3
$\begingroup$

Imagine you have a triplet spin state, which, in general, can be written as $$|\psi \rangle = \alpha | \uparrow \uparrow \rangle + \beta ( | \downarrow \uparrow \rangle+ | \uparrow \downarrow \rangle) + \gamma | \downarrow \downarrow \rangle,$$ with some complex numbers $\alpha, \beta, \gamma$.

Here, I've written the given state as a superposition of the $m_z=0,-1$ and $+1$ triplet states in the $z$-basis; so, for example, $|\uparrow \uparrow \rangle$ is an eigenstate of $S^{z} =\tfrac{1}{2}( \sigma_1^{z} + \sigma_2^{z}) $ with eigenvalue $m_z = 1$.

My question is: Can you find a total spin operator $S^{\hat{n}} =\tfrac{1}{2}( \sigma_1^{\hat{n}} + \sigma_2^{\hat{n}}) $, defined by some quantization axis $\hat{n}$, such that the above state $|\psi \rangle$ is an eigenstate of $S^{\hat{n}}$?

$\endgroup$

migrated from math.stackexchange.com Mar 28 at 23:09

This question came from our site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields.

  • $\begingroup$ We need to translate this into mathematical language and migrate it back to math.SE . Would "representation-theory" be an appropriate tag? $\endgroup$ – Keith McClary Mar 29 at 15:17
  • $\begingroup$ A possible translation is: Can the vector $(\alpha,\sqrt{2}\beta,\gamma)^T$ be an eigenvector of a 3x3 Hermitian traceless matrix with eigenvalue $\pm 1$ or 0? $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Apr 26 at 15:03
  • $\begingroup$ @CosmasZachos I'm not sure that's quite the same question - the algebra generators, and their linear combinations, form a smaller space than the traceless hermitian matrices. (The former is a two-dimensional manifold isomorphic to $\mathbb S^2$, once normalized; the latter is a six-dimensional manifold once normalized, if I'm counting correctly.) Still, I would appreciate your opinion about the correctness of the arguments in my answer below. $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Apr 26 at 16:22
  • $\begingroup$ If he is asking for some basis in which his $\psi$ is an eigenvector of similarity-transformed (triplet) $S^z$, then it is easy to find a Unitary $U$ in SU(3) for such a similarity transform. But he is (physically: "quantization axis") asking for a (basically) Real orthogonal matrix, so R in SO(3), instead, corresponding to a physical space 3-rotation. Aware I am sounding like a math-pedant.... $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Apr 29 at 15:04
3
$\begingroup$

No, this isn't possible for generic states.

To see the underlying structure in more detail, let's start off by using a correct normalization for your state, $$|\psi \rangle = \alpha | {\uparrow \uparrow} \rangle + \beta \frac{ | {\downarrow \uparrow} \rangle+ | {\uparrow \downarrow} \rangle}{\sqrt{2}} + \gamma | {\downarrow \downarrow} \rangle,$$ and then, as Cosmas Zachos noted (in a now-deleted answer), noting that there's nothing special about the tensor-product structure that underlies this state, and that it can be equally well thought of as a general state $$ |\psi \rangle = \alpha | 1 \rangle + \beta |0 \rangle + \gamma | {-1} \rangle $$ within an $\ell=1$ dipolar representation of $\rm SO(3)$.

Moreover, since all of the (complex) irreducible representations of $\rm SO(3)$ with equal total angular momentum quantum number $\ell$ are equivalent, your question can equally well be phrased in the language of spherical harmonics, which carry one such representation, i.e. anything that you can say about the state $|\psi\rangle$ as you've phrased it can also be made to apply to the linear combination $$ f(\theta,\phi) = \alpha \, Y_{11}(\theta,\phi) + \beta \, Y_{10}(\theta,\phi) + \gamma \, Y_{1,-1}(\theta,\phi) $$ of dipolar spherical harmonics. And in yet another transformation, I will multiply each of these $Y_{\ell m}(\theta, \phi)$ with $r$ to get solid harmonics, which are homogeneous linear combinations of $x$, $y$ and $z$: in other words, anything you can say about the state $|\psi\rangle$ as you've phrased it can also be made to apply to the linear combination \begin{align} g(x,y,z) & = -\alpha \frac{x+iy}{\sqrt{2}} + \beta z + \gamma \frac{x-iy}{\sqrt{2}} \\ & = \frac{-\alpha + \gamma}{\sqrt{2}} x + \frac{\alpha + \gamma}{\sqrt{2}\, i} x + \beta z \\ & = \left( \frac{-\alpha + \gamma}{\sqrt{2}}, \frac{\alpha + \gamma}{\sqrt{2}\, i}, \beta \right) \cdot (x,y,z) \\ & = \mathbf n \cdot \mathbf r, \end{align} i.e. to a complex-valued linear functional $g:\mathbb R^3 \to \mathbb C$ which is fully characterized by the (complex) gradient vector $\mathbf n$.

In these terms, then your question boils down to the following:

  1. Does $\mathbf n$ look like $\mathbf n = (0,0,1)$? (which would imply that $|\psi\rangle$ is an eigenstate of some $S_z$ with eigenvalue $0$)
  2. Or does $\mathbf n$ look like $\mathbf n = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(1,i,0)$? (which would imply that $|\psi\rangle$ is an eigenstate of some $S_z$ with eigenvalue $1$)
  3. Or does $\mathbf n$ look like neither of those? (which would imply that $|\psi\rangle$ is not an eigenstate of any $S_z$)

A key component of these questions is the words "looks like", which here means "equal up to a rigid rotation in $\mathbb C^3$ and up to a global phase", with that rotation drawn from $\rm SO(3)$.

And here the answers are relatively easy to provide:

  1. If $\mathbf n$ looks like $\mathbf n = (0,0,1)$, then $\mathrm{Re}(\mathbf n)$ and $\mathrm{Im}(\mathbf n)$ are parallel, in which case $|\psi\rangle$ is an eigenstate of $\mathbf n \cdot S_z$ with eigenvalue $0$.
  2. If $\mathbf n$ looks like $\mathbf n = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(1,i,0)$, then $\mathrm{Re}(\mathbf n)$ and $\mathrm{Im}(\mathbf n)$ are exactly orthogonal, in which case $|\psi\rangle$ is an eigenstate of $(\mathrm{Re}(\mathbf n)\times \mathrm{Im}(\mathbf n))\cdot S_z = \frac{1}{2}(\mathbf n \times \mathbf n^*)\cdot S_z$ with eigenvalue $1$.
  3. And, conversely, if $\mathrm{Re}(\mathbf n)$ and $\mathrm{Im}(\mathbf n)$ are neither parallel nor orthogonal, then neither of those conclusions is possible.

Examples from point 3 are trivial to construct, and they form almost all of the states in the space (by which I mean: the set of complex numbers $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$ which yield an eigenstate of some $S_\hat{n}$ forms a set of measure zero under the regular Lebesgue measure of the space $\mathbb C^3$ that encases them).

I should also note that this conclusion changes if you force $\beta\in \mathbb R$, and $\alpha = -\gamma^*$ (which is a not-unreasonable restriction), in which case $\mathbf n$ is also real-valued and everything collapses so that all states are zero-$S_z$ eigenstates along some direction. The fact that this is possible on the (real-valued) $\ell = 1$ forms the premise of my question How many truly different multipolar charge distributions are there?, which goes on to ask what happens at $\ell = 2$ and higher ─ with the conclusion that at higher angular momentum, even if you restrict to real-valued representations, there are nontrivial states that cannot be reduced to the canonical form of a rotated spin eigenvector.

$\endgroup$

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.