4b)
i If the spin function for three electronss symmetric in two of the to neither of them can be antisymmetric with respect a third index. indices, For example,
satisfies symmetry under 1 2,but it is neither symmetric nor antisymto with respect 1 3 (or2 3).We may try to enforce antisymmetry with 1 and 3 under 1 3 by subtracting the same thing from F.5.5)
<\302\273
antisymmetric
<\302\273
<\302\273
\302\253\302\246\302\273
interchanged:
/2
~~
/3 \"~
+ /31 /
/2
\"\"
/3 \"~
/3
+/
F.5.6)
This satisfies antisymmetry under 1<> 3, but we no longer have the original the dimensionality of ^ is 2;that is, symmetry under 1<> 2.In any case = j).We can seethis by noting that such a tableau it represents doublet (j a to and a corresponds the angular momentum addition of a spin doublet spin triplet ( OH ). We have used up the totally symmetric quartet so the remainder must be a doublet.Alternatively, we may attach a doublet the ) to a singlet ( pj ) as in F.5.4b); net product is obviously a doublet. So no matter how we considert, must represent doublet. But this is a i in what the rule gives.If the number cannot decrease the horizonprecisely direction and must increase the vertical direction, the only possibilities in are
(?)
\342\200\224'
horizontal
and
F.5.7)
must
to correspond a doublet.
6.5.Permutation
Symmetry
373
addition
angularmomentum
ad
F.5.9)
77\302\260,
The labels 2, and 3 may stand for the magnetic quantum numbers of <n~, or the u, /?orbitalsin atomic physicsor charge states of the pion 77+, and s quarks in the SUC)classificationof elementary particles.We d, assume that the rule we inferred using two primitive objects can be generalized and work out such conceptsas the dimensionality; we then
1,
checkto seewhether
1 1
everything
is reasonable.
3 :dimensionality 3 1
dimensionality
(in
3 SUC)* is
from
used to distinguish
Antisymmetry
\342\200\242 \342\200\242
.)
\\
1 2 3
only one
(Totally antisymmetrical.)
F.5.10)
1 1
Symmetry
12
1 3
2 2 1 1 3 2 2 3 1 3 2 2 3 3
2 3 12 2 2 3 3 1 1 3
3 3 : dimensionality 6 12 3 3 3 3 : dimensionality
1 1 1 1 33 1 1 2
\342\200\242 \342\200\242
1 1 2 2 22 12 2 2 2 3
10
1 2 3
Mixed symmetry
13 3
>: dimensionality
374
Identical
Particles
to Thesetableaux correspond representationsof SUC). in Xx boxes first row X 2 boxes second in row X 3 boxes third row in
it
is legitimate to strike
F.5.11
out
\342\200\242
\342\200\242 \342\200\242\342\200\242
F.5.12)
\342\200\242\342\200\242\342\200\242
be
l9
A2,
@.3.13
where p = Xx
In the
7=1state.
and q = A2 ~~ t SUC)language,a tableau correspondso a definite irreducible of SUC). n the other hand, when each boxis interpreted to O representation to mean a = 1 object,then a tableau does not correspond an irreducible of the rotation group. Let us discussthis point more specifirepresentation a w We start with putting together two boxes, hereeach box represents
\342\200\224
X2
specifically.
_ _
Cx3= 6 + 3)
F.5.14
The horizontal tableau has six states;the tableau is to be broken down into 7 = 2 (multiplicity 5) and 7 = 0 (multiplicity 1),both of which are symmettensor out In fact this is just how we construct a symmetric secondrank to of two vectors. The vertical tableau fl corresponds an antisymmetric 7=1state behaving like a X b. To work out the addition of three angular momenta with j\\ = j2 = j3 = let us first figure out
symmetric.
1,
+ Fx3= 10 8)
= Cx3 8+1)
F.5.15
To see how breaks down, we note that it must contain 7 = 3. + this is not the only totally symmetric state; a(b*c)+b(c#a) c(a#b) However, is also totally symmetric, and this has the transformation property of 7=1. Sorm contains both 7 = 3 (seven states) and 7=1(three states).As for ^ with eight possibilities ltogether, the argument is more involved, but a we note that this 8 cannot be broken into 7+1 because 7 is totally symmetric, while 1is totally antisymmetric when we know that 8 is of mixed other words 7 = 2 symmetry. So the only other possibility is 8 = 5 + and 7=1.
3\342\200\224in
6.5.Permutation
Symmetry
375
3X3 X3 =
In terms of angularmomentum 7) 7 = 3 (dimension once
10
7+3
T
8
5+3
T
8
5+3
T
+1
F.5.16)
states, we have
(totally symmetric)
three times (one totally symmetric, two mixed symmetry) 1) (totally antisymmetric) 7 = 0 (dimension once
F.5.17)
t That the 7 = 0 state is unique correspondso the fact that the only product which is necessarily of a, b, and c invariant under rotation is a(bxc), We can also look at the 7=1 states using the tensor antisymmetric. approach.We have three independent vectorsconstructed from a, b, and c: F a a(b*c),b(c*a), nd c(a*b). rom these we can construct only one totally combination, symmetric
+ a(bc)+b(ca)c(ab).
We
F.5.18
can apply this consideration to the BpKconfiguration of the There are alnitrogen atom, N (Z=7, shell structure (lsJBsJBpK).
altogether
The space function have /tot = 3, is it because must be combined with a totally antisymmetactually impossible spin function. Remember
antisymmetric
6* 654 \" 3!3! 32 = 20 states. behaving like rm, which would
F.5.19
where each box standsfor spin up or down, is impossibleor spin states of f In three electrons. contrast the totally antisymmetric spacefunction
with
= 0 is perfectly allowableif combinedwith a totally symmetric spin /tot function which has total spin angular momentum \\; we have 4S3/2 for this configuration. The mixedsymmetry spacefunction ^p (/tot = must be combined with a mixedsymmetry spin function, necessarilya spin doublet So we have 2D5/23/2and ^3/2,1/2 counting of states The
rm,
2,1)
[p.
376
Identical
Particles
=i y
6 states
J; = 1
4x3states
\342\200\224
2 states 20 states
F.5.20)
This agreeswith the other way of counting. H Finally, we consider pplicationsto elementaryparticle physics. ere a we apply SUC)considerationsto the nonrelativisticquark model, where the primitive objects are w, d, s (up, down, and strange, where up and down refer to isospin up and isospin down). A box can now stand for w, d, or s. We look at the decuplet epresentation rrn A0): r
+'Of
I=
\302\247,
F.5.21
sss
where / stands for isospin. Now all ten states are
known to be spin \\ objects. is safe to It assumethat the spacepart is in a relative Sstate for lowlying states of three quarks.We expecttotal symmetry in the spin degreeof freedom.For instance, the j = \\, m = \\ state of A can be visualized to have quark spins all aligned. But the quarks are spin \\ objects;we expect total antisymmetry because f FermiDirac o statistics. et Y
Spin:
symmetric symmetric
F.5.22)
Space:
for the
this
becauseother aspectsof the nonrelativisticquark model were embarrassing so successful. The way out of this dilemma is to postulate that there is actually an additional degree freedom called color (red, blue, or yellow) and posof
the j = \\ decuplet.But as is evident from F.5.22), total symmetry in case even! This led to the \"statisticsparadox,\"which was especially is
Problems
377
tulate
that
particles,including
RYB\302\273.
F.5.23)
The a totally antisymmetric combinationin color space. statistics of F.5.10), problemis now solved because
p =
p(flavor)
p(spin)
p(space) (color) p
/? 5 24)
this is a cheap way to get out of the dilemma. other piecesof evidencein favor of color, such Fortunately, there were also and the crosssection for electronpositronannihilaas the decayrate of into hadrons.In fact, this is a very good example of how attempts to overcome difficulties lead to nontrivial prediction of color.
77\302\260 annihilation
PROBLEMS
to \\ particles are subjected a onedimensionalsimple harmonic oscillator potential. What is the groundstateenergy?What is the Fermi energy? b. What are the ground state and Fermi energiesf we ignore the mutual i interactions and assume N to be very large? 2. It is obvious that two nonidenticalspinl particleswith no orbital angular momenta (that is, sstatesfor both) can form y = 0, y=l, and y = 2. Suppose,however, that the two particlesare identical.What restrictions do we get? 3.Discusswhat would happen to the energy levelsof a helium atom if the electron were a spinless boson.Beas quantitative as you can. 4. Three spin 0 particles are situated at the corners of an equilateral triangle. Let us define the zaxis to go through the center and in the direction normal to the plane of the triangle. The whole system is free to rotate about the zaxis. singstatistics considerations, obtain restrictions U on the magnetic quantum numbers corresponding to
/.
378
Identical
Particles
5. Considerthree weakly interacting, identical spin 1particles. a. Supposethe spacepart of the state vector is known to be symmetric
under interchange of any pair.Usingnotation  + )0)+for particle ) 1in ms = +1,particle 2 in ms = 0, particle 3 in ms = +1,and so on, construct the normalizedspin states in the following three cases: (i) All three of them in + (ii) Two of them in +), one in 0). (iii) All three in different spin states. What is the total spin in each case? b. Attempt to do the same problem when the spacepart is antisymmetric under interchange of any pair. 6. Supposethe electron were a spin particle obeying FermiDirac statisWrite the configuration of a hypotheticalNe (Z = 10)atom made up of such \"electrons\" Show that [that is, the analog of (lsJBsJBpN]. the configuration is highly degenerate. hat is the ground state (the W lowest term) of the hypothetical Ne atom in spectroscopic notation where S, L, and stand for the total spin, the total orbital B5+1L7, when angular momentum, and the total angular momentum, respectively) exchange splitting and spinorbit splitting are taken into account? 7. Two identical spin \\ fermions move in one dimension under the ininfluence of the infinitewall potential V= oc for x < 0, x > L, and V= 0 for 0 < x < L. a. Write the groundstate wave function and the groundstate energy when the two particles are constrained to a triplet spin state (ortho
).
\302\247
statistics.
b. Repeat (a)when
state).
are in a singlet spin state (para state). the two particles interact mutually via a very shortrange attractive potential that can be approximated by
they
V=\\8(xlx2)(A>0).
that perturbation theory is valid even with such a singular potential, discuss semiquantitatively what happensto the energy levels obtained in (a) and (b).
CHAPTER7
Theory Scattering
This last chapter of the book is devoted to the theory of scattering and, more generally, collision processes.is impossible overemphasizethe It to of this subject. importance
+ H=H0 V
where Ho stands for the kineticenergyoperator
G.1.1
In the would
scattering
absenceof a scatterer, V would be zero, and an energy eigenstate of be just a free particle state p).The presence V causesthe energy eigenstate to be different from a freeparticlestate.However,if the scatterare interested is, no change in processis to be
elastic\342\200\224that energy\342\200\224we
in
obtaining a solution to the fullHamiltonian Schrodingerequation with be the energyeigenket l the same energy eigenvalue.More specifically,et
\\<f>)
379
380
Scattering
Theory
of
Ho:
G.1.3)
(We
use <f>) here rather than p) becausewe may later be interested in wave rather than planewavestates; may stand for either.) freespherical The basicSchrodingerquation we wish to solve is e
\\<f>)
G.1.4)
Both Ho and Ho + V exhibit continuous energy spectra.We look for a solution to G.1.4) that, as F> we have \\//) > <J>),where <J>) is the such 0, with solution to the freeparticle Schrodingerequation [G.1.3)] the same energy eigenvalue. It may be argued that the desiredsolution is
It/
~F
t  Ho M r / ~M9/>
7F~
^/.l.jj
apart from complications arising from the singular nature of the operator 1/(E Ho).We can seethis by noting that E Ho applied to G.1.5 is The immediately gives the correct equation, G.1.4). presenceof reasonable because must reduceto as V vanishes.However,without prescriptionsfor dealing with a singular operator, an equation of type has G.1.5) no meaning.The trick we usedin timeindependentperturbation the complimentary projection operator, and so on (see theory\342\200\224inserting Section not work well here becauseboth <f>) and exhibit continuous eigenvalues. Instead, this time the solution is specified by
\\<j>)
\\\\p)
\\<f>)
5.1)\342\200\224does
\\\\p)
making
slightly
complex:
Edistances.
Ho\302\261
ie
G.1.6)
(x\\//(\302\261))
This is known as the LippmannSchwinger equation. The physical meaning of + is to be discussedin a moment by looking at at large The LippmannSchwinger quation is a ket equation independentof e We particular representations. now confine ourselves to the position basis by multiplying (x from the left. Thus
E
Ho\302\261
ie
This is an integral equation for scattering becausethe unknown ket appears under an integral sign.If <J>) stands for a planewave state with momentum p, we can write 3/2
7.1. he LippmannSchwinger T
Equation
381
is, [Editor'sNote:In contrast to bound states, the planewave state G.1.8) of course, normalizable and not really a vector in Hilbertspace. not Dealing with such statesis oneof the inconveniencesof timeindependent scattering is theory. The \"normalization\" in G.1.8)such that = j</3jt<p'x><xp> 8C)(p
 p').
is written
ie
G.1.9)]
using
If, on the other hand, the LippmanSchwinger equation the momentum basis, we obtain
<p We
<pl<t>>
1  (pz/2m) E
\302\261
G.1.10
shall come 7.2. back to this equation in Section Let us considerspecificallythe positionbasisand work with G.1.7) To make any progresswe must first evaluate the kernel of the integral equation defined by
h2
E
We
i  Ho
x
\342\200\224
\302\261
ie
G.1.11
claim that
G\302\261(x,
x') is given by
G\302\261(x,
x') =
h
\302\261ik\\xx'
G.1.12
where E
2m
we evaluate
as follows: G.1.11)
1
\302\261
ie
x' =
2m 
d3p'
x p E
where Ho acts on <p' Now use
1  (p'2/2m)
\302\261
ie
G.1.13
1
Jf
\302\261
 (p'2/2m)
p') =
ie
372
sC)(p' p\ E (p'72m) ie
\302\261
(x
'
<P\"
G.1.14
becomes G.1.13)
*
[E (p'2/2m) ie]
\302\261
G.1.15
382
Scattering Theory
becomes G.1.15)
\342\200\224x'lcosfl
I'll^
W~t
\302\247s
/qx
Ji
kzqz\302\261ie
i\\xx'\\'co
e
477 'x
q2
V
/!
\342\200\224x
.
that
G.1.16
the
integrand
In the last step we used the method of residues, oting n has polesin the complex gplane at
\302\261k\302\261ie'.
G.1.17
The reader may recognize that G + is nothing for the Helmholtz equation,
( V72 Armed
I
k2\\(l
(v
v^ = ^^3)^v v^
in
G.1.11)
with
Equation
\342\200\224
x
Notice that the wave
written
lk\\\\
Xr
\302\261}>.
47rxx
G.1.19
of the scatterer is function (x^(\302\261)) in the presence as the sum of the wave function for the incident wave (x<f>) and a term that represents effectof scattering.As we will see the explicitly later, at of large distancesthe spatial dependence the second term is sufficiently provided that the potential is of finite range. This means that the t positive solution (negativesolution) correspondso the plane wave plus an outgoing (incoming) spherical wave. In most physical problemswe are interestedin the positive solution becauseit is difficult to preparea system satisfying the boundary condition appropriate for the negative solution. To seethe behavior of (x^(\302\261)) more explicitly,let us considerthe where V is a local is, a potential diagonal in the specificcase Potentials that are functions only of the position operator xrepresentation. x belongto this category. In preciseterms V is said to be local if it can be written as
e\302\261lkr/r potential\342\200\224that
G.1.20
7.1. he LippmannSchwinger T
As
Equation
383
a result, we obtain
)) =
d3x\"(x'\\V\\x\(x\"\\xP(\302\261))
G.1.21
The integral equation G.1.19) simplifies as now
\342\200\224
G1.22)
Let us attempt to understand the physics contained in this equation. The to towards the observationpoint at which vector x is understood be directed the wave function is evaluated.For a finite range potential, the region that In gives rise to a nonvanishing contribution is limited in space. scattering we are interested in studying the effectof the scatterer (that is, the processes finite range potential) at a point far outside the range of the potential. This is quite relevant from a practical point of view becausewe cannot put a O detectorat short distance near the scattering center. bservation is always made by a detectorplacedvery far away from the scatterer at r greatly larger than the range of the potential. In other words, we can safely set
x\302\273x',
G.1.23)
= x
r'=lx'l
and a = z(x,x'), P
G.1.24)
G.1.25)
Observation point
=
point P is where the wave to the integral in Equation G.1.22) less than the range of the potential, as depicted by the shaded region of the figure.
\302\261
FIGURE function
7.1.Finiterange
is for
x'
(x\\\\p{
*) is to be evaluated,
scattering
potential. The
observation
384
Scattering Theory
we have for r
\302\273
r',
Ix
\342\200\224x'l
= vr2 2/r'cosar' +
\342\200\224
=r , 1
\342\200\224
r 2r'cosa+ /2 
\\
1/2
G.1.26)
~ r vx
where
^^
Also define
k'=kr.
x. We
obtain
x_
G.1.28
propagation
The motivation for this definition is that vector for waves reaching observationpoint
e\302\261iK\\x
e\302\261itcre+iK
for large r. It is legitimate to replace Furthermore, to by just rid of the /Ts in expressionsuch as 1/Bt7^K/2,t is convenient to use i s get k) rather than pz), where
\342\200\224xr
l/x
G.1.29)
1/r.
Becausek) is normalizedas
we have
k=^.
= 5C)(kk/)
<xk> = 3/2
G.1.30)
G.1.31
G.1.32
So,finally,
1 2m
4tt
elkr
\342\200\224
1 B*)3/2
ikr
1 2m
4tt
\342\200\224
/k'*x'
3/2
G.1.34
7.1. he LippmannSchwinger T
Similarly,
Equation
385
correspondsto the original plane wave in propagation direction k plus an incoming sphericalwave with spatial dependence e~lkr/r and amplitude
To obtain the differential cross sectiondvldil, we may considera large number of identicallypreparedparticlesall characterized by the wave function G.1.32). can then ask, what is the number of incident particles We to crossinga planeperpendicular the incident direction perunit areaper unit time? This is just proportional to the probability flux due to the first term on the righthand side in we Likewise may ask, what is the number of scattered particles going into a small area da subtending a differential solidangle d element Ct? Clearly, do number of particles scattered into dQ, per unit time unit area per unit time dSl number of incident particles crossing
(I/477)B7rKBm//i2Xk'Fi//)>.
G.1.33).
__
Jincid
Hence the
differential
crosssection is
d2
WavePacket Description
formulation
do_
G.1.36)
The readermay wonderhere whether our timeindependentformulaof scattering has anything to do with the motion of a particle being
(a)
(b)
FIGURE 7.2. (a) Incident wave packet approaching scattering center initially, (b) Incident wave packet continuing to move in the original direction plus spherical outgoing wave front (after a long time duration).
386
Scattering Theory
bouncedby a scattering center. The incident plane wave we have used is infinite in extent in both spaceand time. In a more realistic situation, we the that considera wave packet(a difficult subject!) approaches scattering
the original wave packet moving in the original direction plus a sphericalwave front that moves outward, as in Figure 7.2.Actually the use of a plane wave is satisfactory as long as the dimension of the wave packet is much larger than the size of the scatterer
(orrange of V).
7.2.THE BORNAPPROXIMATION
is Equation G.1.34)still not directly useful in computing the differential for crosssectionbecausein the expression /(k',k)the unknown ket ^(+ )) If the effectof the scatterer is not very strong, we may infer that it appears. is not such a bad approximationto replace(x'\\//(+)) (which appearsunder the integral sign) by is,
(x'<f>)\342\200\224that
we Because treat the for We then obtain an approximateexpression potential V to first order, the approximate amplitude so obtained is known as the firstorderBorn amplitude and is denotedby /A):
/(k',k).
f^(k\\k) = ^^^jd3x'e^kk/^V(x').
\342\200\224
G.2.2)
In other words,apart from the Bm/4iTh2), firstorder amplitude is just the threedimensionalFourier transform of the potential V with respectto q =k
\342\200\224k'.
For a
k
\342\200\224k',
function
of
sin;
G.2.3)
seeFigure 7.3. e W
9ml
h
/ q Jo
rV(r)sinqrdr.
G.2.4)
*For a fuller account of the wavepacket approach, seeM. L. Goldberger and K. M. R Watson, Collision Theory, Chapter 3 (New York: John Wiley, 1964); . G.Newton, Scattering Theory of Waves and Particles, Chapter 6 (New York: McGrawHill, 1966).
7.2. The
Born Approximation
387
k'
FIGURE
7.3.
9, where
q=
kk'.
Yukawa
An
example is now
in
order. Considerscattering by a
potential
V(r) =
fir
G.2.5)
\302\273
in where Vo is independent of r and 1/ju, corresponds, a certain sense,to the range of the potential. Notice that V goesto zero very rapidly for r 1/ju,. For this potential we obtain [from G.2.4)]
G.2.6)
where we have used
/\342\200\242OO
Im
G.2.7)
Noticealso that
q2 =
G.2.8)
the first Born approximation, the differential cross section for scattering by a Yukawa potential is given by
So, in
do
cos
G.2.9)
fixed\342\200\224for
It is amusing to observehere that as /t * 0, the Yukawa potential is reduced to the Coulomb potential, provided the ratio V0/n is the limiting process. seethat the first Born We example,to be differential cross sectionobtained in this manner becomes
ZZ'e2\342\200\224in
da\\
)~
BmJ(ZZ'e2J
h4
16A:4sin4@/2)
G.2.10)
Scattering Theory
if disappears
hk
s is identified as p, o
d?l I where
16
juke
sin4(9/2)
'
= \\p\\2/2m; this is preciselythe Rutherford scattering cross EKE sectionthat can be obtained classically. Coming back to G.2.4),the Born amplitude with a spherically
symmetric potential, there are several general remarks we can make if first Born amplitude, the corresponding
of q only; that is, fF) dependson the energy (h2k2/2m)and 6 only through the combination
4. Forsmall
involving
0.
2m
d 3x,
Jkr e
1.
<\302\253
G.2.12)
We now considerwhat the specialcase the Yukawa potential in of is legitimate is, for small k (k may imply. At low to replaceelkr by So we must have
G.2.5)
1.
energies\342\200\224that
/x)\342\200\224it
jtr
This requirement may be compared with the condition for the Yukawa potential to develop a bound state, which we can show to be
h
KO>2.7
G.2.14)
7.2. The
with Vo
Born Approximation
389
negative. In other words, if the potential is strong enough to develop a bound state, the Born approximation will probably give a misleading result. In the oppositehigh &limit, the condition that the secondterm in is small G.1.22) can be shown to imply
/*/
As k
G.2.15)
energies.
inequality
V\\^) =
Multiplying V
T\\<j>).
\302\273.,P7W
G.2.17)
This is supposed to hold for <J>) taken to be any planewave state; T furthermore, we know that these momentum eigenketsare complete. herewe must have the following operator equation satisfied:
Therefore,
T=V+ VE = /(k'.k) 
\342\200\224
Ho + ie
^r\342\200\224\342\200\224
T. as [using
G.2.18)
The scattering amplitude of G.1.34) now be written can with the <J>) as momentum eigenkets]
G.2.16
^ ^B7rK<k'Tk>.
E Ho + ie E Ho + ie
\342\200\224 \342\200\224
G.2.19)
operator T.
V
Thus to determine /(kr,k),it is sufficient to know the transition We can obtain an iterative solution for T as follows:
V
+V
\342\200\224
Ho + ie
+V
G.2.20)
we Correspondingly, can expand as follows:
00
G.2.21)
390
Scattering Theory
FIGURE
7.4.
Physical interpretation
4tt
V\\k) EHo + ie
G.2.22
If an explicit form
it
as
1 2m
Air
Btt)
(k''xV(x')
2m
V(x\elk'
is G.2.23)given
x\"\342\200\224which
G.2.23
for
the
then
Helmholtz equation G.1.18); subsequently,a secondinteraction occursat xr the wave is scattered into the of the appearance finally, to direction k\". In other words, /B) corresponds scattering viewed as a a likewise,/C) is viewedas a threestep process, nd so on. twostep process;
\342\200\224thus
propagatesfrom
x\"
to xr via
Green'sfunction
K(xr)\342\200\224and,
7.3 OPTICALTHEOREM
Thereis a very famous relationship popularly attributed to Bohr,Peierls,
Placzek [Editor's Note: This relationship is in fact due to Eugene see Feenberg* (Phys. Rev. 40, 1932); R. G. Newton (Am. J. Phys. 44,
and
*As pointed out by Newton in his Review (c.f.Ref.8 therein), Feenberg's paper is also with a receipt date stated as remarkable for the fact that it was published on 1 April 1932, 8 September violating causality!
1932\342\200\224thus
7.3.Optical
Theorem
391
relatesthe imaginary part of the forward scattering amplitude fF the total crosssectionatot, as follows:
Optical Theorem
0) to
G.3.1
where
the
G.3.2)
setting of k'= k imposesscatteringin
da_ the
dtt
dQ
G.3.3)
G.3.4)
We next evaluate Im(krk) using
of
V:
= Im
Now we use the wellknown relation
EH0ie
= Pr.
\342\200\224
G.3.5)
E
to reduce the
\342\200\224
Ho ie
EH, i<n8(EH0) o
form
righthand
'E
The
G.3.6)
of
V
two terms of
vanish
hermiticity
and
G.3.7)
Again,
we can recastG.3.7)sing u
j
7T
E hlk 2m
2/,/2
\\
mk
G.3.8)
392
Scattering Theory
where we have used d3k'=k'dE(dk'/dE)dti\\the 5function constraint E = h2k'2/2m [hence dE = (ti1k'/m)dk'\\ k'= k. From and we G.3.4) G.3.8), have
and\342\200\224finally\342\200\224
We can appreciate the physical significanceof the optical theorem after we discussshadow scattering.
7.4.EIKONALAPPROXIMATION
This approximation coversa situation in which K(x) varies very little over a distanceof orderof wavelength X (which can be regardedas \" small\.") Note that V itself need not be weak as long as E h K; ence the domain of here is different from the Born approximation. Under these condivalidity the semiclassical concept ecomes pplicable, nd we replacethe b a path a exact wave function \\// + ) by the semiclassical wave function [seeB.4.18) and B.4.22)], namely,
\302\273
conditions,
\\
G.4.1)
G.4.2)
as discussedin Section 2.4. e proposeto compute S from G.4.2)by W the further approximation that the classicalrajectory is a straightmaking t line path, which should be satisfactoryfor small deflectionat high energy.* Considerthe situation depictedin Figure 7.5,where the straightline trajecis along the zdirection.Integrating G.4.2) e have w
trajectory
1/2
dz'+ constant.
that
G.4.3)
Tkz
n
as V+0
this
G.4.4)
zeropotential
would
is G.4.1)reproducedin
determine
to G.4.2)
be a
task in general.
7.4.Eikonal
limit. We
Approximation
393
can then
write
Equation r
m
a G.4.3) s
T = kz +
= kzwhere for E
:\302\273
Im
k dz'
'2)dz'
~k
mV h2k
h2k * oo
G.4.5)
V,
we have used
k2 2m
at
high
E = hzkl/2m. o S
ZTL)
=s
1
Btt)
3/2
\342\200\224
im
h'k Joo
G.4.6)
have the correct asymptotic form appropriatefor an incident plussphericaloutgoing wave (that is, it is not of form e + and indeedrefers only to motion along the original direction), f(Q)(elkr/r) it can neverthelesstill be usedin G.1.34) s to obtain an approximate expresto wit, for/(k',k),
expression
im
G.4.7)
G.4.7) [...], isjust like the firstorder
without
Born amplitude in
in
We G.2.2). perform the threedimensional(d3x') integraG.4.7) y introducing cylindricalcoordinates d3x'= b bdbd$hdz' (see
zdirection
Scatteringregion
FIGURE
straight
7.5.
line trajectory
Schematic diagram of eikonal approximation scattering where the classical is along the zdirection, x = /*, and b = b is the impact parameter.
394
Scattering Theory
Figure 7.5)and
noting
that
where we have used k and (k k')z~ O@2),which can be ignored for small deflection 6.Without loss of generality we choose scattering to be in the xzplaneand write
\342\200\224
(kk')x'=(kk')(b+z'z)k'b, G.4.8)
\302\261b
= (ksin0x+
The expression for
kcosdz)\342\200\242
(bcos
bsin<j>hy)
kbdcos<}>h.
G.4.9)
/(k',k)becomes 1 2m 00bdb /(k\\k) =
4tt
f
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
ikbO
cos<j>h
/oo
We next
+ 00 dz Kexp
im
hLk
fJooVdz'
J
G.4.10
use the
following
identities:
d<t>he'khecos't'\302\273
= 2irJ0(kbd)
G.4.11
Z
and
/oo
+ 00 dz Kexp
\342\200\224
Vdz'
oo
ih2k m
\342\200\224
exp
im
h2k * oo
\342\200\224
= + 00 =
\342\200\224
Vdz'
oo
G.4.12
the where, of course, contribution from z
\342\200\224
oo on
f(k\\k) = ik
where
\342\200\224
/\342\200\242OO
dbbJ0(kbd)[e2'Hh)
00
i
I],
G.4.13
dz.
G.4.14
\342\200\224
In G.4.14)fix the impactparameter b and integratealong the straightline we T path z, shown in Figure 7.5. here is no contribution from [ell^h) X] in if G.4.13)b is greater than the range of V. It can be shown in a straightforward manner that the eikonal This approximation satisfies the optical theorem G.3.1). proof plus some interesting applications\342\200\224for example,when V is a Gaussian potential A F) becomes in in the literature (Gottfried Gaussian discussed For 1966). the casewhere V is a Yukawa potential, seeProblem 7 in this
bspace\342\200\224are
chapter.
7.5.FreeParticle
395
/, E'). (E\\ /',m'?, m) = 8ir8mm,8(EIn analogy with the angular w positionspace ave function, we may
G.5.1)
guessthe
dependence:
G.5.2)
To prove this rigorously,we proceedas follows.First, consider momenthe is, a planewavestate whose propagation direction eigenket is along the positive zaxis. n important property of this state is that it has A no orbital angularmomentum component in the zdirection:
momentum
\\kz)\342\200\224that
Lz\\kz)
= (xpy
ypx)\\kx
= 0,ky = 0,kz = k) = 0.
G.5.3)
T Actually this is plausible from classicalconsiderations: he angularmomentum component must vanish in the directionof propagation because
G.5.3)\342\200\224and
396
must
\\kz)
Scattering Theory
0\342\200\224we
G.5.4)
<J>,
W Noticethat there is no m' sum; m' is always zero. e can obtain the most
general momentum
from
\\kz)
by just applying
C.6.47)]:
eigenket, with the direction of k specifiedby 0 and the appropriate rotation operator as follows[see
G.5.5)
Multiplying
= X(E'J\\m'
G.5.6 oi
(E, [, m =
independentof 6 and
we can write, using
hi +
k\342\200\224that
is,
/\342\200\224^\342\200\224
g*E{k).
So
C.6.51),
= <k?,/,m>
gIB
(k)
YT
(k)
G.5.7)
= 0. (HoE)\\E,l,m)
But
\342\200\224
G.5.8)
= (k\\(H0E)
Multiplying with G.5.9)
\\E,
'h2k2
2m
right,
G.5.9)
we obtain
I, m) on the
( h2k 2k2
G.5.10
only
This means that (k\\E,l,m)can be non vanishing we must be able to write g/E(k) as
h2k2
if
2/, 2 E = hlkL/7.m;so
1m E
G.5.11
7.5.FreeParticle
397
',/',
m'\\E,
/, m)
, /, m>
k\022dk
\"
'h2k\022
\342\200\224~
2m
E'
x8'h2k 2m
k\022dE'
E
(fi2k 2m
dE\"/dk
E
xy;
// = fe2/,//2 where we have defined E\" _ h k\" /2m to change ^\"integration into we E\"integration. omparing this with G.5.1), seethat N = h/yfrnk will C suffice.Therefore, we can finally write
G.5.12)
{mk
>h2k2 2m
E
G.5.13
hence
h
{mk
'h2k2 E 2m
G.5.14
the planewavestate k) can be expressed a as of free sphericalwavestates with all possible/values; in superposition particular,
From
, /, m)(E,/, mk>
h h2k2/2m
\\
oo
ymk
y/\"*(k) 
G.5.15
Becausethe transverse dimension of the plane wave is infinite, we expect that the plane wave must contain all possible valuesof impact parameter b the impact parameter b^lh/p).rom this point of view it F (semiclassically, is no surprisethat the momentum eigenstatesk),when analyzedin terms of valuesof /. sphericalwavestates,contain all possible
We
function
for
\\E,l,m) in
in
momentum
position space.
398
Scattering Theory
From wave mechanics, the readershould be familiar with the fact that the wave function for a free spherical wave is y/(A:r)Y/w(f), where ji(kr) is the sphericalBesselfunction of order / (seeAppendix A). The secondsolution n^kr), although it satisfiesthe appropriate differential equation, is inadmisbecauseit is singular at the origin. So we can write
inadmissible
(x\\E9
/, m) = ctjt(kr)Ytm(t).
G.5.16)
= ^777 = E E
B^K/2
I
i~m
I, jdE(x\\E, m)(E,I,
h h2k2\\
G.5.17)
which
can be proved by
using
the
following
Ji(kr): = ji(kr)
with Comparing G.5.17)
\342\200\224.
G.5.19) (*lelkrcosePl(cos0)d(cos6).
'\"
we G.5.18),have
P^.
E 2m
h
G.5.20)
To summarize, we have
h
ymk
G.5.21a
G.5.21b
These expressionsare extremely useful in developing the partialwave in expansiondiscussed the next section. We concludethis section by applying G.5.21a) decay process. to a Supposea parent particle of spin j disintegratesinto two spinzeroparticles A (spin j) B (spin0)+C (spin0).The basicHamiltonian responsibleor f
*\302\246
7.6.Method of Partial
Waves
399
such a decayprocessis, in general,very complicated. However,we do know that angular momentum is conserved becausethe basic Hamiltonian must be rotationally invariant. So the momentumspacewave function for the final state must be of the form G.5.21a), / identified with the spin of with the parent particle.This immediately enablesus to compute the angular distribution of the decay product because momentumspacewave functhe is nothing more than the probability amplitude for finding the decay productwith relative momentum direction k. As a concrete example from nuclear physics,let us considerthe of an excitednucleus,Ne20*: decay
function
+ Ne20*>O16He4.
G.5.22
the Both O16and He4 are known to be spinless S particles. uppose magnetic number of the parent nucleus is +1,relative to some direction z. quantum Then the angular distribution of the decay product is proportional to = C/877)sin20, here @,<t>) are the polar angles defining the w \\Y1\302\2611F,(j>)\\2 relative direction k of the decay product.On the other hand, if the magnetic the decay angular quantum number is 0 for a parent nucleus with spin = C/4t7)cos20. distribution varies as Fora general spin orientation we obtain
1,
\\Y\302\256@,<j>)\\2
m=
1
G5.23
Foran
an
unpolarized nucleus the various w(m) are all equal, and we obtain this is not surprising because there is no preferred direction if the parent particle is unpolarized. For a higher spin object,the angular distribution of the decay is more involved; the higher the spin of the parent decaying system, the of the decay products. greater the complexity of the angular distribution Quite generally, through a study of the angular distribution of the decay products,it is possibleto determine the spin of the parent nucleus.
isotropicdistribution;
400
Scattering Theory
gives
/ <?',',
m'\\T\\E9
/, m) = Ti(E)8ir8mm,.
G.6.1)
In other words, T is diagonal both in / and in m\\ furthermore, the (nonvanishing) diagonal element dependson E and / but not on m. This leads to an enormous simplification, as we will see shortly. Let us now look at the scattering amplitude
G.2.19):
I' m'
Ylm(kf)YlmXk)
X{E'l'm'\\T\\Elm){Elm%)
mk
Ait2
I
E = h2k2/2m
t,(e)
G.6.2)
zdirection. e W
To obtain the angular dependence f the scatteringamplitude, let us choose o the coordinatesystem in such a way that k, as usual, is in the positive
then
have
[seeC.6.50)]
0,
G.6.3)
= hence only the terms ra = 0 contribute. where we have used P7(l) 6 to be the angle between k' and k, we can write Taking
l;
G.6.4)
It
G6.5)
ForG.6.2) then we
have
00
G.6.6)
where fF)
still dependson k (or the incident energy) even though k is suppressed. To appreciatethe physical significanceof //(A:), let us study the behavior of the wave function (x\\//( +)) given by G.1.33 largedistance Using the expansionof a plane wave in terms of spherical waves [G.5.18
Waves
401
noting
(AppendixA)
j{kr(t*l2))
large r
ji
_ e~i{kr{M2))
2ikr
and
that
fF) is given
]arger
by 3/2
we G.6.6), have
ikz ikr
3/2
l)P,(cos0) likr
ikr
_ i(krlw)
\\
1
Brr)
3/2
When the scatterer is absent, we can The physicsof scattering is now clear. analyze the plane wave as the sum of a sphericallyoutgoing wave behaving like elkr/r and a spherically incoming wave behaving like e~l{kr~l7r)/r for each /. The presence the scatterer changes only the coefficientof the of outgoing wave, as follows:
\342\200\224
G.6.8)
G.6.9)
The incoming wave is completelyunaffected.
Unitarity
and
PhaseShifts
We now
unitarity.
o examine the consequencesf probability conservation, or In a timeindependentformulation, the flux current density j must
satisfy
vj
dt
= 0.
G.6.10)
Let us now considera spherical surface of very large radius. By Gauss's theorem, we must have
spherical surface
G.6.11
The particles. and Physically G.6.10)
outgoing
of because angularmomentum
there is no sourceor sink of equal the incoming flux. Furthermore, conservation,this must hold for each partial
402
Scattering Theory
I wave separately. n other words, the coefficientof elkr/r must be the same in magnitude as the coefficientof e~lkr/r. Defining Sj(k) to be
+ S/(?)=l 2/A//(fc),
this that means [from G.6.9)]
G.6.12)
G.6.13)
that is, the most that can happen is a change in the phase of the outgoing is known as the unitarity relation for the /th partial wave. Equation G.6.13) as wave. In a more advanced treatment of scattering, S^k) can be regarded the /th diagonal elementof the S operator, which is required to be unitary as a consequence probability conservation. of We thus seethat the only change in the wave function at a large distance as a result of scattering is to change the phase of the outgoing wave. Calling this phase28i (the factor of 2 here is conventional),we can
write
S7 = e2/\\
with 67
G.6.14)
/\342\200\236
do
G.6.12)]
real.It is understood here that 8i is a function not explicitly write 5, as 5/(A:). Returning to
8h
^
?
V
G6.15
kcot
2ik
full
\302\253,
ik
= T L Bl+ l)el8fsin8lPl(cos6) k
i
G.6.17)
for f@) rests on the twin principlesof 67 real.This expression rotational invarianceand probability conservation.In many bookson wave mechanics, .6.17) G is obtained by explicitly solving the Schrodingerequawith a real, sphericallysymmetric potential; our derivation of G.6.17) may be of interest becauseit can be generalized to situations when the in potential described the contextof nonrelativisticquantum mechanicsmay fail. The differential crosssection do/dSl can be obtained [seeG.1.36) To by just taking the modulus squaredof G.6.17). obtain the total cross
with
equation
Waves
403
sectionwe have
kz Jo
X
/'
^'sinS/e'
G.6.18)
We
can checkthe optical theorem G.3.1), we obtained earlier using a which that more general argument. All we need to do is note from G.6.17)
0= 0
sin6/'
G.6.19)
is the sameas G.6.18) for Air/k. except As a function of energy, 8, changes; hence ft(k) changes also.The relation of G.6.13) restriction on the manner in which f, can is a unitarity vary. This can be most conveniently seenby drawing an Argand diagram for kf/. We plot kft in a complexplane, as shown in Figure 7.6,which is
which
FIGURE
7.6.
eachradii
the magnitude of Argand diagram for kfh = of length on the unitary circle; angle OCP 257.
\\
0 OP is
Re (kf,)
kfh
while
COand CP are
404
Scattering Theory
that G.6.16)
21*'
G620) as the
unitary
important features from Figure 7.6. uppose is S 57 It near the bottom of the circle. may be positiveor negative, but fl is almost purely real:
small.Then fl
lie. seemany
\\, known
circle, on
must stay
ft e^sinS,= (l k
+ i8l)8l=
k
\302\2537
k.
G.6.21)
On the other hand, if 5, is near tt/2, kft is almost purely imaginary, and the magnitude of kfi is maximal. Under such a condition the /th partial wave in a may be in resonance, concept to be discussed somedetail in Section7.8. crosssection Note that the maximum partial
l)
is achieved [see when G.6.18)]
G.6.22)
Connectionwith the Eikonal Approximation The eikonal approximation discussed 7.4is valid at high energies in (X range R); hence many partial wavescontribute. We may regard / as a continuous variable. As an aside we note the semiclassical argument that / = bk (becausengular momentum lh = bp, where b is the impact paramea and momentum p = hk).We take
\302\253: parameter
lmax
= kR;
following
substitutions
in
smalln n
where lmax
We
= kR
G.6.24)
implies that
have
G.6.25)
ikjdbbJ0(kb6)[e2iA(h)l]. G.6.26)
The computation of 8, can be done by using the explicit form for given by G.4.14) Problem 7 in this chapter). (see
7.6. Method
of Partial Waves
405
in,',
thesehave the asymptotic behavior (seeAppendix A)
r
large
G.6.27)
ikr
t(kr(lir/2))
ikr
. G.6.28
The fullwave
function
at
any
r can
then
be written as:
1 3/2 B*)
Forr > R
we have (for the radialwavefunction)
. G.6.29
G.6.30
where the coefficient that multiplies A, in G.6.29)chosenso that, for is coincideswith j)(kr) everywhere. Using G.6.28), can we A,(r) the behavior of the wave function for large r given by G.6.29) and compare
V\342\200\2240,
with G.6.30)
1 B*)3/2
Clearly, we must have
2ikr
2ikr
G.6.31
a)ip2,s,
rB) _ 2 Cl ~
G.6.32
is,just
So the radialwave function for r > R is now written as A,(r) = e/8'[cos 6/7/(A:r)sin V/(?>\] Usingthis, we can evaluate the logarithmic derivative at r = R outsidethe range of the follows:
potential\342\200\224as
G.6.33
that
r dA, A, dr r= R
= kR
kR [{ )cos6/
G.6.34
kr
j, with
respectto
evaluated at
406
kr
Scattering Theory
Conversely, knowing the logarithmic derivative at R, we can obtain the phase shift as follows:
tan
= kR.
5, =
\342\200\224^
; HlJ/y kRj,'(kR)p,j,(kR)
the
kRn](kR)filnl(kR)
phase shift is
.
reducedto
G.6.35
that
thus
of
potential, we can solve the Schrodingerequation in three dimensions by looking at the equivalent onedimensionalequation
d2U/ dr 2m
look at the solution to the Schrodingerequation for r < R is, inside the range of the potential. For a spherically symmetric
r2
G.6.36)
where
G.6.37)
subjectto the boundary condition
u
G.6.38 0.
equation\342\200\224if
We
to r = R, starting at r = In this way we obtain numerically\342\200\224up logarithmic derivative at R. By continuity we must be able to match logarithmic derivative for the insideand outside solutions at r = R: Pi
inside solution
~~
integrate
this
onedimensional Schrodinger
necessary,
the the
Pi
outside solution'
' O
where the lefthand sideis obtained by integrating the Schrodingerequation in up to r = R, while the righthand sideis expressible terms of the phase shifts that characterize the largedistance behavior of the wave function. This means that the phaseshifts are obtained simply by substituting /?7 for the inside solution into tanS7 [G.6.35)].an alternative approach it is For possibleto derive an integral equation for A^r), from which we can obtain phase shifts (seeProblem 8 of this chapter).
HardSphere Scattering
Let us work out a specificexample. e consider W scatteringby a hard, or rigid, sphere
F=(\302\260\302\260
\\0
G.6.40
v y
In this problemwe neednot even evaluate /?7 need to know is that the wave function must
Waves
407
G.6.41)
or, from or
tan 67
G.6.33),
= y/(A:/?)cos6/ nl(kR)sin8l 0
\342\200\224
G.6.42)
=
n,(kR)m
G.6.43)
Thus the phase shifts are now known for any /. Notice that no approximahave been made so far. To appreciatethe physical significanceof the phase shifts, let us considerthe / = 0 case (Swave scattering) specifically.Equation G.6.43) for becomes, / = 0,
approximations
tan
On
k cosR /kR
sin kR /kR
tan
kR,
el8\302\260
G.6.44)
omitted varies as
or 60 =
\342\200\224
80).
G.6.45
Therefore, if we plot rAl=0(r) as a function of distance r, we obtain a to sinusoidal ave, which is shifted when compared the free sinusoidalwave w amount R; see 7.7. by Figure
R=60/k
FIGURE 7.7. Plot of rA^0{r) versus r (with the factor removed). The dashed curve for V 0 behaves like sin At, while the solid curve is for Swave hardsphere scattering, shifted by from the caseV= 0.
= = 80/k
elS\302\260
408
Scattering Theory
Let us now study the low and high energy limits of tan 5,. Low Appendix A) energy means kR small, kR <c We can then use(see
1.
(kr)'
G.6.46)
to obtain
tanS,=
{B/ l)[B/l)!!]2}
It is therefore all right to ignore 5, with / =?0. In other words, we have for iSwave scattering only, which is actually expected almost any finiterange o potential at low energy. Because = kR regardless f whether k is large 50 or small, we obtain
??
^^
~
\342\200\224.
G.6.47)
^
It
dQ
do = sin250 \342\200\224^^R2
k2
forkR<zl.
G.6.48)
f%<**'#<
<7649>
is four times the geometriccrosssection ttR2. By geometriccrosssection we mean the area of the disc of radius R that blocksthe propagation of the plane wave (and has the same crosssection area as that of a hard sphere). Lowenergyscattering, of course,means a very large wavelength scattering, and we do not necessarilyexpecta classicallyreasonable result. One might conjecture that the geometric crosssection is reasonable to expectfor highenergy scattering becauseat high energies situation the look similar to the semiclassical situation. At high energiesmany might /values contribute, up to /max ~kR,& reasonableassumption. The total cross sectionis therefore given by
TT k
But using
/_o
E B/ +
l)sin2\302\253/.
G.6.50)
we G.6.43),have
l + tan2S,
[ i.lkRW1!\\n.(kR\\\\2
sir?(kR 2
1
\\
G.6.51)
7.6. Method
of Partial Waves
409
n,(kr)
We
90\302\260
~\342\200\224
t~cos kr kr
\\
2
\342\200\224
seethat 57 decreases y each time / increases y one unit. Thus, for b b = an adjacent pair of partial waves, sin2^+ sin25/+1 sin25z + sin2E/ it/2) = sin25/ 4cos25, and with so many /valuescontributing to = it is legitimate to replacesin26/ by its average value, \\. The number of terms in all the the /sum is roughly kR, as is the average of 2/ + Putting
1,
G.6.50),
1.
1
which
= 2'nR2,
G653)
is not the geometriccrosssection ttR2 either! To seethe origin of the into factor of 2, we may split G.6.17) two parts:
kR
kR
~ /reflection
In evaluating
\"*\"
/shadow
\342\200\242
(/
.0. j j4
the //refl2dl2, orthogonality of the /^(costfysensuresthat there is no interference amongst contributions from different /, and we obtain the sum of the square of partialwavecontributions:
max
.
G.6.55) 1
Turning our attention to /shad, we note that it is pure imaginary. It is = particularly strong in the forward direction becauseP^cosO) for 6 = 0, and the contributions from various /values all add up coherently\342\200\224that is, W with the same phase,pure imaginary and positive in our case. e can use to the smallangleapproximation for P( [seeG.6.24)] obtain
bdbJ0(kb6)
.
But this
G.6.56)
in
isjust the
formula for
Fraunhofer diffraction
opticswith a strong
410
Scattering Theory
peakingnear 6
\342\200\224
di~/i~=
/
o ^ Finally, the interferencebetween /shad and
T\"*
J(cosfl)
G.6.57)
/refl
/\"v
vanishes:
/ ^7
v
\342\200\224
/
\\
/* jit
\342\200\242/
/*
\342\200\242/
dllctu.
1C11
\\
^\"
^O
\\
to zero, while
/shad
77), approximatelyaverag
t
arefl
T
ashad
G.6.59)
The secondterm (coherent contribution in the forward direction) is w called a shadow becausefor hardsphere scattering at high energies, aves with impact parameter less than R must be deflected. So,just behind the scatterer there must be zero probability for finding the particle and a shadow must be created.In terms of wave mechanics,this shadow is due to destructive interference between the original wave (which would be there even if the scatterer were absent) and the newly scattered wave. Thus we need scattering in order to create a shadow. That this shadow amplitude must be pure imaginary may be seen by recalling from G.6.8) the that coefficientof elkr/2ikr for the /th partial wave behaves like 1+ likf^k), where the 1 would be present even without the scatterer; hence there must be a positive imaginary term in ft to get cancellation. In fact, this gives a physical interpretation of the optical theorem, which can be checkedexexplicitly. First note that
4*77
TIm/@) TIm[/shad@)]
we obtain
= 4*77
.
G.6.60
= /shad @)
which
kR
= 2ttR2 G.6.61
is indeedequal to ator
7.7.LOWENERGYSCATTERINGAND BOUNDSTATES
At
low
energies\342\200\224or,
larger
unimportant.
than
R\342\200\224partial
more precisely, hen X=l//c is comparable to or w waves for higher / are, in general, unimbe obvious classicallybecausethe particle cannot
7.7. LowEnergy
411
penetrate the centrifugal barrier; as a result the potential inside has no effect. In terms of quantum mechanics, the effectivepotential for the /th partial wave is given by
unless the potential is strong enough to accommodate / ?= 0 bound states near E =^ 0, the behavior of the radialwavefunction is largely determined by the centrifugal barrier term, which means that it must resemble jj(kr). to Morequantitatively, it is possible estimate the behaviorof the phaseshift
using
(seeProblem 8 of
this
chapter):
J J,(kr)V(r)A,(r)r2dr.
G.7.2)
If At{r) is not too different from j)(kr) and \\/k is much larger than the range of the potential, the righthand side would vary as kll\\ for small Sh the lefthand side must vary as 8t/k. ence,the phaseshift k goesto zero H as
Oj
~K
finite
\\
/./.J)
for small k. This is known as threshold behavior. It is therefore clear that at low energies with a Swave scattering is important.
range potential,
is
( *o = constant
for r
<R
10
\\
>0 Vo < 0
Vo
repulsive
' G74)
*
8 /o(*r)cos0
g*m^r+8\302\260>.
Vo
G.7.5)
a constant:
k' determined by
= Avl/==0(r)
a sin kV,
G.7.6)
(\".7)
= 0 at r = 0.In other words,
412
Scattering Theory
the insidewave function is also sinusoidalas long as E > Vo. The curvature of the sinusoidal ave is different than in the freeparticlecase; s a result w a the wave function can be pushedin E0> 0) or pulled out E0< 0) dependon whether Vo < 0 (attractive) or Vo > 0 (repulsive),as shown in Figure 7.8. oticealso that G.7.6)and G.7.7)hold even if Vo > provided we N understand sin to mean is, the wave function behaveslike
depending
?,
sinh\342\200\224that
u(r) ocsinh[/cr],
where
2m
G.7.6')
G.7.7')
No potential
curvature
bigger
Vo<0
(b)
u(r)
<5o//c
Vo>O
iyf
0
sinh function
if
\\ \\l
(c)
V0>E
Plot
FIGURE
7.8
of u(r)
versus r. (a) For V = 0 (dashed line), (b) For Vo < 0, 60 > 0 (solid line) pushed in. (c) For Vo > 0, 60 < 0 with the wave function
7.7. LowEnergy
413
We now concentrate on the attractive caseand imagine that the a Increasedttraction will result in a wave magnitude of Vo is increased.
function with
a larger curvature. Supposethe attraction is such that the o w [0, ] just accommodatesnefourth cycle of the sinusoidal ave. R 1 in the low energy kR<t: limit, the phase shift is now 80 = tt/2, Working and this results in a maximal 5wave crosssectionfor a given k because the sin280 is unity. Now increase well depth Vo even further. Eventually w the attraction is so strong that onehalf cycle of the sinusoidal ave can be fitted within the range of the potential.The phase shift 80 is now it; in other words, the wave function outsideR is out of phasecompared to the freeparticlewave function. What is remarkableis that the partial crosssectionvanishes (sin 80 = 0), G.7.8) a/=0= 0, despitethe very strong attraction of the potential.In addition, if the energy is low enough for / ?^ 0 waves still to be unimportant, we then have an almostperfect transmission of the incident wave. This kind of situation, known as the RamsauerTownsend effect, is actually observedexperimenfor scattering of electronsy such rare gasesas argon, krypton, and b xenon.This effect was first observedin 1923 to the birth of wave prior mechanics and was considered be a great mystery. Note the typical to ~8 kinetic energy of order parametershereare R 2 x 10 cm for electron ~ 0.324. O.leV, leadingto kR
interval
180\302\260 experimentally
\342\200\224
ZeroEnergy Scattering and Bound States Let us considerscattering at extremely low energies (k ~ 0). For
The obvious solution to G.7.9)s i u (r) = constant( r a), just a straight line!This can be understood as an infinitely limit of the usual expression the outsidewavefunction for
\342\200\224
G.7.9)
G.7.10
long wavelength a [seeG.6.37)nd
G.6.45)],
which
= lim
8n
k+0
sin
*i,+
o r
G.7.11
= kcoi
k^i =
\302\273
\\
1
\342\200\224
a
true
G.7.12
wave function],
is 0, G.7.10)not the
a
lim/:cot(S0
G.7.13
Scattering Theory
sectionas k
\302\273
a is known as the scatteringlength. The limit of the total cross 0 is given by [seeG.6.16)]
1
k cot 80 ik
\342\200\224
G.7.14)
Even though a has the same dimensionas the range of the potential R, a and R can differ by orders of magnitude. In particular, for an for attractive potential, it is possible the magnitude of the scattering length to be far greater than the range of the potential. To see the physical meaning of a, we note that a is nothing more than the intercept of the outsidewave function. For a repulsive potential, a > 0 and is roughly of order of R, as seenin Figure 7.9a. owever,for an attractive potential, the H I intercept is on the negative side(Figure 7.9b).f we increase the attraction, the outsidewave function can again cross the raxis on the positive side
7.9c). (Figure
The sign change resulting from increased attraction is related to the we note from development of a bound state. To seethis point quantitatively, Figure 7.9cthat for a very large and positive, the wave function is with essentially flat for r > R. But G.7.10) a very large is not too different N from e~Kr with k essentially zero. ow e~Kr with k 0 is just a boundstatewave function for r > R with energy E infinitesimally negative. The insidewave function (r < R) for the = 0+ case (scattering with zero kinetic energy) and the E = 0 case(bound state with infinitesimally small in binding energy) are essentiallythe same because both casesk' in sin k 'r is [G.7.6)] determined by
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
2m
with
= F
\342\200\224
\\V
A 7
IS\"!
infinitesimal
Because insidewavefunctions are the same for the two physical the situations (E = 0 + and E = 0 we can equate the logarithmic derivative
\342\200\224),
(positiveor negative).
with that
zero
1
r =r
\\
\342\200\224
r= R
G.7.16
or, if R
\302\253:
a,
*\302\253.
^boundstate
G.7.18
7.7. LowEnergy
415
(b)
(a)
a<0 a>0
(c)
a>0
FIGURE
7.9.
Plot of u(r) versus r for (a) repulsive potential, (b) attractive potential, and (c) of the zeroenergy outsidewave function with the /axis is
and we have a relation between scattering length and boundstate energy. This is a remarkable result.To wit, if there is a looselybound state, we can infer its binding energy by performing scattering experiments near zero kinetic energy,provided a is measured to be large compared with the range R of the potential. This connection between the scattering length and the boundstateenergy was first pointed out by Wigner, who attempted to apply
to G.7.18)^scattering.
that
2.22 eV. M
G.7.19
Scattering Theory
= 5.4X1O\0213 cm,
G.7.20)
mNa
m^j*
S^0
\302\253\342\200\242
mNca
\\5.4xl(r13cm/
G.7.21)
where /x is the reducedmass approximated by mnp/2. The agreement i between G.7.19) G.7.21)not too satisfactory.The discrepancys due is and to the fact that the insidewavefunctions are not exactly the same and that R is not really such a good approximation for the deuteron. A a triplet better result can be obtained by keeping the next term in the expansion of k cot S as a function of k,
\302\273
kcotS0=
+ yr0A:2,
G.7.22)
where r0 is known as the effectiverange (see, or example,Preston 1962, f 23). Bound Statesas Poles f 57(/r) o
concludethis section by studying the analytic propertiesof the where and amplitude Si(k) for / = 0.Let us go back to G.6.8) G.6.12), the radial wave function for / = 0 at large distance found to be proportional was
We
to
S,0(k)Comparethis
with
ikr
pikr
\342\200\224.
G.7.23)
the wave
function
e'Kr
G.7.24)
The existenceof a bound state implies that a nontrivial solution to the v Schrodinger quation with E < 0 existsonly for a particular (discrete) alue e of k. We may argue that e~Kr/r is like elkr/r,exceptthat k is now purely imaginary. Apart from k being imaginary, the important differencebetween and i G.7.23) G.7.24)s that in the boundstate case, ~Kr/r is presenteven e without the analogue of the incident wave. Quite generallyonly the ratio of the coefficientof elkr/r to that of e~lkr/ris of physical interest, and this is given by S^k). In the boundstate case we can sustain the outgoing wave (with imaginary k) even without an incident wave. So the ratio is oo, which means that S!=0(k), variable k, has a regarded as a function of a complex
7.7. LowEnergy
417
Imk
pole
Re*
FIGURE
with boundstate
pole at k = +/k.
For seeFigure 7.10. k real and positive, we have the region of physical Herewe must require[comparewith G.6.14)] scattering. 5/o = e2*0 G.7.25) with 80 real.Furthermore, as k k cot 80 has a limiting value \\la 0,
\342\200\224\302\273
pole at k = ik.Thus a bound state impliesa pole(which can be shown to be a simplepole)on the positive imaginary axis of the complex/cplane;
[G.7.13)],
which
0, 80*
\302\273
\302\261
ir,
Hence = Sl=0
* 1
0.
....
ik ik
\342\200\224
G.7.26)
satisfying:
1.Poleat k
= ik
G.7.27)
G.7.28)
for is [Editor'sNote:Equation G.7.28) chosen simplicity rather than as a realisticexample. reasonableotentials (not hard spheres!) For physically p the phase shift vanishes as k An assumption implicit in choosingthis form is that there is no other that is important apart from the boundstate We singularity pole. can then use G.6.15)obtain, for fi=0(k), to
\342\200\224> \302\260\302\260.]
ik
G7.29)
G.6.16),
//=o
1
\342\200\224
k cot 80
ik'
G.7.30)
418 we seethat
lim
Scattering Theory
= A:cot50
 k,
G.7.31
the precisely relation betweenbound state and scattering length [G.7.17)] It thus appearsthat by exploiting unitarity and analyticity of S in the /cplane,we may obtain the kind of information that can be secured by solving the Schrodingerequation explicitly.This kind of technique can be very useful in problems where the details of the potential are not known.
7.8.RESONANCE SCATTERING
In atomic, nuclear, and particle physics,we often encounter a situation where the scattering cross section for a given partial wave exhibits a with the dynamics of such a pronouncedpeak. This section is concerned
resonance.
We
continue to consider finiterangedpotential V(r).The effective a for the radial wave function of the /th partial wave is potential appropriate V(r) plus the centrifugal barrier term as given by G.7.1). SupposeV(r) itself is attractive. Because secondterm, the
h2 1A
+ 1)
r2
2m
is repulsive, we have a
where the effective potential has an situation a attractive well followedby a repulsivebarrier at larger distances, s shown in Figure for Supposethe barrier were infinitely high. It would then be possible to be trapped inside, hich is another way of saying that we expect w particles bound states,with energy E > 0.They are genuine bound states in the sense that they are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian with definite values of E. In other words,they are stationary states with infinite lifetime.
7.11.
Quasiboundstate
barrier
(or Vior?=0)
7.11.
barrier can
be due
7.8.Resonance
Scattering
419
L particle leaks through the barrier to the outsideregion. et us call such a it state quasibound state because would be an honest bound state if the
finite barrier, the particle can be but it cannot be trapped forever. Sucha trapped state has trapped inside, a finite lifetime due to quantummechanical tunneling. In other words,a
barrierwere infinitely high. The corresponding scattering phase shift 8/ rises through the value it/2 as the incident energy risesthrough that of the quasibound state, and at the same time the correspondingpartialwave cross section passes its maximum possiblevalue 4ttB/ + 1)//^.[Editor'sNote: Such through a sharp rise in the phaseshift is, in the timedependent chrodinger quaS e o associatedwith a delay of the emergencef the trapped particles, for rather than an unphysical advance, as would be the case a sharp decrease
equation,
through
It
known
resonance
is instructive to verify this point with explicit calculationsfor some potential. The result of a numerical calculation showsthat a resfor behavior is in fact possible /1^0 with a sphericalwell potential.
287T
tt/2.]
res
(a)
<53(k)
ttI
V*
FIGURE
k res
7.12.Plots
=
of (a)
= 77/2 and a/=3 = a/==3 versus k, where at resonance 83(Arcs) and (b) S3(k) versus k. The curves are for a spherical well with
420
Scattering Theory
To be specificwe show the results for a sphericalwell with 2mV0R2/h2= 5.5 The w and / = 3 in Figure 7.12. phaseshift (Figure 7.12b), hich is small at extremely low energies,starts increasing rapidly past k=\\/R, and goes through 77/2 around k =1.3//?. Another very instructive example is provided by a repulsive 5shell potential that is exactly soluble (seeProblem 9 in this chapter):
G.8.1)
Here resonances re possible / = 0 because 5shellpotential itself can for the a
trap the particle in the region 0 < r < R. For the seriesof bound states in the region r < R with
kR
this
= ir,2ir9... ;
function
G.8.2)
given by
= 0 but also at r = R
in this
for / = 0 must vanish not only at F case. or the region r > R, we simply have
G.8.3)
problemsbecausethe
wall at r
The situation is more interesting with a finite barrier, as we can show behaviorwhenever explicitly.The scatteringphaseshift exhibitsa resonance
^incident
two
= ^quasibound F
state
\342\200\242
G u '8
V
\342\200\242
Thus we have a situation in which a resonance o behavior is superimposedn a smoothly behaving background scattering. This serves as a model for neutronnucleus scattering, where a series of sharp resonancepeaks are observedon top of a smoothly varying crosssection. of d s Coming back to our general iscussion resonancecattering,we ask how the scattering amplitudes vary in the vicinity of the resonance energy.If we are to have any connection between07 beinglarge and the states, 8/ must go through tt/2 (or 3tt/2, .) from below,as quasibound discussed above. In other wordscot 8/ must go through zerofrom above. Assuming that cot 8/ is smoothly varying near the vicinity of resonance,
..
that
is,
G.8.5)
we may attempt to expand cotS7 as follows: cot
\302\2537
= cot
fi7?.Er 0
G.8.6)
7.9. Identical
421
This leads to
1 //(*)= k cot 81
1
ik
1
,
\342\200\224
r/2
where we have defined the
width
G.8.7)
by
d(cot8,)
d~E
2
*\302\246
E=Er
G.8.8)
if cot 8, varies rapidly. If a simple resonance dominates the /th partialwave cross section, we obtain a onelevel resoresonance formula (the BreitWigner formula):
\"
(EErJ+T2/4
ignored.
So it is legitimate to regard T as the full width at halfmaximum, provided the resonanceis reasonably narrow so that variation in 1/k2can be
SCATTERING
exampleto illustrate the phase of the scattering amplitude, let us considerthe scattering of two identical spinlesscharged particles via the Coulombpotential (which we discussfurther in Section 7.13). spaceThe wave function must now be symmetric, so the asymptotic wave function must look like
e ik'x
\342\200\224 \302\253r
 0)]
ik
\342\200\224,
where x = xx x2 is the relativeposition vector between the and 2.This results in a differential crosssection,
two
G.9.1) particles 1
da _
The crosssectionis enhanced through constructiveinterferenceat 6 ~ 77/2. In contrast, for spin \\ spin \\ scattering with unpolarizedbeam and V independent of spin, we have the spinsinglet scattering going with function and the spin triplet going with spaceantisymspacesymmetrical metrical wave function (seeSection 6.3). the initial beam is unpolarized, If
\342\200\224
422
hence
\\
Scattering Theory
for spin
triplet;
)].
In other
G.9.3)
fact, beenobserved.
words,we expectdestructiveinterference at 0
\342\200\224
it/2.This has, in
SupposeV and Ho are both invariant under some symmetry operation. We may ask what this implies for the matrix elementof T or for the scattering
If the symmetry operator is unitary (for example, rotation and Usingthe explicit form of T as parity), everything is quite straightforward. we see that given by
amplitude /(k',k).
G.2.20),
UH0U*
= H0,
under
UVUf
U\342\200\224that
=V is,
G.10.1
UTU*= T. define
jk>
G.10.2)
= ?/k').
= f/k>,
jk'>
G.10.3)
Then
= <k':rk>(k'\\UWTUW\\k)
= (k/rk>.
As an
G.10.4
parity operator
G.10.5
under
parity
would mean
= <k'rk><krrk>.
Pictorially,we have the situation
We
G.10.6
7.13a.
illustrated
in
Figure
o exploitedthe consequence f angularmomentum conservation when we developed method of partial waves.The fact that T is diagonal the in the \\Elm) representation is a direct consequence f T being invariant o under rotation. Notice also that (krrk) depends only on the relative orientation of k and k', as depicted Figure 7.13b. in When the symmetry operation is antiunitary (as in time reversal),we must be more careful. First, we note that the requirement that V as well as
7.10. Symmetry
Considerations in Scattering
423
k' k
k'
rotated
k'
(a)
FIGURE
Equality
7.13.(a)
of
(b)
Equality
\302\273
k'
and
k\302\273\342\200\224k'.
(b)
G.10.7) 1
in
operator changes
into
+ EHo ie
We G.2.20). alsorecall that
1
\342\200\224
E Ho ie
\342\200\224
G.10.8)
for an
antiunitary
operator [seeD.4.11)],
G.10.9
where
a) = 0a)
Let us consider
then
and
G.10.10
G.10.1
= d) = erk> becomes G.10.9)
(k
Notice that the
^Ik) =
G.10.12
As a result
= ik) (
\342\200\224ki
\342\200\224k
).
G.10.13
and [G.10.13)]parity [G.10.6)]: . under e under <k'rk) = <that is, from G.2.19) G.2.22) have and we
initial and final momenta are interchanged, in addition to the fact that the directionsof the momenta have been reversed. It is also interesting to combine the requirements of time reversal
G.10.14
G.10.15
Scattering Theory
is known as detailedbalance. Equation G.10.16) It is more interesting to look at the analogue of G.10.14) we when have spin. Here may characterize the initial freeparticle by  we ket and we exploitD.4.79) the timereversal portion: for
(k'9m's\\T\\k,ms)
T\\k\\
 m's).
mfs)
G.10.17
Forunpolarized initial
by
states.We
Bs+1);
if the
then
states, we sum over the initial spin states and divide polarization is not observed,we must sum over final obtain detailed balance in the form
final
G.10.18
i to mean that where we understand the bar on the top of do/dttn G.10.18) we average over the initial spin states and sum over the final spin states.
is
\\
G.11.1
where t) is the timedependentSchrodinger ket in the presenceof V. The boundary condition appropriate for the scattering problem is that in the remote past (t * oo), the particle was free. This requirement is if automatically accomplished we turn on the potential adiabatically\342\200\224that in Section 5.8: is, very
\\\\p;
\342\200\224
slowly\342\200\224as
V+ lim
Just
Ve*.
G.11.2
as the partial differential equation with an inhomogeneous term is solved by introducing a Green'sfunction [see G.1.18)], operator the
7.11. TimeDependent
, t') satisfying
Formulation
of Scattering
425
) = Oyt
\342\200\224
).
\\IAl.5)
The causality requirement we imposeon G+ is that the interaction of a particle at has an effectonly for t > We therefore imposethe retarded boundary condition = 0 iort<t\\ G.11.4
t'
t'.
We
 U{t t')elH^'t>)/h.
G.11.5
For t > a constant times el/foC'')/*clearly satisfies the differential the because 8function on the righthand sideis inoperequation because For t < t\\ we obviously have the desiredcondition G.11.4) G+(t,t')hereis identically zero.At t = t\\ we note that there is an extra of the 0function that just balances contribution due to the discontinuity the righthand side of
t', G.11.3)
inoperative.
G.11.3):
full
d mdt
=
+ 00
oc
8(tt').
+
G.11.6
/
where and the upper limit of the t. As G+ vanishes for
\342\200\224
G+(t,t')V\\+< );t')dt\\
G.11.7)
G.11.8
required;this is becauseG+(/,t') vanishesas t > oo for any finite value of t'. To seethat G.11.7) satisfies the /dependentSchrodingerequation +
\342\200\224
t'>
in integration t oo, + );
\342\200\224 \302\273
may G.11.7)
we G.11.1),merely
<f>;
by means of which the Ho] acting on G+ just gives 8(t + integration is immediately evaluated to be K^( ); t). So far we have not even required ^(+ ); t) to be an energyeigenket. If it is, we can separate time dependences usual: the a
[ih(d/dt)\342\200\224
t)
ket
[ih(d/dt)\342\200\224
Ho] to
\\//
);/).The
1'),
Herethere is
is
426
Scattering Theory
oo
G.11.10
The integral may appearto oscillateindefinitely. However,we recall that V is really to be understood as Vevt. As a result, the time integration is straightforward:
h t,. _
r\302\260A'e\302\253c/o
Jt\302\273
1
Ho E o
\342\200\224
t\"
\"

iff
oo
G.11.1
oc, this is just the LippmannSchwinger quation G.1.6). e The reader should note carefully how the ie prescription appearsin the two formalisms. Earlier, using the timeindependentformalism we saw of that the choice positive sign of the icterm (seeSection 7.1)corresponds to the statement that the scatterer affects only outgoing spherical waves. In the rdependent ormulation presented f here, the presenceof ie (e= t)h) in arisesfrom the requirementthat the particle was free in the remote
But
as f\"
\302\273
\342\200\224
G.11.11)
past.
on One may argue that the slow switchonof the potential which we have relied is somewhat artificial. But let us supposethat we are scattering.When the wave packet using a wavepacketformalism to describe is well outside the range of the potential, it does not matter whether the potential is zero or finite. In particular, V may be zero in the remote past, which then leads to no difficulty.
G.11.2)
G.11.1), G.11.1).
ConnectionWith TimeDependentPerturbation Theory Inasmuch as scattering can be discussed using the timedependent formulation, which is based on the timedependent Schrodingerequation we should be able to apply an approximation scheme based on In particular we should be able to deploy the methods of timedependent perturbation theory developed earlier in Section 5.6 to the scattering problem\342\200\224provided, of course,the potential can be regardedas weak in somesense. First we will show how the golden rule can be appliedto compute do/dti,eading to the results of the Born approximation of Section 7.2. l We assumein the remote past that the state ket is represented a by momentum eigenket k). When the interaction is slowly switched on, as in momentum G.11.2), example, eigenkets other than
k)\342\200\224for
k')\342\200\224are
7.11. TimeDependent
Formulation
of Scattering
427
t populated.As we have seen(seeSection5.6),he transition probability is (to first order) evaluated in the following manner. First we write
r
where Vtf) = eiHQt'lhVeiHot'lhe^ and Ek = at of finding k') time t is then
probability
(k'\\Vr(t')\\k)dt',
G.11.1
prob
T tftfllm. he transition
G.11.1
As
Tj
rule:
rate isjust
what
2*
,), G.11.U
where we have used E.8.5). that the righthand side of G.11.14) Note is independentof /. It is important here to review the normalization conventionsusedfor we planewave states.In Section 1.7 used the 5function normalization
= SC)(kk').
The completenesselation is then r
written
G.11.1
as
1=
[ d3A;k)<k.
G.11.1
In applying /dependent erturbation theory to scattering processes,t is i p more helpful to use box normalization,
G.11.17
where the allowed values for k are given
by
*, V,
by
<xlk>
~jhe'k'X
G.11.1
l=I>><k, k
but
G.11.20
v
might
, as
428
Scattering Theory
continuous, so
G.11.21
This lookslike G.11.16) for the presence (L/2ttK. very useful of A except relation that enablesus to go from the 5functionnormalizationconvention to that of box normalization is
box
normalization normalization
G.11.22
by inserting
positionrepresentation. The box normalization is very convenient for evaluating the density of states.Forthis reason it is used more often in a treatment of scattering based on timedependentperturbation theory. Thus if we are interested in scattering into the solidangle dQ,,the relevant formula is
2ir)
G.11.23
[see E.7.31)].
Coming backto scattering,which we view as a transition rate w from into a group of states element dti, we subtending the solidangle k) have w given by (for elastic scattering k''= k)
k')
277
h
from the
G.11.24
be equated to
goldenrule
(Incidentflux)
1
rpr du
dti.
hk
G.11.25
mL
G.11.26
every
Alternatively,
everything
incident
( mL3 hk
\\
flux
together
do
1 2m
But this
G.11.27
a similar manner.
7.12. Inelastic
ElectronAtom Scattering
429
To sum up, the timedependent formulation based on the timeenables dependentSchrodinger quation [G.11.1)] us to derive easily the e results we obtained earlier using the timeindependent formalism\342\200\224the LippmannSchwingerequation, the Born approximation, and so on. FurFurthermore, it turns out that the timedependent formalism is more suitable for discussing o moregeneralreaction processes ther than elastic scattering. As a concretexample to illustrate this point, we now turn to a discussion f o e the inelastic scattering of electrons by atoms.
Let us considerthe interactionsof electron beamswith atoms assumed to be their ground states.The incident electron may get scattered elastically with final atoms unexcited:
G.12.1
This is an exampleof elasticscattering.To the extent that the atom can be regarded as infinitely heavy, the kinetic energy of the electron does not
I for change.t is also possible the target atom to get excited: e~ + atom (ground state) e'+atom (excited state).
\342\200\224>
G.12.2
In this case talk about inelastic scattering becausethe kinetic energy of we the final outgoing electron is now less than that of the initial incoming the electron, differencebeing usedto excite the target atom. The initial ket of the electron plus the atomic system is written as
k,0>
G.12.3
where k refers to the wave vector of the incident electron and 0 stands for the atomic ground state. Strictly speaking G.12.3) should be understood as the direct product of the incident electron ket k) and the groundstate atomic ket 0). he correspondingwave function is T
x
L3/2
G.12.4
where we use the box normalization for the plane wave. We may be interested in a finalstateelectron with a definite wave vector k'.The finalstate ket and the corresponding ave function are w
and
^^k\"x^(x1,...,xz), G.12.5
where n
w Assuming that timedependentperturbation theory is applicable, e can immediately write the differential cross section, as in the previous
430
Scattering Theory
section:
In
da
1
(hk/meL )
2tt h
(k'n V
kO)
,2i
L_
k'm(
G.12.6)
is similar, including the cancellationof terms such as L3, with Everything is one important exception: /c'=k' not, in general, equal to fc = k for inelastic scattering. The next question is, What V is appropriate for this problem? The to incident electron can interact with the nucleus,assumed be situated at the So origin; it can also interact with each of the atomic electrons. V is to be written as 7p
x
\342\200\224
G.12.7)
Herecomplications may arise because of the identity of the incident electron with one of the atomic electrons;to treat this rigorously is a nontrivial task. Fortunately, for a relatively fast electronwe can legitimately there is little overlap between ignore the question of identity; this is because We the boundstateelectron and the incident electron in momentum space. when explicitly writmust evaluate the matrix element (k'/7Fk0), which,
written,
is
= <k'wFkO>
\\ Id3xeiq'x(n\\L
x x
\342\200\224
P>
Ze
+E
G.12.8
with
\342\200\224
Let us seehow to evaluate the matrix element of the first term, F Ze2/r,where r actually means x. irst we note that this is a potential between the incident electron and the nucleus, which is independent of the atomic electron coordinates. it can be taken outside the integration So
q =k
\342\200\224
k'.
n/
in
we G.12.8); simply
obtain
this
G.12.9)
for the remainder. In other words,
term
contributes
only
to the
Inelastic 7.12.
ElectronAtom Scattering
431
case, where the target atom remains unexcited. In the elasticscattering elasticcase must still integrate eiq'x/rwith respectto x,which amounts we be done because already evaluated in Section7.2the Fourier transform we of the Yukawa potential [seeG.2.6)conjunction with G.2.2)]. in Hence
to taking the Fourier transform of the Coulomb potential; this can readily
= Urn
q
As
G.12.10
l/x + We x,.
\342\200\224
for the secondterm in G.12.8), evaluate the Fourier transform of we can can accomplish this by shifting the coordinate variables
x x ,:
\302\273
J
Notice that
this
IX
Xf
. J
X
ql .
T eiq'x
12 11)
is just the Fourier transform of the Coulomb potential the Fourier transform of the electron density due to the multiplied by atomic electronssituated at
x.:
G.12.12
We customarily define the form factor Fn(q) for excitation
follows:
0) to
\\n)
as
G.12.13
which
is made of
relationcontributions
coherent\342\200\224in
the
ships
have
for n = 0;hencethe form factor approaches unity in case.For n # 0 (inelastic scattering), Fn(q)+0as q
the elasticscattering
\302\2730
0).
by orthogonality
We
can then
write
as G.12.8)
Ze2
2 xx,
G.12.14
section We are finally in a positionto write the differential cross for inelastic(orelastic) cattering of electronsy atoms: b s
da
@>\302\253)
=
\\kj
2me 4>nZe2 r
2
h
+
\\kj
Fn
(q)
G.12.15
432
Scattering Theory
is customary
G.12.16
1
as follows:
do
G.12.17
G.12.18
kk'
G.12.19
stopping
The inelastic crosssection we have obtained can be used to discuss energy loss of a charged particle as it goes through matter. A number of people,including H. A. Bethe and F. Bloch, have discussedthe quantummechanicalderivation of stoppingpower from the point of view of the inelasticscatteringcrosssection.We are interested in the energy loss of a charged particle per unit length traversed by the incident charged particle.The collisionrate per unit length is No, where N is the number of atoms per unit volume; at each collisionprocessthe energy lost by the charged particle is En Eo. So dE/dxis written as
power\342\200\224the
\342\200\224
dE
dx
n
da @ dq
\342\200\224>
n)
dq
ax
dq
q min
G.12.20
There are many paperswritten The upshot of all this is to formula for stopping power,
justify
dE
dx
4rrNZe4
Bm v
G.12.21
A966) and
where
*For a relatively
Jackiw A968).
discussion,
seeK. Gottfried
H. A. Bethe and R. W.
7.12. Inelastic
ElectronAtom Scattering
433
energy (En Eo). If the charged particle has electric charge + ze,we just Z replace e4 by z2Ze4.It is also important to note that even if the projectile is still the is not an electron, me that appearsin G.12.21) the electron mass, o S not the massof the charged particle. o the energy lossis dependent n the charge and the velocity of the projectile but is independent of the mass of This the projectile. has an important application to the detectionof charged
\342\200\224
particles.
Quantum mechanically,we view the energy lossof a chargedparticle At as a seriesof inelasticscatteringprocesses. each interaction between the chargedparticle and an atom, we may imagine that a \"measurement\" of the position of the charged particle is made. We may wonder why particle tracks in such media as cloud chambers and nuclear emulsionsare nearly is sharply straight. The reasonis that the differential crosssection G.12.17) t peaked at small q\\ in an overwhelming number of collisions, he final direction of momentum is nearly the same as the incident electron due to the rapid falloff of q~4 and Fn(q) for large q. Nuclear Form Factor
q
Coulombpotential due to the point nucleus must now be replacedby a Coulombpotential due to an extended object,
Ixx
where N(r) is a nuclear charge distribution, normalized so that
jd3x'N(r')=l.
The pointlike nucleus can now be regarded as a specialcase, ith w
G.12.23
N(r') = 8C)(r').
We can evaluate the Fourier transform of the
analogy with
as follows: G.12.10)
n v
righthand
//\342\200\242
d3x'Piq'xN( = /p r'}
\342\200\224
'x
\342\200\224
xr
n vp
\"
A/i
F
9
nucleus VM/
(a)
434
Scattering Theory
\302\273
x+
x' in
the
first
step and
G.12.26
We
obtain the deviation from the Rutherford formula due to the of the nucleus, size
thus
Rutherford
finite
where (da/dfl)Rutherford is the differential cross section for the electric of electrons a pointlike nucleusof charge Z\\e\\. For small q we scattering by have
(
/qx<? V(qrJ
G.12.28
vanishes becauseof spherical symmetry, and in the ^r2term The we have used the fact that the angular averageof cos20(where 6 is the angle between q and r) is just \\:
q\302\253xterm
H G U I COS I
z~f
/\302\273/'~\\c
H ItOo i7 ^^ l/^/^xo
\342\200\224
\342\200\224\342\200\224
III) .VL.Ljj
I /
1vJ 1
The quantity
In
is possible \"measure\" the sizeof the nucleus and also of the to as doneby R. Hofstadter and coworkers. the proton casethe spin In proton, effect is also important. (magnetic moment)
this way it
</2)nucieus *s known
7.13. OULOMBSCATTERING C
This last sectionwas not written even in preliminary form by Professor Sakurai,but it was listedas an item he would like to considerfor Modern Thomas Fulton of The JohnsHopkinsUniProfessor Quantum Mechanics. notes on Coulomb University graciously offered to contribute his own lecture in honor of ProfessorSakurai's memory. The scattering for this section this gestureof friendship.However,the reader editor deeplyappreciates needs be alertedthat there couldbe stylistic and even notational changes to herefrom the rest of the book. In this revisededition, the material is somewhat reorganized; the resultspreviously obtainedare still given in the main text, while principal the mathematical detailsare now presentedin Appendixes and C.2. C.I Much of this material is a slightly expandedversion of Gottfried's treatment (Gottfried 1966, and pp.148153) uses the notation of thi?
7.13. Coulomb
Scattering
435
text.The
for example, Bohm 1951, Schiff 1968) y dealing directly with the and b is the asymptotic forms. The differential equation G.13.7) standard form, which can alsobeobtainedby separating variables in parabolic coordinates. It can be recognizeds the differential equation for the confluent hypera function,* and so the properties of this function (including geometric t H asymptoticforms) can be appliedto analyse this case. owever,he present alternative approach can pass directly to the asymptotic limit by using variable techniques C.I Laplacetransforms and complex (seeAppendixes and C.2), thus avoid referring to the detailedproperties the confluent of and hypergeometric function. Clearly, this simplerapproach, which can be understood without any reference material outsidethe presenttextbook, to losesinformation about the scattering wave function at the origin. Thus, for example, wecan say nothing about the Gamowfactor? which is relevant for the study of many nuclear reaction rates.The interested reader is therefore encouraged supplement is knowledge to herewith reading from h other texts (e.g., t Schiff 1968)hat deal with the behavior of the Coulomb wave function at the origin via power series expansionof the associated confluent hypergeometricunction. f Scattering Solutionsof the Hamiltonian of the Coulomb Interaction
We start
Coulomb
treatment of Coulombpartial waves is original. The present of discussion Coulombscattering differs from the standard treatment (see,
with
potential
V(r)
ZlZ2??
G.13.1
a Z2e, s follows:
_h
or
v2
ZxZ2e
V2
k2
\342\200\224
]i/(r) = 0
G.13.2b
*See,for
4th
ed.(London:
436
Scattering Theory
and
yk
The Z2e. yk
in
is given G.13.2b) by
i Z2c
= +
ft
or
a=
he
1 137.03608 G.13.3)
to Note that 7 > 0 corresponds attraction. As long as we are interestedin a pure Coulombfield, it is possibleto write our solution vik(r) to G.13.2)
as
\342\200\224
ikr{\\
cos6) =
ik(r
\342\200\224
z) =
ikw
G.13.4)
= kz.
<j>
The separationof variables for i>k(r) in G.13.4) is plausibleif we recognize of A) that the solution will not involve the azimuthal angle because the axial symmetry of the problemand B) sincei)>k(r) represents complete the Coulombwave function (incident plus scatteredwave), terms must exist in its dominant asymptotic form that contain e*'rand r~lelkr. We will demonstrate shortly [seeEquations G.13.9a), and G.13.14) of that, with the choice independentvariables we areabout to make, this will indeedbe the case. of (Another argument for our particular choice variables is given by Gottfried 1966, 148.) Let us choosendependentvariables (z, w, X) where w = r z i and X can be taken to be cj), on which the solution vik( r) does depend. not In changing our Cartesiancoordinates(jc, y, z) to (z, h>, X),
G.13.13),
use\342\200\224for
example\342\200\224such
as expressions
dw
d dw d
dx
dx
X
dz d dx dz
dk d
dx dk
ax
dw
dx dk
G.13.5)
*
\302\246
Note that because elkzx(u) is independentof X, the operationd/dk makes no contribution. The reader ill readily verify that, operating on e w
1
dx
2\\
r2 dw2
y_
r3, r3,
w _d_ dw
By
r2 dw2
w2
G.13.6)
2w d2 r dzdw
d2
dw2
r2
72
2) _d_
73, dw
W
\342\200\224^
d
dw
dz
7.13.Coulomb
Scattering
437
du
du
X(u)
0.
G.13.7)
case\342\200\224that
considers asymptotic the Our first attempt at the solution of G.13.7) is,solutionsfor large r z (away from the forward direction, cos6) = 0 for 6 = 0). Let us try two types of since r z = r(l ~ wx and B) x ~ e\". solutions,A) x The first type of solution requires G.13.8) (X i7)iix 0, or X = 17
\342\200\224 \342\200\224 \342\200\224
and, hence,
X(u)
 u'h e'h 
ln
k(r~z)
In _ ^/[k.r7 k(rz)]
G.13.9a G.13.9b
T clearly representsthe incomingplanewave piece. he Equation G.13.9b) second type of solution, x ~ eu, manifestly satisfies u(d2x/du2) features u(dxldu) = 0,so heuristically we try for a solution that combines of both solutions in productform,
X(u)
ukeu,
G.13.10
X
and substitute into The coefficient of ux+leu obviously vanishes, while the coefficient of the wVterm leads to the following relation:
2X
G.13.7).
A
 X)
\302\253
17
0,
or
1+ 17.
G.13.1
Hence,
X(M)
fLL
U
\302\253
ACl
Z,
en m kirz)
G.13.12
and
J[kr + y
In
k(rz)]
,
two
ii(r)
G.13.13
solution
\342\200\224
clearly an
by
normalizedwave
outgoing
+ 2 In
sin
as
= r(l
piecesgiven cos 6)
\342\200\224
1
Btt)
3/2
J[k.ryln(fcrkr)] ,
G.13.14
438
Scattering Theory
Now we must find the Coulombscattering amplitude fc(k, 0). Inz): Interestingly, asidefrom a factor of y/k, the magnitude is just from (r But we (l/2k sin 8/2),which appears in the asymptotic form have to work hard to get the Because detailshere arequite involved to the firsttime readers encouraged i mathematically Appendix focus only on the final results summarized below. The physical basis of
\342\200\224
(c.f.
it!
G.13.13).
C.I),
our resultsarediscussed later on in this section. For the normalized iik(r) we obtain
1
Bir)
3/2
i[kzy
In
k(rz)] ,
51 1/
V
gl(y) 2k sin2F/2)
G.13.15
This exhibitsexplicitly all the r and ^dependentphasesand leads to the identification from G.13.14) that + j[eG) ln sin(e/2)]
^'
2\302\253y
\302\260^
2k sin2F/2)
eie(y)
Thus, as in
G.13.
where y is given by G.13.3)\342\200\224and we areback to the Rutherford formula of Forthe aficionados, e remind the reader f Hankel's w o formula
G.2.11).
rB)
(which
G.13.18
T 1). hus
c euttly\\l
 t)ndt
7.13.Coulomb
Scattering
439
=A
=
AJceik\"eik\302\2531<\\:
 t)d{t,
G.13.20
where
iyl G.13.21 d(t, 7) = We perform the partialwave expansionof the plane wave analogous to as G.5.18)
oo
=
\302\253l\302\27300
E B/ + 1=0
9)A?kr),
G.13.22
where
A^kr) = A JI
Now, //
G.13.23
*
= 2(MX) +
(seeAppendixA
where the htp aresphericalHankel functions h\\^*)y and Whittaker and Watson 1935), = ?/(p)elp/p, /i/(p) 0
?/(p)
+5i
li
hi
G.13.24
we and, asymptotically, ?/(p) = (~/)/+1+ 0(P l) Hence, write Aikr) = A\\l\\kr) + A\\2\\kr), G.13.25 where A\\1^ and A\\2^ correspondto the contributions from
respectively.
and hf,
re
=0
A?\\kr)
G.13.26
x
+ fei[kr(M2)y
In
2kr]
In 2A:r
]i
G.13.27
G.13.28
440
Scattering Theory
[seeG.13.3)].
that
= 1,
2mg3(y) =
= 2itigt(y) =
2iri
ry)'
For/ =
1,
fy)' we have
G.13.29
Ef 2i
^
1
s
s
Ids
1\342\200\224s/2L
\342\200\224
2m
\342\200\224
rB
rB +
ry)
[A
+ 17) 2] =
rB + 17) rB + 17) Thus for a general/, we The same pattern repeats for / = 2,3,
conjecture
17) TB
17) 17)
ry)
G.13.30
....
 iy)
G.13.31
As a final summary we remark that the Coulombpartialwavediffers from the general artialwave case (seeSection scattering case p 7.6) only through the modification J(kr(M2)) 2ikr 2i^ J(kr(M2)+ y
In
2kr)
2ikr
G.13.32
Let us note
wave function,
written G.1.33),
the asymptotic form of the Coulombscattering is different from that which appearsin Eq. Eq. for large r as
that
G.13.15),
jkz
Jkr
G.13.33
The latter form is valid only for shortrange forces, hile the Coulomb w force is a longrange one.The form is modified as followsfor the Coulombinteraction: The first term on the righthand side of G.13.15
G.1.33')
Problems
441
elkz
but as in G.13.33), also a modifying, the factor e~nln *(r~z).Hence, coordinatedependent,multiplicative phase of how far away the incident plane wave is slightly distorted,irrespective term on the righthand A particle is from the origin. nalogously, the second to the outgoing sphericalwave, contains side of G.13.15), corresponding i the r dependentphasefactor en In 2kr. Nevertheless,n spiteof these longeffects leading to phase factors that vary with distance,we can still range the define a scattering crosssection for shortrange forces because disalter physically observablequantities (e.g., terms, although they distorting l the mean current), ead to alterations that vanish as r goesto infinity.
PROBLEMS
1.The LippmannSchwingerformalism
potential,
can also be applied to a onedimensional transmissionreflection problem with a finiterangepotenV(x)?= 0 for 0 < x< a only. a. Supposewe have an incident wave coming from the left: (x\\(j>) = How must we handle the singular \\/{E HQ)operator if we are to have a transmitted wave only for x > a and a reflected wave and the original wave for x < Is the E > E + ie prescripstill correct? Obtain an expression for the appropriate Green's function and write an integral equation for (x\\\\p(*]). b. Considerthe specialcaseof an attractive 5function potential
^n.
\342\200\224
\342\200\224
a]
prescription
V= lyh2
\342\200\224
2m
)\302\253(*)
(y>0).
one)bound state for any value of y. Show that the transmission and reflection amplitudes you computed have boundstate poles at the expected positions when k is regarded as a complex variable. 2. Prove
only
'tot
C 52. amplitudes. heckyour results with Gottfried 1966, c. The onedimensional5functionpotential with y > 0 admits one (and
m2 r
mn
.?
r /,/v J
.\302\246>
.....,
x_., r
sin2k\\\\\\'
xx
in
cross section computed using the firstorder Born approximation. b. By applying the optical theorem to the forwardscatteringamplitude in the secondorder Born approximation.[Note that /@)is real if the firstorder Born approximation is used.] 3. Considera potential V = 0 for r > R, V = Fo = constant for r < 7?,
a. By
each of the
442
Scattering Theory
where Vo may be positive or negative. Using the method of partial E = h2k2/2m and kR 1 the differential waves, show that for crosssectionis isotropic and that the total crosssection is given by
\302\253: \\VQ\\\302\253\302\253
can
distribution
Bcosv.
for Obtain an approximate expression B/A. 4. A spinlessparticle is scattered by a weak Yukawa potential
V
=
fir in
where ju > 0 but Vo can be positive or negative.It was shown that the firstorder Born amplitude is given by
the
text
15/1
???
2B/+ 3)
\\
( ' Vl
is repulsive(attrac
(ii) When the de Brogliewavelength is much longer than the range of the potential, 5/ is proportional to k2l+l.Find the proportionalproportionality
constant.
Problems
443
5. Checkexplicitly the x
relation for the ground state of px uncertainty for a particle confined inside a hard sphere: F=oo r > a, V=0 for r < a. (Hint: Take advantage of spherical symmetry.) 6. Considerthe scattering of a particle by an impenetrable sphere
\\
oo
for r
< a.
b.
the swave (/ = 0) phase shift. (You need not know the detailed properties the spherical Bessel unctions to of f be able to do this simple problem!) What is the total crosssection o [o = dQ,]in the extreme limit k > 0? Compare your answer with the geometric lowenergy crosssection 7ra2. You may assume without proof:
j(do/d?l)
d\302\260=\\f(ey2
7. Use8,=k(b)\\h^l/k to obtain the phaseshift 8, for scattering at high a energies (a) the Gaussian potential, V = by r2/a2), nd (b) the Yukawa potential, V= Foexp( jur)//xr.Verify the assertion that 5, kR, where goesto zero very rapidly with increasing I (k fixed) for
Foexp(\342\200\224
\342\200\224
/:\302\273
is the
8. a. Prove
G.4.14)].
\"range\"
in
\342\200\224
lip. T\" IE u
b. For sphericallysymmetric
\\Elm(
where r< (r>) stands for the smaller (larger) of r and r\\ potentials, the LippmannSchwinger qua e tion can be written for spherical waves:
+ )) = \\Elm)+
in
Using (a), show that this equation, written leads to an equation for the radial function,
2mik
h 00
X
the xrepresentation,
A((k\\r),
as follows:
jl(kr<)h(j1\\kr>)V(r')Al(k;r')r'2dr'
444
By taking
Scattering Theory
.
{
Bm)
h2
L o
9. Considerscattering by
h
a repulsive 5shellpotential:
2ra
ti I
1
(y>o)
a. Set up
b.
an equation that determines the swave phase shift 80 as a function of k (E = h2k2/2m). Assume now that y is very large,
to Show that if tan/:/? is not close zero, the swave phase shift in resembles hardsphereresult discussed the text. Show also that the for
to (but not exactly equal to) zero, resonance tan kR close behavior is possible;that is, cot50 goes through zero from the D positive side as k increases. etermine approximately the positions of the resonances keeping terms of order 1/y;compare them with the boundstateenergiesfor a particle confined inside a spherical wall of the same radius,
K=0, r<R;
\"
F=oo, r>R.
2
[d(cot80)/dE]\\E=Er
and notice, in particular, that the resonances ecome b extremelysharp as y becomeslarge. (Note: For a different, more sophisticated who discusses approachto this problem seeGottfried 1966, the analytic properties the /^function defined by A{ = Ji/Dt.) of A 10. spinlessparticle is scattered by a timedependentpotential
131141,
y(r,t) = F(r)cosco/.
Show that if the potential is treated to first order in the transition or amplitude, the energy of the scattered particle is increased decreased hco. Obtain do/dQ,.Discuss qualitatively what happens if the by higherorder terms are taken into account. Show that the differential crosssection for the elastic scattering of a fast
11.
Problems
445
by
do
Am2e
16
\\2 I
12. et the L
functional
energy of a particle moving in a central field be E(JlJ2J3), where (JVJ2,J3) the three action variables. How does the funcare form of E specializefor the Coulomb potential? Usingthe recipe of the actionangle method, compare the degeneracyof the central field and the Coulomb problems relate it to the vector A. and
If the Hamiltonian is
2/x
how are these statements changed? o Describe corresponding the degeneracies f the central field and Coulombproblemsin quantum theory in terms of the usual quantum numbers (n, /, m) and also in terms of the quantum numbers (k, m, n). Herethe secondset, (k, m, n), labelsthe wave functions ^^n(a/3y). How are the wave functions 2^n{afiy) related to Laguerre times
sphericalharmonics?
APPENDIXA
wave Here summarize the simple solutions to Schrodinger's equation for we a variety of solublepotential problems.
A.I.FREEPARTICLES 0) (F=
The planewave,or momentum, eigenfunctionis
B*)
where
h'
and our normalization is
2mh
2m
k^k0,the
wave
A.2. Piecewise
Constant Potentials In
OneDimension
447
group velocity
hk o
g
*
dk J k0
(A.1.5)
The time evolution of a minimum wave packet can be described by 1/4 hk2 2w where 1/2
'
(A.I.6)
Xexp{
\342\200\224
(A.1.7)
So the
width
(AjcH at f =
1+
1/2
4m
at/>0. (A.I.8)
E>V=V0:
\342\200\224
ikx
, = \\l,2m(EV0) .(A.2.1)
y\342\200\224~\342\200\224\342\200\224
2m(V0E)
(A.2.2)
(c
RigidWall
Here
y
\342\200\224
0
oo
otherwise.
forO<*<L,
(A.2.3)
448
sinl
j
I,
\302\253
=1,2,3...,
(A.2.4)
v=
@
rz
for c
Ijcl
>a
\\\\
a,
for for
n\\
(A.2.5)
x>
(A.2.6)
\\x\\<a>
^ (oddparity)
^
\342\200\242\302\246
\\
where
 h2K2/2mare to be determined
, ,
ka cot ka
YYl