## Momentum operator for the Dirac field?

In the borrowed notes I have for last Monday’s lecture (which I missed) I see the momentum operator defined by
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:20}
\BP = \sum_{s = 1}^2
\int \frac{d^3 q}{(2\pi)^3} \Bp \lr{
a_\Bp^{s\dagger}
a_\Bp^{s}
+
b_\Bp^{s\dagger}
b_\Bp^{s}
}.

There’s a “use Noether’s theorem” comment associated with this. For the scalar field, using Noether’s theorem, we identified the conserved charge of a spacetime translation as the momentum operator
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:40}
P^i = \int d^3 x T^{0i} = – \int d^3 x \pi(x) \spacegrad \phi(x),

and if we plugged in the creation and anhillation operator representation of $$\pi, \phi$$, out comes
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:60}
\BP =
\inv{2} \int \frac{d^3 q}{(2\pi)^3} \Bp \lr{ a_\Bp^\dagger a_\Bp + a_\Bp a_\Bp^\dagger},

(plus $$e^{\pm 2 i \omega_\Bp t}$$ terms that we can argue away.)

It wasn’t clear to me how this worked with the Dirac field, but it turns out that this does follow systematically as expected. For a spacetime translation
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:80}
x^\mu \rightarrow x^\mu + a^\mu,

we find
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:100}
\delta \Psi = -a^\mu \partial_\mu \Psi,

so for the Dirac Lagrangian, we have
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:120}
\begin{aligned}
\delta \LL
&= \delta \lr{ \overline{\Psi} \lr{ i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu – m } \Psi } \\
&=
(\delta \overline{\Psi}) \lr{ i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu – m } \Psi
+
\overline{\Psi} \lr{ i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu – m } \delta \Psi \\
&=
(-a^\sigma \partial_\sigma \overline{\Psi}) \lr{ i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu – m } \Psi
+
\overline{\Psi} \lr{ i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu – m } (-a^\sigma \partial_\sigma \Psi ) \\
&=
-a^\sigma \partial_\sigma \LL \\
&=
\partial_\sigma (-a^\sigma \LL),
\end{aligned}

i.e. $$J^\mu = -a^\mu \LL$$.
To plugging this into the Noether current calculating machine, we have
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:160}
\begin{aligned}
\PD{(\partial_\mu \Psi)}{\LL}
&=
\PD{(\partial_\mu \Psi)}{} \lr{ \overline{\Psi} i \gamma^\sigma \partial_\sigma \Psi – m \overline{\Psi} \Psi } \\
&=
\overline{\Psi} i \gamma^\mu,
\end{aligned}

and
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:180}
\PD{(\partial_\mu \overline{\Psi})}{\LL} = 0,

so
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:140}
\begin{aligned}
j^\mu
&=
(\delta \overline{\Psi}) \PD{(\partial_\mu \overline{\Psi})}{\LL}
+
\PD{(\partial_\mu \Psi)}{\LL} (\delta \Psi)
– a^\mu \LL \\
&=
\overline{\Psi} i \gamma^\mu (-a^\sigma \partial_\sigma \Psi)
– a^\sigma {\delta^{\mu}}_{\sigma} \LL \\
&=
– a^\sigma
\lr{
\overline{\Psi} i \gamma^\mu \partial_\sigma \Psi
+ {\delta^{\mu}}_{\sigma} \LL
} \\
&=
-a_\nu
\lr{
\overline{\Psi} i \gamma^\mu \partial^\nu \Psi
+ g^{\mu\nu} \LL
}.
\end{aligned}

We can now define an energy-momentum tensor
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:200}
T^{\mu\nu}
=
\overline{\Psi} i \gamma^\mu \partial^\nu \Psi
+ g^{\mu\nu} \LL.

A couple things are of notable in this tensor. One is that it is not symmetric, and there’s doesn’t appear to be any hope
of making it so. For example, the space+time components are way different
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:220}
\begin{aligned}
T^{0k} &= \overline{\Psi} i \gamma^0 \partial^k \Psi \\
T^{k0} &= \overline{\Psi} i \gamma^k \partial^0 \Psi,
\end{aligned}

so if we want a momentum like creature, we have to use $$T^{0k}$$, not $$T^{k0}$$. The charge associated with that current is
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:240}
\begin{aligned}
Q^k
&=
\int d^3 x
\overline{\Psi} i \gamma^0 \partial^k \Psi \\
&=
\int d^3 x
\Psi^\dagger (-i \partial_k) \Psi,
\end{aligned}

or translating from component to vector form
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:260}
\BP =
\int d^3 x

which is the how the momentum operator is first stated in [2]. Here the vector notation doesn’t have any specific representation, but it is interesting to observe how this is directly related to the massless Dirac Lagrangian

\label{eqn:momentumDirac:280}
\begin{aligned}
\LL(m = 0)
&=
\overline{\Psi} i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu \Psi \\
&=
\Psi^\dagger i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu \Psi \\
&=
\Psi^\dagger i (\partial_0 + \gamma_0 \gamma^k \partial_k) \Psi \\
&=
\Psi^\dagger i (\partial_0 – \gamma_0 \gamma_k \partial_k ) \Psi,
\end{aligned}

but since $$\gamma_0 \gamma_k$$ is a $$4 \times 4$$ representation of the Pauli matrix $$\sigma_k$$ Lagrangian itself breaks down into
\label{eqn:momentumDirac:300}
\LL(m = 0)
=
\Psi^\dagger i \partial_0 \Psi
+
\Bsigma \cdot \lr{ \Psi^\dagger (-i\spacegrad) \Psi },

components, and lo and behold, out pops the momentum operator density! There is ambiguity as to what order of products $$\gamma_0 \gamma_k$$, or $$\gamma_k \gamma_0$$ to pick to represent the Pauli basis ([1] uses $$\gamma_k \gamma_0$$), but we also have sign ambiguity in assembling a Noether charge from the conserved current, so I don’t think that matters. Some part of this should be expected this since the Dirac equation in momentum space is just $$\gamma \cdot p – m = 0$$, so there is an intimate connection with the operator portion and momentum.

The last detail to fill in is going from \ref{eqn:momentumDirac:260} to \ref{eqn:momentumDirac:20} using the $$a, b$$ representation of the field. That’s an algebraically messy looking job that I don’t feel like trying at the moment.

# References

[1] C. Doran and A.N. Lasenby. Geometric algebra for physicists. Cambridge University Press New York, Cambridge, UK, 1st edition, 2003.

[2] Michael E Peskin and Daniel V Schroeder. An introduction to Quantum Field Theory. Westview, 1995.

## PHY1520H Graduate Quantum Mechanics. Lecture 8: Dirac equation in 1D. Taught by Prof. Arun Paramekanti

### Disclaimer

Peeter’s lecture notes from class. These may be incoherent and rough.

These are notes for the UofT course PHY1520, Graduate Quantum Mechanics, taught by Prof. Paramekanti.

### Schrodinger Derivation

Recall that a “derivation” of the Schrodinger equation can be associated with the following equivalences

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:300}
E \leftrightarrow \Hbar \omega \leftrightarrow i \Hbar \PD{t}{}

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:320}
p \leftrightarrow \Hbar k \leftrightarrow -i \Hbar \PD{t}{}

so that the classical energy relationship

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:20}
E = \frac{p^2}{2m}

takes the form

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:40}
i \Hbar \PD{t}{} = -\frac{\Hbar^2}{2m}.

How do we do this in a relativistic context where the energy momentum relationship is

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:60}
E = \sqrt{ p^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4 } \approx m c^2 + \frac{p^2}{2m} + \cdots

where $$m$$ is the rest mass and $$c$$ is the speed of light.

### Attempt I

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:80}
E = m c^2 + \frac{p^2}{2m} + (…) p^4 + (…) p^6 + \cdots

First order in time, but infinite order in space $$\partial/\partial x$$. Useless.

### Attempt II

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:100}
E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4.

This gives

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:120}
-\Hbar^2 \PDSq{t}{\psi} = – \Hbar^2 c^2 \PDSq{x}{\psi} + m^2 c^4 \psi.

This is the Klein-Gordon equation, which is second order in time.

### Attempt III

Suppose that we have the matrix

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:140}
\begin{bmatrix}
p c & m c^2 \\
m c^2 & – p c
\end{bmatrix},

or

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:160}
\begin{bmatrix}
m c^2 & i p c \\
-i p c & – m c^2
\end{bmatrix},

These both happen to have eigenvalues $$\lambda_{\pm} = \pm \sqrt{p^2 c^2}$$. For those familiar with the Dirac matrices, this amounts to a choice for different representations of the gamma matrices.

Working with \ref{eqn:qmLecture8:140}, which has some nicer features than other possible representations, we seek a state

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:180}
\Bpsi =
\begin{bmatrix}
\psi_1(x, t) \\
\psi_2(x, t) \\
\end{bmatrix},

where we aim to write down an equation for this composite state.

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:200}
i \Hbar \PD{t}{\Bpsi} = \BH \Bpsi

Assuming the matrix is the Hamiltonian, multiplying that with the composite state gives

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:220}
\begin{aligned}
\begin{bmatrix}
i \Hbar \PD{t}{\psi_1} \\
i \Hbar \PD{t}{\psi_1}
\end{bmatrix}
&=
\begin{bmatrix}
\hat{p} c & m c^2 \\
m c^2 & – \hat{p} c
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\psi_1(x, t) \\
\psi_2(x, t) \\
\end{bmatrix} \\
&=
\begin{bmatrix}
\hat{p} c \psi_1 + m c^2 \psi_2 \\
m c^2 \psi_1 – \hat{p} c \psi_2
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{aligned}

What happens when we square this?

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:240}
\begin{aligned}
\lr{ i \Hbar \PD{t}{} }^2 \Bpsi
&= \BH \BH \Bpsi \\
&=
\begin{bmatrix}
\hat{p} c & m c^2 \\
m c^2 & – \hat{p} c
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\hat{p} c & m c^2 \\
m c^2 & – \hat{p} c
\end{bmatrix}
\Bpsi \\
&=
\begin{bmatrix}
\hat{p}^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4 & 0 \\
0 & \hat{p}^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4 \\
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{aligned}

That is
\label{eqn:qmLecture8:260}
– \Hbar^2 \PDSq{t}{} \Bpsi
=
\lr{ \hat{p}^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4 } \mathbf{1} \Bpsi,

or more exactly

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:280}
– \Hbar^2 \PDSq{t}{} \psi_{1,2}
=
\lr{ \hat{p}^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4 } \psi_{1,2}.

This recovers the Klein Gordon equation for each of the wave functions $$\psi_1, \psi_2$$.

Instead of squaring the operators, lets try to solve the first order equation. To do so we’ll want to diagonalize $$\BH$$.

Before doing that, let’s write out the Hamiltonian in an alternate but useful form

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:340}
\BH
=
\hat{p} c
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\
0 & -1
\end{bmatrix}
+
m c^2
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & 1 \\
1 & 0
\end{bmatrix}
= \hat{p} c \hat{\sigma}_z + m c^2 \hat{\sigma}_x.

We have two types of operators in the mix here. We have matrix operators that act on the wave function matrices, as well as derivative operators that act on the components of those matrices.

We have

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:360}
\hat{\sigma}_z
\begin{bmatrix}
\psi_1 \\
\psi_2 \\
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
\psi_1 \\
-\psi_2 \\
\end{bmatrix},

and

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:380}
\hat{\sigma}_x
\begin{bmatrix}
\psi_1 \\
\psi_2 \\
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
\psi_2 \\
\psi_1 \\
\end{bmatrix}.

Because the derivative actions of $$\hat{p}$$ and the matrix operators are independent, we see that these operators commute. For example

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:400}
\hat{\sigma}_z \hat{p}
\begin{bmatrix}
\psi_1 \\
\psi_2 \\
\end{bmatrix}
=
\hat{\sigma}_z
\begin{bmatrix}
-i \Hbar \PD{x}{\psi_1} \\
-i \Hbar \PD{x}{\psi_2} \\
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
-i \Hbar \PD{x}{\psi_1} \\
i \Hbar \PD{x}{\psi_2} \\
\end{bmatrix}
=
\hat{p}
\hat{\sigma}_z
\begin{bmatrix}
\psi_1 \\
\psi_2 \\
\end{bmatrix}.

### Diagonalizing it

Suppose the wave function matrix has the structure

\label{eqn:qmLecture8:420}
\Bpsi =
\begin{bmatrix}
f_{+} \\
f_{-} \\
\end{bmatrix}
e^{i k x}.

We’ll plug this into the Schrodinger equation and see what we get.

## PHY1520H Graduate Quantum Mechanics. Lecture 5: time evolution of coherent states, and charged particles in a magnetic field. Taught by Prof. Arun Paramekanti

### Disclaimer

Peeter’s lecture notes from class. These may be incoherent and rough.

These are notes for the UofT course PHY1520, Graduate Quantum Mechanics, taught by Prof. Paramekanti, covering \textchapref{{1}} [1] content.

### Coherent states (cont.)

A coherent state for the SHO $$H = \lr{ N + \inv{2} } \Hbar \omega$$ was given by

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:20}
a \ket{z} = z \ket{z},

where we showed that

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:40}
\ket{z} = c_0 e^{ z a^\dagger } \ket{0}.

In the Heisenberg picture we found

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:60}
\begin{aligned}
a_{\textrm{H}}(t) &= e^{i H t/\Hbar} a e^{-i H t/\Hbar} = a e^{-i\omega t} \\
a_{\textrm{H}}^\dagger(t) &= e^{i H t/\Hbar} a^\dagger e^{-i H t/\Hbar} = a^\dagger e^{i\omega t}.
\end{aligned}

Recall that the position and momentum representation of the ladder operators was

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:80}
\begin{aligned}
a &= \inv{\sqrt{2}} \lr{ \hat{x} \sqrt{\frac{m \omega}{\Hbar}} + i \hat{p} \sqrt{\inv{m \Hbar \omega}} } \\
a^\dagger &= \inv{\sqrt{2}} \lr{ \hat{x} \sqrt{\frac{m \omega}{\Hbar}} – i \hat{p} \sqrt{\inv{m \Hbar \omega}} },
\end{aligned}

or equivalently
\label{eqn:qmLecture5:100}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{x} &= \lr{ a + a^\dagger } \sqrt{\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}} \\
\hat{p} &= i \lr{ a^\dagger – a } \sqrt{\frac{m \Hbar \omega}{2}}.
\end{aligned}

Given this we can compute expectation value of position operator

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:120}
\begin{aligned}
\bra{z} \hat{x} \ket{z}
&=
\sqrt{\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}}
\bra{z}
\lr{ a + a^\dagger }
\ket{z} \\
&=
\lr{ z + z^\conj } \sqrt{\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}} \\
&=
2 \textrm{Re} z \sqrt{\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}} .
\end{aligned}

Similarly

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:140}
\begin{aligned}
\bra{z} \hat{p} \ket{z}
&=
i \sqrt{\frac{m \Hbar \omega}{2}}
\bra{z}
\lr{ a^\dagger – a }
\ket{z} \\
&=
\sqrt{\frac{m \Hbar \omega}{2}}
2 \textrm{Im} z.
\end{aligned}

How about the expectation of the Heisenberg position operator? That is

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:160}
\begin{aligned}
\bra{z} \hat{x}_{\textrm{H}}(t) \ket{z}
&=
\sqrt{\frac{\Hbar}{2 m \omega}} \bra{z} \lr{ a + a^\dagger } \ket{z} \\
&=
\sqrt{\frac{\Hbar}{2 m \omega}} \lr{ z e^{-i \omega t} + z^\conj e^{i \omega t}} \\
&=
\sqrt{\frac{\Hbar}{2 m \omega}} \lr{ \lr{z + z^\conj} \cos( \omega t ) -i \lr{ z – z^\conj } \sin( \omega t) } \\
&=
\sqrt{\frac{\Hbar}{2 m \omega}} \lr{ \expectation{x(0)} \sqrt{ \frac{2 m \omega}{\Hbar}} \cos( \omega t ) -i \expectation{p(0)} i \sqrt{\frac{2 m \omega}{\Hbar} } \sin( \omega t) } \\
&=
\expectation{x(0)} \cos( \omega t ) + \frac{\expectation{p(0)}}{m \omega} \sin( \omega t) .
\end{aligned}

We find that the average of the Heisenberg position operator evolves in time in exactly the same fashion as position in the classical Harmonic oscillator. This phase space like trajectory is sketched in fig. 1.

fig. 1. phase space like trajectory

In the text it is shown that we have the same structure for the Heisenberg operator itself, before taking expectations

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:220}
\hat{x}_{\textrm{H}}(t)
=
{x(0)} \cos( \omega t ) + \frac{{p(0)}}{m \omega} \sin( \omega t).

Where the coherent states become useful is that we will see that the second moments of position and momentum are not time dependent with respect to the coherent states. Such states remain localized.

### Uncertainty

First note that using the commutator relationship we have

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:180}
\begin{aligned}
\bra{z} a a^\dagger \ket{z}
&=
\bra{z} \lr{ \antisymmetric{a}{a^\dagger} + a^\dagger a } \ket{z} \\
&=
\bra{z} \lr{ 1 + a^\dagger a } \ket{z}.
\end{aligned}

For the second moment we have

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:200}
\begin{aligned}
\bra{z} \hat{x}^2 \ket{z}
&=
\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}
\bra{z} \lr{a + a^\dagger } \lr{a + a^\dagger } \ket{z} \\
&=
\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}
\bra{z} \lr{
a^2 + {(a^\dagger)}^2 + a a^\dagger + a^\dagger a
} \ket{z} \\
&=
\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}
\bra{z} \lr{
a^2 + {(a^\dagger)}^2 + 2 a^\dagger a + 1
} \ket{z} \\
&=
\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}
\lr{ z^2 + {(z^\conj)}^2 + 2 z^\conj z + 1} \ket{z} \\
&=
\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}
\lr{ z + z^\conj }^2
+
\frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega}.
\end{aligned}

We find

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:240}
\sigma_x^2 = \frac{\Hbar}{ 2 m \omega},

and

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:260}
\sigma_p^2 = \frac{m \Hbar \omega}{2}

so

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:280}
\sigma_x^2 \sigma_p^2 = \frac{\Hbar^2}{4},

or

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:300}
\sigma_x \sigma_p = \frac{\Hbar}{2}.

This is the minimum uncertainty.

### Quantum Field theory

In Quantum Field theory the ideas of isolated oscillators is used to model particle creation. The lowest energy state (a no particle, vacuum state) is given the lowest energy level, with each additional quantum level modeling a new particle creation state as sketched in fig. 2.

fig. 2. QFT energy levels

We have to imagine many oscillators, each with a distinct vacuum energy $$\sim \Bk^2$$ . The Harmonic oscillator can be used to model the creation of particles with $$\Hbar \omega$$ energy differences from that “vacuum energy”.

### Charged particle in a magnetic field

In the classical case ( with SI units or $$c = 1$$ ) we have

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:320}
\BF = q \BE + q \Bv \cross \BB.

Alternately, we can look at the Hamiltonian view of the system, written in terms of potentials

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:340}

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:360}
\BE = – \spacegrad \phi – \PD{t}{\BA}.

Note that the curl form for the magnetic field implies one of the required Maxwell’s equations $$\spacegrad \cdot \BB = 0$$.

Ignoring time dependence of the potentials, the Hamiltonian can be expressed as

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:380}
H = \inv{2 m} \lr{ \Bp – q \BA }^2 + q \phi.

In this Hamiltonian the vector $$\Bp$$ is called the canonical momentum, the momentum conjugate to position in phase space.

It is left as an exercise to show that the Lorentz force equation results from application of the Hamiltonian equations of motion, and that the velocity is given by $$\Bv = (\Bp – q \BA)/m$$.

For quantum mechanics, we use the same Hamiltonian, but promote our position, momentum and potentials to operators.

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:400}
\hat{H} = \inv{2 m} \lr{ \hat{\Bp} – q \hat{\BA}(\Br, t) }^2 + q \hat{\phi}(\Br, t).

### Gauge invariance

Can we say anything about this before looking at the question of a particle in a magnetic field?

Recall that the we can make a gauge transformation of the form

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:420a}
\label{eqn:qmLecture5:420}
\BA \rightarrow \BA + \spacegrad \chi

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:440}
\phi \rightarrow \phi – \PD{t}{\chi}

Does this notion of gauge invariance also carry over to the Quantum Hamiltonian. After gauge transformation we have

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:460}
\hat{H}’
= \inv{2 m} \lr{ \hat{\Bp} – q \BA – q \spacegrad \chi }^2 + q \lr{ \phi – \PD{t}{\chi} }

Now we are in a mess, since this function $$\chi$$ can make the Hamiltonian horribly complicated. We don’t see how gauge invariance can easily be applied to the quantum problem. Next time we will introduce a transformation that resolves some of this mess.

## Question: Lorentz force from classical electrodynamic Hamiltonian

Given the classical Hamiltonian

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:381}
H = \inv{2 m} \lr{ \Bp – q \BA }^2 + q \phi.

apply the Hamiltonian equations of motion

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:480}
\begin{aligned}
\ddt{\Bp} &= – \PD{\Bq}{H} \\
\ddt{\Bq} &= \PD{\Bp}{H},
\end{aligned}

to show that this is the Hamiltonian that describes the Lorentz force equation, and to find the velocity in terms of the canonical momentum and vector potential.

The particle velocity follows easily

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:500}
\begin{aligned}
\Bv
&= \ddt{\Br} \\
&= \PD{\Bp}{H} \\
&= \inv{m} \lr{ \Bp – a \BA }.
\end{aligned}

For the Lorentz force we can proceed in the coordinate representation

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:520}
\begin{aligned}
\ddt{p_k}
&= – \PD{x_k}{H} \\
&= – \frac{2}{2m} \lr{ p_m – q A_m } \PD{x_k}{}\lr{ p_m – q A_m } – q \PD{x_k}{\phi} \\
&= q v_m \PD{x_k}{A_m} – q \PD{x_k}{\phi},
\end{aligned}

We also have

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:540}
\begin{aligned}
\ddt{p_k}
&=
\ddt{} \lr{m x_k + q A_k } \\
&=
m \frac{d^2 x_k}{dt^2} + q \PD{x_m}{A_k} \frac{d x_m}{dt} + q \PD{t}{A_k}.
\end{aligned}

Putting these together we’ve got

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:560}
\begin{aligned}
m \frac{d^2 x_k}{dt^2}
&= q v_m \PD{x_k}{A_m} – q \PD{x_k}{\phi},
– q \PD{x_m}{A_k} \frac{d x_m}{dt} – q \PD{t}{A_k} \\
&=
q v_m \lr{ \PD{x_k}{A_m} – \PD{x_m}{A_k} } + q E_k \\
&=
q v_m \epsilon_{k m s} B_s + q E_k,
\end{aligned}

or

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:580}
\begin{aligned}
m \frac{d^2 \Bx}{dt^2}
&=
q \Be_k v_m \epsilon_{k m s} B_s + q E_k \\
&= q \Bv \cross \BB + q \BE.
\end{aligned}

## Question: Show gauge invariance of the magnetic and electric fields

After the gauge transformation of \ref{eqn:qmLecture5:420} show that the electric and magnetic fields are unaltered.

For the magnetic field the transformed field is

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:600}
\begin{aligned}
\BB’
&= \BB.
\end{aligned}

\label{eqn:qmLecture5:620}
\begin{aligned}
\BE’
&=
– \PD{t}{\BA’} – \spacegrad \phi’ \\
&=
– \PD{t}{}\lr{\BA + \spacegrad \chi} – \spacegrad \lr{ \phi – \PD{t}{\chi}} \\
&=
– \PD{t}{\BA} – \spacegrad \phi \\
&=
\BE.
\end{aligned}

# References

[1] Jun John Sakurai and Jim J Napolitano. Modern quantum mechanics. Pearson Higher Ed, 2014.

## Quantum SHO ladder operators as a diagonal change of basis for the Heisenberg EOMs

Many authors pull the definitions of the raising and lowering (or ladder) operators out of their butt with no attempt at motivation. This is pointed out nicely in [1] by Eli along with one justification based on factoring the Hamiltonian.

In [2] is a small exception to the usual presentation. In that text, these operators are defined as usual with no motivation. However, after the utility of these operators has been shown, the raising and lowering operators show up in a context that does provide that missing motivation as a side effect.
It doesn’t look like the author was trying to provide a motivation, but it can be interpreted that way.

When seeking the time evolution of Heisenberg-picture position and momentum operators, we will see that those solutions can be trivially expressed using the raising and lowering operators. No special tools nor black magic is required to find the structure of these operators. Unfortunately, we must first switch to both the Heisenberg picture representation of the position and momentum operators, and also employ the Heisenberg equations of motion. Neither of these last two fit into standard narrative of most introductory quantum mechanics treatments. We will also see that these raising and lowering “operators” could also be introduced in classical mechanics, provided we were attempting to solve the SHO system using the Hamiltonian equations of motion.

I’ll outline this route to finding the structure of the ladder operators below. Because these are encountered trying to solve the time evolution problem, I’ll first show a simpler way to solve that problem. Because that simpler method depends a bit on lucky observation and is somewhat unstructured, I’ll then outline a more structured procedure that leads to the ladder operators directly, also providing the solution to the time evolution problem as a side effect.

The starting point is the Heisenberg equations of motion. For a time independent Hamiltonian $$H$$, and a Heisenberg operator $$A^{(H)}$$, those equations are

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:20}
\ddt{A^{(H)}} = \inv{i \Hbar} \antisymmetric{A^{(H)}}{H}.

Here the Heisenberg operator $$A^{(H)}$$ is related to the Schrodinger operator $$A^{(S)}$$ by

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:60}
A^{(H)} = U^\dagger A^{(S)} U,

where $$U$$ is the time evolution operator. For this discussion, we need only know that $$U$$ commutes with $$H$$, and do not need to know the specific structure of that operator. In particular, the Heisenberg equations of motion take the form

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:80}
\begin{aligned}
\ddt{A^{(H)}}
&= \inv{i \Hbar}
\antisymmetric{A^{(H)}}{H} \\
&= \inv{i \Hbar}
\antisymmetric{U^\dagger A^{(S)} U}{H} \\
&= \inv{i \Hbar}
\lr{
U^\dagger A^{(S)} U H
– H U^\dagger A^{(S)} U
} \\
&= \inv{i \Hbar}
\lr{
U^\dagger A^{(S)} H U
– U^\dagger H A^{(S)} U
} \\
&= \inv{i \Hbar} U^\dagger \antisymmetric{A^{(S)}}{H} U.
\end{aligned}

The Hamiltonian for the harmonic oscillator, with Schrodinger-picture position and momentum operators $$x, p$$ is

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:40}
H = \frac{p^2}{2m} + \inv{2} m \omega^2 x^2,

so the equations of motions are

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:100}
\begin{aligned}
\ddt{x^{(H)}}
&= \inv{i \Hbar} U^\dagger \antisymmetric{x}{H} U \\
&= \inv{i \Hbar} U^\dagger \antisymmetric{x}{\frac{p^2}{2m}} U \\
&= \inv{2 m i \Hbar} U^\dagger \lr{ i \Hbar \PD{p}{p^2} } U \\
&= \inv{m } U^\dagger p U \\
&= \inv{m } p^{(H)},
\end{aligned}

and
\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:120}
\begin{aligned}
\ddt{p^{(H)}}
&= \inv{i \Hbar} U^\dagger \antisymmetric{p}{H} U \\
&= \inv{i \Hbar} U^\dagger \antisymmetric{p}{\inv{2} m \omega^2 x^2 } U \\
&= \frac{m \omega^2}{2 i \Hbar} U^\dagger \lr{ -i \Hbar \PD{x}{x^2} } U \\
&= -m \omega^2 U^\dagger x U \\
&= -m \omega^2 x^{(H)}.
\end{aligned}

In the Heisenberg picture the equations of motion are precisely those of classical Hamiltonian mechanics, except that we are dealing with operators instead of scalars

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:140}
\begin{aligned}
\ddt{p^{(H)}} &= -m \omega^2 x^{(H)} \\
\ddt{x^{(H)}} &= \inv{m } p^{(H)}.
\end{aligned}

In the text the ladder operators are used to simplify the solution of these coupled equations, since they can decouple them. That’s not really required since we can solve them directly in matrix form with little work

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:160}
\ddt{}
\begin{bmatrix}
p^{(H)} \\
x^{(H)}
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & -m \omega^2 \\
\inv{m} & 0
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
p^{(H)} \\
x^{(H)}
\end{bmatrix},

or, with length scaled variables

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:180}
\begin{aligned}
\ddt{}
\begin{bmatrix}
\frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} \\
x^{(H)}
\end{bmatrix}
&=
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & -\omega \\
\omega & 0
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} \\
x^{(H)}
\end{bmatrix} \\
&=
-i \omega
\begin{bmatrix} 0 & -i \\ i & 0 \\ \end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} \\
x^{(H)}
\end{bmatrix} \\
&=
-i \omega
\sigma_y
\begin{bmatrix}
\frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} \\
x^{(H)}
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{aligned}

Writing $$y = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} \\ x^{(H)} \end{bmatrix}$$, the solution can then be written immediately as

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:200}
\begin{aligned}
y(t)
&=
\exp\lr{ -i \omega \sigma_y t } y(0) \\
&=
\lr{ \cos \lr{ \omega t } I – i \sigma_y \sin\lr{ \omega t } } y(0) \\
&=
\begin{bmatrix}
\cos\lr{ \omega t } & \sin\lr{ \omega t } \\
-\sin\lr{ \omega t } & \cos\lr{ \omega t }
\end{bmatrix}
y(0),
\end{aligned}

or

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:220}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{p^{(H)}(t)}{m \omega} &= \cos\lr{ \omega t } \frac{p^{(H)}(0)}{m \omega} + \sin\lr{ \omega t } x^{(H)}(0) \\
x^{(H)}(t) &= -\sin\lr{ \omega t } \frac{p^{(H)}(0)}{m \omega} + \cos\lr{ \omega t } x^{(H)}(0).
\end{aligned}

This solution depends on being lucky enough to recognize that the matrix has a Pauli matrix as a factor (which squares to unity, and allows the exponential to be evaluated easily.)

If we hadn’t been that observant, then the first tool we’d have used instead would have been to diagonalize the matrix. For such diagonalization, it’s natural to work in completely dimensionless variables. Such a non-dimensionalisation can be had by defining

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:240}
x_0 = \sqrt{\frac{\Hbar}{m \omega}},

and dividing the working (operator) variables through by those values. Let $$z = \inv{x_0} y$$, and $$\tau = \omega t$$ so that the equations of motion are

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:260}
\frac{dz}{d\tau}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & -1 \\
1 & 0
\end{bmatrix}
z.

This matrix can be diagonalized as

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:280}
A
=
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & -1 \\
1 & 0
\end{bmatrix}
=
V
\begin{bmatrix}
i & 0 \\
0 & -i
\end{bmatrix}
V^{-1},

where

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:300}
V =
\inv{\sqrt{2}}
\begin{bmatrix}
i & -i \\
1 & 1
\end{bmatrix}.

The equations of motion can now be written

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:320}
\frac{d}{d\tau} \lr{ V^{-1} z } =
\begin{bmatrix}
i & 0 \\
0 & -i
\end{bmatrix}
\lr{ V^{-1} z }.

This final change of variables $$V^{-1} z$$ decouples the system as desired. Expanding that gives

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:340}
\begin{aligned}
V^{-1} z
&=
\inv{\sqrt{2}}
\begin{bmatrix}
-i & 1 \\
i & 1
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\frac{p^{(H)}}{x_0 m \omega} \\
\frac{x^{(H)}}{x_0}
\end{bmatrix} \\
&=
\inv{\sqrt{2} x_0}
\begin{bmatrix}
-i \frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} + x^{(H)} \\
i \frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} + x^{(H)}
\end{bmatrix} \\
&=
\begin{bmatrix}
a^\dagger \\
a
\end{bmatrix},
\end{aligned}

where
\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:n}
\begin{aligned}
a^\dagger &= \sqrt{\frac{m \omega}{2 \Hbar}} \lr{ -i \frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} + x^{(H)} } \\
a &= \sqrt{\frac{m \omega}{2 \Hbar}} \lr{ i \frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} + x^{(H)} }.
\end{aligned}

Lo and behold, we have the standard form of the raising and lowering operators, and can write the system equations as

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:360}
\begin{aligned}
\ddt{a^\dagger} &= i \omega a^\dagger \\
\ddt{a} &= -i \omega a.
\end{aligned}

It is actually a bit fluky that this matched exactly, since we could have chosen eigenvectors that differ by constant phase factors, like

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:380}
V = \inv{\sqrt{2}}
\begin{bmatrix}
i e^{i\phi} & -i e^{i \psi} \\
1 e^{i\phi} & e^{i \psi}
\end{bmatrix},

so

\label{eqn:harmonicOscDiagonalize:341}
\begin{aligned}
V^{-1} z
&=
\frac{e^{-i(\phi + \psi)}}{\sqrt{2}}
\begin{bmatrix}
-i e^{i\psi} & e^{i \psi} \\
i e^{i\phi} & e^{i \phi}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\frac{p^{(H)}}{x_0 m \omega} \\
\frac{x^{(H)}}{x_0}
\end{bmatrix} \\
&=
\inv{\sqrt{2} x_0}
\begin{bmatrix}
-i e^{i\phi} \frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} + e^{i\phi} x^{(H)} \\
i e^{i\psi} \frac{p^{(H)}}{m \omega} + e^{i\psi} x^{(H)}
\end{bmatrix} \\
&=
\begin{bmatrix}
e^{i\phi} a^\dagger \\
e^{i\psi} a
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{aligned}

To make the resulting pairs of operators Hermitian conjugates, we’d want to constrain those constant phase factors by setting $$\phi = -\psi$$. If we were only interested in solving the time evolution problem no such additional constraints are required.

The raising and lowering operators are seen to naturally occur when seeking the solution of the Heisenberg equations of motion. This is found using the standard technique of non-dimensionalisation and then seeking a change of basis that diagonalizes the system matrix. Because the Heisenberg equations of motion are identical to the classical Hamiltonian equations of motion in this case, what we call the raising and lowering operators in quantum mechanics could also be utilized in the classical simple harmonic oscillator problem. However, in a classical context we wouldn’t have a justification to call this more than a change of basis.

# References

[1] Eli Lansey. The Quantum Harmonic Oscillator Ladder Operators, 2009. URL http://behindtheguesses.blogspot.ca/2009/03/quantum-harmonic-oscillator-ladder.html. [Online; accessed 18-August-2015].

[2] Jun John Sakurai and Jim J Napolitano. Modern quantum mechanics, chapter {Time Development of the Oscillator}. Pearson Higher Ed, 2014.

## (a)

Evaluate the classical Poisson bracket

\label{eqn:translation:420}
\antisymmetric{x}{F(p)}_{\textrm{classical}}

## (b)

Evaluate the commutator

\label{eqn:translation:440}
\antisymmetric{x}{e^{i p a/\Hbar}}

## (c)

Using the result in \ref{problem:translation:28:b}, prove that
\label{eqn:translation:460}
e^{i p a/\Hbar} \ket{x’},

is an eigenstate of the coordinate operator $$x$$.

## (a)

\label{eqn:translation:480}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{x}{F(p)}_{\textrm{classical}}
&=
\PD{x}{x} \PD{p}{F(p)} – \PD{p}{x} \PD{x}{F(p)} \\
&=
\PD{p}{F(p)}.
\end{aligned}

## (b)

Having worked backwards through these problems, the answer for this one dimensional problem can be obtained from \ref{eqn:translation:140} and is

\label{eqn:translation:500}
\antisymmetric{x}{e^{i p a/\Hbar}} = a e^{i p a/\Hbar}.

## (c)

\label{eqn:translation:520}
\begin{aligned}
x e^{i p a/\Hbar} \ket{x’}
&=
\lr{
\antisymmetric{x}{e^{i p a/\Hbar}}
e^{i p a/\Hbar} x
+
}
\ket{x’} \\
&=
\lr{ a e^{i p a/\Hbar} + e^{i p a/\Hbar} x ‘ } \ket{x’} \\
&= \lr{ a + x’ } \ket{x’}.
\end{aligned}

This demonstrates that $$e^{i p a/\Hbar} \ket{x’}$$ is an eigenstate of $$x$$ with eigenvalue $$a + x’$$.

## (a)

For power series $$F, G$$, verify

\label{eqn:translation:180}
\antisymmetric{x_k}{G(\Bp)} = i \Hbar \PD{p_k}{G}, \qquad
\antisymmetric{p_k}{F(\Bx)} = -i \Hbar \PD{x_k}{F}.

## (b)

Evaluate $$\antisymmetric{x^2}{p^2}$$, and compare to the classical Poisson bracket $$\antisymmetric{x^2}{p^2}_{\textrm{classical}}$$.

## (a)

Let

\label{eqn:translation:200}
\begin{aligned}
G(\Bp) &= \sum_{k l m} a_{k l m} p_1^k p_2^l p_3^m \\
F(\Bx) &= \sum_{k l m} b_{k l m} x_1^k x_2^l x_3^m.
\end{aligned}

It is simpler to work with a specific $$x_k$$, say $$x_k = y$$. The validity of the general result will still be clear doing so. Expanding the commutator gives

\label{eqn:translation:220}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{y}{G(\Bp)}
&=
\sum_{k l m} a_{k l m} \antisymmetric{y}{p_1^k p_2^l p_3^m } \\
&=
\sum_{k l m} a_{k l m} \lr{
y p_1^k p_2^l p_3^m – p_1^k p_2^l p_3^m y
} \\
&=
\sum_{k l m} a_{k l m} \lr{
p_1^k y p_2^l p_3^m – p_1^k y p_2^l p_3^m
} \\
&=
\sum_{k l m} a_{k l m}
p_1^k
\antisymmetric{y}{p_2^l}
p_3^m.
\end{aligned}

From \ref{eqn:translation:100}, we have $$\antisymmetric{y}{p_2^l} = l i \Hbar p_2^{l-1}$$, so

\label{eqn:translation:240}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{y}{G(\Bp)}
&=
\sum_{k l m} a_{k l m}
p_1^k
\antisymmetric{y}{p_2^l}
\lr{ l
i \Hbar p_2^{l-1}
}
p_3^m \\
&=
i \Hbar \PD{y}{G(\Bp)}.
\end{aligned}

It is straightforward to show that
$$\antisymmetric{p}{x^l} = -l i \Hbar x^{l-1}$$, allowing for a similar computation of the momentum commutator

\label{eqn:translation:260}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{p_y}{F(\Bx)}
&=
\sum_{k l m} b_{k l m} \antisymmetric{p_y}{x_1^k x_2^l x_3^m } \\
&=
\sum_{k l m} b_{k l m} \lr{
p_y x_1^k x_2^l x_3^m – x_1^k x_2^l x_3^m p_y
} \\
&=
\sum_{k l m} b_{k l m} \lr{
x_1^k p_y x_2^l x_3^m – x_1^k p_y x_2^l x_3^m
} \\
&=
\sum_{k l m} b_{k l m}
x_1^k
\antisymmetric{p_y}{x_2^l}
x_3^m \\
&=
\sum_{k l m} b_{k l m}
x_1^k
\lr{ -l i \Hbar x_2^{l-1}}
x_3^m \\
&=
-i \Hbar \PD{p_y}{F(\Bx)}.
\end{aligned}

## (b)

It isn’t clear to me how the results above can be used directly to compute $$\antisymmetric{x^2}{p^2}$$. However, when the first term of such a commutator is a monomomial, it can be expanded in terms of an $$x$$ commutator

\label{eqn:translation:280}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{x^2}{G(\Bp)}
&= x^2 G – G x^2 \\
&= x \lr{ x G } – G x^2 \\
&= x \lr{ \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } + G x } – G x^2 \\
&= x \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } + \lr{ x G } x – G x^2 \\
&= x \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } + \lr{ \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } + G x } x – G x^2 \\
&= x \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } + \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } x.
\end{aligned}

Similarily,

\label{eqn:translation:300}
\antisymmetric{x^3}{G(\Bp)} = x^2 \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } + x \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } x + \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } x^2.

An induction hypothesis can be formed

\label{eqn:translation:320}
\antisymmetric{x^k}{G(\Bp)} = \sum_{j = 0}^{k-1} x^{k-1-j} \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } x^j,

and demonstrated

\label{eqn:translation:340}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{x^{k+1}}{G(\Bp)}
&=
x^{k+1} G – G x^{k+1} \\
&=
x \lr{ x^{k} G } – G x^{k+1} \\
&=
x \lr{ \antisymmetric{x^{k}}{G} + G x^k } – G x^{k+1} \\
&=
x \antisymmetric{x^{k}}{G} + \lr{ x G } x^k – G x^{k+1} \\
&=
x \antisymmetric{x^{k}}{G} + \lr{ \antisymmetric{x}{G} + G x } x^k – G x^{k+1} \\
&=
x \antisymmetric{x^{k}}{G} + \antisymmetric{x}{G} x^k \\
&=
x \sum_{j = 0}^{k-1} x^{k-1-j} \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } x^j + \antisymmetric{x}{G} x^k \\
&=
\sum_{j = 0}^{k-1} x^{(k+1)-1-j} \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } x^j + \antisymmetric{x}{G} x^k \\
&=
\sum_{j = 0}^{k} x^{(k+1)-1-j} \antisymmetric{ x }{ G } x^j.
\end{aligned}

That was a bit overkill for this problem, but may be useful later. Application of this to the problem gives

\label{eqn:translation:360}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{x^2}{p^2}
&=
x \antisymmetric{x}{p^2}
+ \antisymmetric{x}{p^2} x \\
&=
x i \Hbar \PD{x}{p^2}
+ i \Hbar \PD{x}{p^2} x \\
&=
x 2 i \Hbar p
+ 2 i \Hbar p x \\
&= i \Hbar \lr{ 2 x p + 2 p x }.
\end{aligned}

The classical commutator is
\label{eqn:translation:380}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{x^2}{p^2}_{\textrm{classical}}
&=
\PD{x}{x^2} \PD{p}{p^2} – \PD{p}{x^2} \PD{x}{p^2} \\
&=
2 x 2 p \\
&= 2 x p + 2 p x.
\end{aligned}

This demonstrates the expected relation between the classical and quantum commutators

\label{eqn:translation:400}
\antisymmetric{x^2}{p^2} = i \Hbar \antisymmetric{x^2}{p^2}_{\textrm{classical}}.

## Question: Translation operator and position expectation. ([1] pr. 1.30)

The translation operator for a finite spatial displacement is given by

\label{eqn:translation:20}
J(\Bl) = \exp\lr{ -i \Bp \cdot \Bl/\Hbar },

where $$\Bp$$ is the momentum operator.

## (a)

Evaluate

\label{eqn:translation:40}
\antisymmetric{x_i}{J(\Bl)}.

## (b)

Demonstrate how the expectation value $$\expectation{\Bx}$$ changes under translation.

## (a)

For clarity, let’s set $$x_i = y$$. The general result will be clear despite doing so.

\label{eqn:translation:60}
\antisymmetric{y}{J(\Bl)}
=
\sum_{k= 0} \inv{k!} \lr{\frac{-i}{\Hbar}}
\antisymmetric{y}{
\lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^k
}.

The commutator expands as

\label{eqn:translation:80}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{y}{
\lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^k
}
+ \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^k y
&=
y \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^k \\
&=
y \lr{ p_x l_x + p_y l_y + p_z l_z } \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1} \\
&=
\lr{ p_x l_x y + y p_y l_y + p_z l_z y } \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1} \\
&=
\lr{ p_x l_x y + l_y \lr{ p_y y + i \Hbar } + p_z l_z y } \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1} \\
&=
\lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl } y \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1}
+ i \Hbar l_y \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1} \\
&= \cdots \\
&=
\lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1} y \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-(k-1)}
+ (k-1) i \Hbar l_y \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1} \\
&=
\lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k} y
+ k i \Hbar l_y \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1}.
\end{aligned}

In the above expansion, the commutation of $$y$$ with $$p_x, p_z$$ has been used. This gives, for $$k \ne 0$$,

\label{eqn:translation:100}
\antisymmetric{y}{
\lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^k
}
=
k i \Hbar l_y \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1}.

Note that this also holds for the $$k = 0$$ case, since $$y$$ commutes with the identity operator. Plugging back into the $$J$$ commutator, we have

\label{eqn:translation:120}
\begin{aligned}
\antisymmetric{y}{J(\Bl)}
&=
\sum_{k = 1} \inv{k!} \lr{\frac{-i}{\Hbar}}
k i \Hbar l_y \lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1} \\
&=
l_y \sum_{k = 1} \inv{(k-1)!} \lr{\frac{-i}{\Hbar}}
\lr{ \Bp \cdot \Bl }^{k-1} \\
&=
l_y J(\Bl).
\end{aligned}

The same pattern clearly applies with the other $$x_i$$ values, providing the desired relation.

\label{eqn:translation:140}
\antisymmetric{\Bx}{J(\Bl)} = \sum_{m = 1}^3 \Be_m l_m J(\Bl) = \Bl J(\Bl).

## (b)

Suppose that the translated state is defined as $$\ket{\alpha_{\Bl}} = J(\Bl) \ket{\alpha}$$. The expectation value with respect to this state is

\label{eqn:translation:160}
\begin{aligned}
\expectation{\Bx’}
&=
\bra{\alpha_{\Bl}} \Bx \ket{\alpha_{\Bl}} \\
&=
\bra{\alpha} J^\dagger(\Bl) \Bx J(\Bl) \ket{\alpha} \\
&=
\bra{\alpha} J^\dagger(\Bl) \lr{ \Bx J(\Bl) } \ket{\alpha} \\
&=
\bra{\alpha} J^\dagger(\Bl) \lr{ J(\Bl) \Bx + \Bl J(\Bl) } \ket{\alpha} \\
&=
\bra{\alpha} J^\dagger J \Bx + \Bl J^\dagger J \ket{\alpha} \\
&=
\bra{\alpha} \Bx \ket{\alpha} + \Bl \braket{\alpha}{\alpha} \\
&=
\expectation{\Bx} + \Bl.
\end{aligned}

# References

[1] Jun John Sakurai and Jim J Napolitano. Modern quantum mechanics. Pearson Higher Ed, 2014.

## Update to old phy356 (Quantum Mechanics I) notes.

It’s been a long time since I took QM I. My notes from that class were pretty rough, but I’ve cleaned them up a bit.

The main value to these notes is that I worked a number of introductory Quantum Mechanics problems.

These were my personal lecture notes for the Fall 2010, University of Toronto Quantum mechanics I course (PHY356H1F), taught by Prof. Vatche Deyirmenjian.

The official description of this course was:

The general structure of wave mechanics; eigenfunctions and eigenvalues; operators; orbital angular momentum; spherical harmonics; central potential; separation of variables, hydrogen atom; Dirac notation; operator methods; harmonic oscillator and spin.

This document contains a few things

• My lecture notes.
Typos, if any, are probably mine(Peeter), and no claim nor attempt of spelling or grammar correctness will be made. The first four lectures had chosen not to take notes for since they followed the text very closely.
• Notes from reading of the text. This includes observations, notes on what seem like errors, and some solved problems. None of these problems have been graded. Note that my informal errata sheet for the text has been separated out from this document.
• Some assigned problems. I have corrected some the errors after receiving grading feedback, and where I have not done so I at least recorded some of the grading comments as a reference.
• Some worked problems associated with exam preparation.