Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- classes:2009:fall:phys4101.001:q_a_1125 [2009/11/25 10:56] – yk
+++ classes:2009:fall:phys4101.001:q_a_1125 [2009/11/30 08:56] (current) – x500_bast0052
@@ Line 47: / Line 47: @@
 ===Blackbox 11/25 10am ===
 Yeah, I agree with you and we get three 3by1 matrices not 1by3.
+===David Hilbert's Hat 11/25 11am===
+You have to solve for three different values of χ (they look like vectors in 3D space) that are linearly independent to give you a basis for each possible spin state, just like how Griffiths did a χ+ and a χ- case, you need to do a χ+, χ-, and a χ0 case. Once you've solved for all of them, since they're an orthonormal basis, you can put them all together for a 3x3 matrix that has the information about all of the states in it.
+The easiest way to do it is by taking what you know, the raising and lower operators acting on any spin state to raise or lower it, and having the 3x3 be entirely made up of variables - the a, b, c, d, e... stuff (you need 9 for this problem). Although this is a rather crude way of doing it because you end up taking one equation, using it to solve for 3 variables, and everything else is multiplied by zero. The easier way is to let any generic matrix A be sandwiched in between two states, like < s m' | A | s m >. Since you have the eigenvalues of A for any operator, you can pull those out and figure out each component by taking < s m' | s m > similar to what Griffiths did on p. 120, equation [3.81]. It seems more elegant to do it that way, but on homework or a test I'm just going to use the first method I think.
 ====Hydra  11/24 6pm====
 What does Griffiths mean when he says Lx, Ly and Lz are incompatible observables?  And is he implying that L^2 is compatible with Lx Ly and Lz?
@@ Line 57: / Line 63: @@
 === Ralph 11/25 10:35 am ===
 Also, remember if the commutator of two operators is nonzero that their eigenstates do not share the same basis.
+===John Galt 11/28 1:15 PM===
+What you said is mainly correct, but remember knowing Lx with more certainty means you know (Lz + Ly) with less certainty, not so much each one indiviually.
 ====Andromeda 11/25 9:17AM====
@@ Line 64: / Line 74: @@
 I agree with you, Andromeda, about the notation. It's going to take some getting used to. The concepts and the general ideas are all fairly simple and logical, it's just translating what the notation is saying or taking what you want to do and translating it into the notation to begin solving a problem that's difficult. I don't know about the exam. I'm guessing we'll be told today in lecture what it'll cover and when it'll be.
+===David Hilbert's Hat 11/25 12:30pm===
+The notation is a little tricky to learn but I've found that if anything looks simple and the notation is screwing you up then the easiest thing to do is refer back to chapter 3 and see if there is a simple one or two sentence that describes what you're looking for. Today in lecture Yuichi said the test will be on the 11th.
+===Pluto 4ever 11/25 6:23PM===
+I also had this problem as well, but,just as David Hilbert's Hat said, it is much easier to refer back to notation that you already know and apply it to the new material. Although, it does take some thinking and time to adjust to the new notation, and I still am, I find that after I read the sections a few times and start working out the problems it will eventually come to me.
+===Dark Helmet 11/28 10:12===
+I found that writing all the different notation out with what it means, kinda like making an equation sheet, helps cement it into my brain.  That and looking back at my calc 3 book for a refresher on linear algebra!
+===Devlin===
+I still find myself moving slowly because of the new notation as well.  I think it'll just take practice.
 ---------------------------------------
 **Return to Q&A main page: [[Q_A]]**\\
 **Q&A for the previous lecture: [[Q_A_1123]]**\\
 **Q&A for the next lecture: [[Q_A_1130]]**

User Tools

Differences

Page Tools