10

10.1

Problem 37

In workshop problem 9.4 you were asked to determine the possible values of J 2 and Jz , and their corresponding probabilities, given the state below for a system of two spin- 12 particles.
2
1
|i = | + +i + | + i.
5
5
Repeat the calculation for two spin-1 particles, letting + and denote projections of m = 1 instead of m = 12 . You
should begin by finding the appropriate Clebsch-Gordan coefficients.
Solution
We begin by finding the CG coefficients. The uncoupled representation will be notated with |, i as above, while the
coupled with |J, mJ i. The uncoupled states will be notated with + (m = +1), (m = 0), and (m = 1). We start at
the top of the ladder and lower:
|22i = | + +i

J |22i = (j1 + j2 )| + +i

r
1
1
2 3 2 1|21i = 1 2 1 0| +i + 1 2 1 0| + i |21i =
| + i +
| +i
2
2
We repeat this continuing down the ladder with each subsequent result to obtain the rest of the |2, m2 i states. Ill omit
the algebra below.
!
r
r
r
r
r
1
1
1
2
1
J |21i = (j1 + j2 )
| + i +
| +i
|20i =
| + i +
| i +
| +i
2
2
6
3
6
r
r
1
1
|2 1i =
| i +
| i |2 2i = | i
2
2
We determine |11i by considering orthnormality conditions. Specifically, |11i shares uncoupled states with |21i, and we
make an orthogonal |11i:
r
r
1
1
|11i =
| + i
| +i
2
2
We apply the same lowering process as before to obtain the next two states down the ladder with J = 1:
r
r
r
r
1
1
1
1
|10i =
| + i
| +i |1 1i =
| i
| i
2
2
2
2
Finally, we note that our last state |00i must be orthogonal to both |20i and |10i, which it will share uncoupled states
with. The following satisfies this requirement:
r
r
r
1
1
1
|00i =
| + i +
| i +
| +i
3
3
3
Recall that the CG coefficients are of the form hmj1 , mj2 |J, mJ i, and that since they are real, hmj1 , mj2 |J, mJ i =
hJ, mJ |mj1 , mj2 i. We can expand them either way. We have two states of interest due to |i, namely | + +i and
| + i, which we would like to rewrite in the coupled basis. Clearly | + +i = |22i. We consider | + i. There are three
coupled states which could contribute to it:
X
| + i =
|JmJ i hJmJ | + i | + i = |20i h20| + i + |10i h10| + i + |00i h00| + i

J,mJ

We are simply expanding the ket in the coupled basis over the uncoupled basis (both are complete orthonormal sets).
! r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
4
|22i +
|20i +
|10i +
|00i =
|22i +
|20i +
|10i +
|00i
|i =
5
5
6
2
3
5
15
5
15
With the state rewritten in this way, we can now

6~2
2
2~2
J =
with probabilities

simply read off the answers.


1/3
2~
2/5
Jz =
with probabilities
0

4/15
37

1/5
4/5

10.2

Problem 38

The Runge-Lenz vector is given by:

K=

1
r
(L p p L) +
2me2
r

(a) Show that this is equivalent to

r
1
(L p i~p) +
me2
r
(b) To compute [H, K] you will find it necessary to compute [pi , 1/r]. Compute this commutator.
(c) Does the result from part (a) hold if motion is constrained to the xy plane (i.e. in two dimensions)? Why?
K=

Solution
(a) We expand one of the cross products being careful about order of operations.
{p L}i = ijk pj Lk = ijk ([pj , Lk ] + Lk pj ) = ijk jkm i~pm (L p)i
= (kk 1)im i~pm (L p)i = 2i~pi (L p)i
Then we may rearrange the L p p L term in K to read:
L p p L = 2L p 2i~p

K=

r
1
(L p i~p) +
2
me
r

(b) We will calculate the commutator with the aid of a trial function to make it extra-clear:




1
1 1
1
1 r
i~ri
1
r +

= i~ 2
= 3
[pi , 1/r] = pi pi = i~
r
r
ri
r ri
r ri
r ri
r
This can be summarized:



1
i~ri
pi ,
= 3
r
r



1
i~r
p,
= 3
r
r

(c) The result from part (a) does not hold in two dimensions, where L = Lz and p and r only have two components.
The clearest mathematical reason for this is that kk evaluates to 2 in 2-dimensions rather than 3, which changes the
result somewhat. You are free to evaluate this out the long way with suitable simplifications however if you wish. The
change in evaluating the delta results in:
r
1
(2L p i~p) +
K=
2
2me
r
for two-dimensions instead of the result derived above for 3. (In general you would clearly like to use the 3D result. This
part of the problem is here simply to draw your attention to the fact that there is a difference, and that you can spot it
if you are being careful about your use of Einstein notation.)

10.3

Problem 39

Consider the system of three particles each with S 2 = 2~2 . The Hamiltonian is shown below, where is a constant.
X
H=
Si Sj
i6=j
2
(a) Write out all the states of the system in the coupled representation. What are the possible values of Stotal
and
the degeneracies of each?
(b) Write H in a form which is diagonal (i.e. change of basis). Determine the eigenvalues of H and the degeneracies
of each. Compute the average eigenvalue. Why should we expect this result? (Hint: compute the trace of H.)
(c) Compute the average eigenvalue for a general sum on i and j (i can equal j). Does the result make sense?

38

Solution
(a) We have a system of 3 spin-1 particles. The coupling of the Hilbert spaces can be denoted by:
1 1 1 = (2 1 0) 1 = 3 2 1 2 1 0 1
The first expansion above denotes the coupling possibilities for the first two particles. There are 33 = 27 states, and we
distinguish states with |ST otal , S1 + S2 , Sz i. We list them out clarify the above:
State
|3, 2, mi
|2, 2, mi
|1, 2, mi
|2, 1, mi
|1, 1, mi
|0, 1, mi
|1, 0, mi

Range of m
3 3
2 2
1 1
2 2
1 1
0
1 1
Total

No. of States
7
5
3
5
3
1
3
27

This implies that S 2 = (12, 6, 2, 6, 2, 0, 2)~2 are (7, 5, 3, 5, 3, 1, 3)-fold degenerate.

(b) We first write out H explicitly.
H = (S1 S2 + S2 S1 + S2 S3 + S3 S2 + S1 S3 + S3 S1 )
We then note that
ST2 = (S1 + S2 + S3 )2 = S12 + S22 + S32 + 2S1 S2 + 2S2 S3 + 2S1 S3
Since Si and Sj correspond to different particles, [Si , Sj ] = 0 for i 6= j. (They exist in different Hilbert spaces.) Then H
can be rewritten as follows:
H = (ST2 S12 S22 S32 ) = (ST2 6~2 ) = (6, 0, 4, 0, 4, 6, 4)~2

are (7, 5, 3, 5, 3, 1, 3)-fold denegerate.

This indicates that average eigenvalue is 0, since we may evaluate the trace of the Hamiltonian in the basis in which it is
diagonal in order to obtain:
T r(H) = ~2 (6 7 + 5 0 4 3 + 5 0 4 3 6 4 3) = 0
Since the trace is invariant under unitary transformation, we may take the trace in the energy eigenbasis and expect it
to be the same regardless of the basis in which we might be expressing the matrix. We expect the overall trace of the
Hamiltonian to be zero because the trace of any angular momentum is zero (we are summing over all possible projections
m = s s, so then T r(Sik ) = 0). A remark on the notation here: I am using the first subscript to denote which spin
this is (i.e. i and j below are 1,2, or 3), and the second subscript to denote the coordinate of that particular spin (i.e. k
below is x, y, or z). So any single case would read like S1x . The trace in this scheme can be separated by the first index
(different Hilbert spaces), but not the coordinate.
X
X
T r(H) =
T r(Sik Sjk ) =
T r(Sik )T r(Sjk ) = 0
i6=j

i6=j

(We may separate the traces in the last step because each term corresponds to a different particle.) Since the original
Hamiltonian must have trace zero, it would a problem if the average eigenvalue evaluated with this trace method (i.e.
eigenvalue weighted by degeneracy) did not give zero. This is a good check of the solution.
(c) Let H0 be the original Hamiltonian.
H = (S12 + S22 + S32 ) + H0

T r(H) = T r(S12 + S22 + S32 ) + T r(H0 ) = T r(6~2 ) + 0 = 27(6~2 )

The average is then 6~2 .

10.4

Problem 40

(a) Find the eigenvalues of the spin operator S of an electron in the direction n
which lies in the xz plane. (You should
be able to say what you expect for this before doing the problem. Do you find what you should?)
(b) Given a particular projection measured at some angle w.r.t. z, comment on how you would obtain the probability
of obtaining a particular measurement along z itself. (I am not asking you to do the math in workshop. It is good practice
to actually compute the probabilities if you wish do so later however.)
39

Solution
(a) Consider S n
= Sx sin + Sz cos . We use the Pauli matrices for Sx and Sz .


~
cos
sin
Sn
=
sin cos
2
We determine that the eigenvalues of this matrix are ~2 in the usual way. (If we remove the factor ~2 in front, the
eigenvalues of the matrix itself are 1, which we use below to simplify calculation of the eigenvectors). This is what
we would expect, because in principle what we called the z axis could have been anywhere. If the possibilities for the
measurement were to change based on the direction of an arbitrarily defined set of coordinates, we would have a problem.
(b) Recall from workshop problem 5.4 that the eigenvectors of Sz are the most convenient eigenvectors, since we
generally work in the Sz basis where it is a diagonal matrix. It is therefore simple to decompose any eigenvector into
eigenvectors of z, and then read off the probabilities. To solve the problem, we would find the eigenvectors associated
with the eigenvalues found in part (a), and take the mod-square of the appropriate components.

40