2
$\begingroup$

I'm having trouble proving this argument in quantum physics:

On a stationary state (with no degeneracy), if the system is time-symmetric but not necessarily symmetric under rotations, prove that the expectation value of the angular momentum is zero.

As I understood:

  • Stationary state: the wave function is an eigenvector of the Hamiltonian.

  • Symmetry in time means that the Hamiltonian is constant.

  • If the system is not necessarily symmetric under rotations then the Hamiltonian does not necessarily commute with the angular momentum operator.

But how can I prove the argument with that? can anyone help me?

Thank you!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Unless I have misunderstood the question, I don't think you can prove that, because that statement is false (consider, e.g., a stationary state of the Hydrogen atom: there, $\langle L_z\rangle=m\neq 0$). $\endgroup$ – AccidentalFourierTransform Nov 10 '16 at 19:57
  • $\begingroup$ Hi, I don't know a lot about the Hydrogen atom, but I forgot to mention that the stationary state is not degenerate, does it help? $\endgroup$ – Noam Chai Nov 10 '16 at 20:10
  • $\begingroup$ I checked again the quetion and it looks like the original question that I copied from my exercise... maybe the question is wrong.... $\endgroup$ – Noam Chai Nov 10 '16 at 20:13
  • $\begingroup$ I have the feeling that the statement is still false, but I could be wrong (what if we consider a free particle, i.e., a plane wave: there, the states are non-degenerate, but the angular momentum is still non-zero...) $\endgroup$ – AccidentalFourierTransform Nov 10 '16 at 20:24
  • $\begingroup$ hi Noam, I'm quite sure that "time-symmetric" here means "symmetric under time-reversal". In the sense you are considering (the hamiltonian doesn't explicitly depend on time) the proposition is false, consider the hamiltonian $H=gS_z$. I wrote my answer under this assumption, let me know if it's not what you was looking for. $\endgroup$ – pppqqq Nov 10 '16 at 21:11
1
$\begingroup$

I guess that "time-symmetric" here means that the system is invariant under time-reversal symmetry:

$$T^{\dagger}HT=H$$

Recall that the angular momentum $\boldsymbol J$ transforms under time reversal as $$T^\dagger \boldsymbol J T=-\boldsymbol J.$$

First, as AccidentalFourierTransform points out, let us note that the state in question cannot be an half-integer spin, by Kramers degeneracy (see comments below).

Now, suppose that $\vert E\rangle$ is a non degenerate eigenstate of $H$. Since $H$ commutes with $T$ we have: $$HT\vert E\rangle =T H \vert E \rangle =ET\vert E\rangle. $$ Since $\vert E\rangle$ is non degenerate, and $T$ is antiunitary, this means that: $$T\vert E\rangle = e^{2i\alpha}\vert E\rangle. $$ Using the antiunitary character of $T$ you can easily see that WLOG we may put $\alpha=0$.

Now, using $T\vert E\rangle =\vert E \rangle$, the antiunitarity of $T$ and the hermiticity of $\boldsymbol J$ we have: $$\langle E\vert \boldsymbol J \vert E \rangle = (\langle E \vert T^{\dagger}\boldsymbol J T\vert E\rangle )^* = -(\langle E\vert \boldsymbol J \vert \boldsymbol E\rangle)^*=-\langle E\vert \boldsymbol J \vert E\rangle$$ which implies:$$\langle E\vert \boldsymbol J \vert E\rangle=0.$$


In response to Noam Chai's comment:

  1. The fact that $HT\vert E\rangle = ET\vert E \rangle$, together with the assumption that the eigenvalues $E$ is nondegenerate, allows me to conclude that $T\vert E \rangle =c\vert E \rangle$ for some complex number $c$.
  2. Since $T$ is in particular an isometry, we must have $\vert c \vert =1$, so $c=e^{2i\alpha}$ for some real number $2\alpha$ beetween $0$ and $2\pi$, say (also $\alpha$ doesn't depend on time, since nor $T$ nor $\vert E \rangle$ does, by assumption). Now, multiplying the equation $T\vert E\rangle =e^{2i\alpha}\vert E\rangle$ by $e^{-i\alpha}$, and using the fact that $T$ is antilinear, we obtain: $$e^{i\alpha}\vert E\rangle = e^{-i\alpha}T\vert E\rangle = T(e^{i\alpha}\vert E\rangle),$$ so that the phase factor can actually be absorbed in the definition of $\vert E \rangle $.
  3. The $*$ comes from the definition of the adjoint of an antilinear operator. Let me switch to the mathematician's Hilbert space notation: $$\langle g \vert f\rangle \longrightarrow (g,f).$$ This notation is clearer when dealing with antilinear operators. Now, neglecting domain's issues (which in fact do not occur in the case of $T$), the adjoint of an antilinear operator $A$ is defined by the equation: $$(A^{\dagger}g,f)=(g,Af)^*.$$ You see that the LHS is linear in $f$, so it must be the RHS, hence the $*$. In this notation, with $\vert E \rangle \to f$, my last equation reads: $$(f,Jf)=(Tf,JTf)=(f,T^{\dagger}JTf)^*.$$
| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ If the system is symmetric under $T$, then there cannot be any non-degenerate state (as per Kramers theorem) $\endgroup$ – AccidentalFourierTransform Nov 10 '16 at 21:14
  • $\begingroup$ Kramers theorem applies to half integer spins, right? Also, I don't know why I did such a mess to prove that $HT\vert E\rangle = ET\vert E \rangle$ XD $\endgroup$ – pppqqq Nov 10 '16 at 21:22
  • $\begingroup$ Kramers theorem is much more general: it applies to any system that is invariant under $T$ (the general proof can be found somewhere in Weinberg's QFT, Vol I). Initially, I also thought that the time-symmetry of the OP was related to $T$, but this cannot be, because in such a case there would be no non-degenerate states. $\endgroup$ – AccidentalFourierTransform Nov 10 '16 at 21:25
  • $\begingroup$ Actually youre right: I found the proof (page 80) and it indeed is only valid for systems with total spin a half-integer. $\endgroup$ – AccidentalFourierTransform Nov 10 '16 at 21:38
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you ! few questions: 1. where did you use HT|E⟩=ET|E⟩? I don't see any use of this fact. 2. can you explain more about alpha? does the exponential power suppose to be time dependent? (the eigenvalue of T) $\endgroup$ – Noam Chai Nov 11 '16 at 8:24

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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