1
$\begingroup$

Typically when solving a Hamiltonian of ye olde form $ \frac{1}{2m} (\bar P - \frac{q}{c} \bar A)^2 $, you do separation of variables.

For simplicity say that $ A = - B Y \hat x $.

You can rewrite it as $\frac{1}{2m} ( (\hbar k_x + \frac{q}{c} B y )^2 + P_y^2 + \hbar^2 k_z^2 ) $.

Now, we're putting everything in the position basis by applying $ \langle x | \otimes \langle y | \otimes \langle z |$ on the left side, and then theoretically some sort of $ |\psi\rangle $ in 3 dimensions on the right side, and then computing the results.

However, then I'm slightly confused about what happens formally with the equation for the y, $ (\hbar k_x + \frac{qB}{c} y)^2 + P_y^2 $. You can solve this as a harmonic oscillator and you'll get solutions for $ \psi(y)$.

Now say, for instance, say you wanted to compute $ \langle Y \otimes I \otimes I\rangle $. In theory, you'd miss it altogether if you apply $ | \psi(x) \rangle \otimes | \psi(y) \rangle \otimes |\psi(z) \rangle $ since Y will only operate on $ \psi(x)$ which is just a plane wave. Frankly I'm not even sure how this computation would work/if it'll just pass through or something. You'd have to apply something like $ | \psi(y) \rangle \otimes | \psi(x) \rangle... $ and so on.

But this shouldn't occur because you should be able to somehow measure the average "Y" value to be $ \frac{\hbar k_x c}{qB} $. This also leads to bad outcomes because if you decide to compute $ \langle dX/dt \rangle $, you'd compute the commutator of $ X \otimes I \otimes I $ with the Hamiltonian; it'll commute with anything which is the identity in the X coordinate; $ D_t \langle X \rangle $ will end up being proportional to the expectation value of Y, and I know this quantity shouldn't end up being trivial or something.

Can someone point out the misstep here in how I propose to find the expectation value for Y?

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, I already know I'm at least slightly off because even in going to the position basis, I assume that $ \langle x | Y = y \langle x | $. $\endgroup$
    – anon.jpg
    Commented Dec 17, 2021 at 5:35
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The different coordinates in the position basis don't correspond to different tensor product factors. That is, $\mathcal{H} \neq \mathcal{H}_x \otimes \mathcal{H}_y \otimes \mathcal{H}_z$. There is just one Hilbert space, and the states $|x, y, z\rangle$ form a basis. So there is no $\psi(x)$, $\psi(y)$, etc., just $\psi(x, y, z) = \langle x, y, z| \psi \rangle$ $\endgroup$
    – d_b
    Commented Dec 19, 2021 at 20:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ That is incorrect. $\hat{p}_x$ is just $\hat{p}_x$, not tensored with anything. The hamiltonian is also not a tensor product, it is just an ordinary sum $(\hat{p}_x - e\hat{A}_x/c)^2 + (\hat{p}_y - e \hat{A}_y /c)^2 + \ldots$ $\endgroup$
    – d_b
    Commented Dec 19, 2021 at 20:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think you are mixing up the Euclidean unit vectors for the different components of $\vec{r}$, $\vec{p}$, etc. with tensor factors. $\endgroup$
    – d_b
    Commented Dec 19, 2021 at 20:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @d_b I think my confusion either came from that or from some misconception that they commuted because they were in different spaces... even though $ d/dy $ clearly commutes with $ d/dx $ anyway. Wow, now a lot has clicked. Now the construction of $ L_i $ makes more sense. if you write this as an answer I'll accept it and give u your reputation. thanks chief!!! $\endgroup$
    – anon.jpg
    Commented Dec 19, 2021 at 20:16

1 Answer 1

1
+50
$\begingroup$

I think your main confusion is that you are treating the Hilbert space as having a tensor product structure, with the different tensor factors corresponding to the different coordinates in position space. However, the Hilbert space does not decompose like that, i.e. $\mathcal{H} \neq \mathcal{H}_x \otimes \mathcal{H}_y \otimes \mathcal{H}_y$. This observation applies to all of the operators, states, wavefunctions, etc. (Note that while the wavefunction $\psi(x,y,z)$ may be separable as $\psi(x,y,z) = \phi(x)\chi(y)\zeta(z)$, this is not the same as saying $\langle x, y, z|\psi\rangle = \left(\langle x| \otimes \langle y| \otimes \langle z|\right)|\psi\rangle$)

In particular, when you write the operator $\vec{A} = -By\,\hat{x}$, the $\hat{x}$ is just telling us about how $\vec{A}$ looks as an ordinary Euclidean vector, not anything to do with tensor factors.

If you want to find the expectation value for the operator $y$, you can do it into the position basis like so: \begin{align} \langle y \rangle &= \langle\psi|y|\psi\rangle\\ &= \int d^3\vec{r}\, y\,\psi^{\ast}(x,y,z)\psi(x,y,z)\\ &= \int d^3\vec{r}\, y\,|\psi(x,y,z)|^2 \end{align} Your wavefunction will like look $\psi(x,y,z) = A e^{-ik_x x - ik_z z}\chi(y)$ so you will end up with \begin{align} \langle y \rangle \propto \int dy\, y\,|\chi(y)|^2, \end{align} which you should be able to do with standard integration techniques.

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.