0
$\begingroup$

I have been able to prove this relation by using a certain method, but it uses the fact that $$\hat p=-i\hbar\frac\partial{\partial x},\tag{1}$$ which is a relation I have avoided so far, so I wish to prove it without using that ($\hat p$ has simply been defined as the generator of spatial translation). Is it possible to prove that $$[\hat p,F(\hat x)]=-i\hbar\frac{\partial F(\hat x)}{\partial x}.\tag{2}$$ without using this relation? I can't see how to get even the first step.

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ What is your definition, in mathematical terms, of $\hat p$? is the (defining) identity $[\hat x,\hat p]=i\hbar$ allowed? $\endgroup$ – AccidentalFourierTransform Oct 19 '17 at 17:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Imagine the term $\hat{x}^n$ in the Taylor expansion of F. Can you find, recursively, it s commutator with $\hat p$? $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Oct 19 '17 at 17:51
  • $\begingroup$ @AccidentalFourierTransform yes that is allowed. $\endgroup$ – John Doe Oct 19 '17 at 17:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/87038/2451 , physics.stackexchange.com/q/78222/2451 and links therein. $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Oct 19 '17 at 18:13
  • $\begingroup$ @Qmechanic Yes, I used this link to make one of the steps in my comment on the accepted answer :) $\endgroup$ – John Doe Oct 19 '17 at 18:16
5
$\begingroup$

Write $F(\hat{x})$ as a power series with arbitrary coefficients. Use linearity to express $[\hat{p}, F(\hat{x})]$ as a linear combination of commutators of the form $[\hat{p}, \hat{x}^n]$. You can calculate the latter commutator using induction and the identities $[A, BC] = B [A, C] + [A, B]C$ and $[\hat{x}, \hat{p}] = i \hbar$. Then recombine the power series into a single expression.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I did it: $$F(x)=\sum_{j=0}^\infty f_j x^j;$$$$\begin{align} [p,F(x)]&=\sum_{j=0}^\infty f_j[p,x^j]\\ &=-i\hbar\sum_{j=0}^\infty f_j jx^{j-1}\\ &=-i\hbar\sum_{j=0}^\infty f_j \frac\partial{\partial x} x^j\\ &=-i\hbar \frac\partial{\partial x} \sum_{j=0}^\infty f_jx^j\\ &=-i\hbar \frac{\partial F(x)}{\partial x}\end{align}$$ Thanks! $\endgroup$ – John Doe Oct 19 '17 at 18:10
  • $\begingroup$ How did you found that $[p,x^j] =-i \hbar jx^{j-1}$? $\endgroup$ – user171780 Aug 6 '18 at 3:13
  • $\begingroup$ I have found the answer to my previous question here. $\endgroup$ – user171780 Aug 6 '18 at 3:31
3
$\begingroup$

You can define the momentum operator as the generator of translations. Abstractly, the translation operator $T_a = \exp(-ia\hat{p})$ acts on eigenstates of position via $T_a|x\rangle = |x+a\rangle$. Hence, if $\langle x|\psi\rangle = \psi(x)$ then $\langle x| \exp(ia\hat{p})|\psi\rangle = \psi(x+a)$.

Expanding the exponential and the result in powers of $a$ tells us the action of the generator: $$\langle x|(I+ia\hat{p})|\psi\rangle = \psi(x+a) = \psi(x)+a\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial x}$$ $$\Rightarrow \langle x| \hat{p}|\psi\rangle = -i\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial x}$$

In other words the $\hat{p}$ operator acting on a state with wavefunction $\psi$ yields a state with wavefunction $-i\frac{\partial\psi}{\partial x}$.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The OP wishes to prove without using the fact that $p$ generates translations... $\endgroup$ – ZeroTheHero Oct 19 '17 at 20:28
  • $\begingroup$ @ZeroTheHero I think you may have misread what I wrote - we have defined $p$ in this way. I just didn't want to use the fact that $p=-i\hbar \frac\partial{\partial x}$. $\endgroup$ – John Doe Oct 19 '17 at 22:52
  • $\begingroup$ I have edited my answer to make it slightly clearer the distinction between the abstract generator of translations and the differential operator $-i\partial_x$. In any case, the statement that $[x,p]=i\hbar$ is exactly equivalent to the statement that $p$ generates translations. $\endgroup$ – Luke Pritchett Oct 20 '17 at 16:09

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.