I am trying to show that [A,Bn]=nBn−1[A,B] where A and B are two Hermitian operators that commute with their commutator. However, I am running into a little problem and would like a hint of how to proceed.
If A and B commute then [A,B]=ABA−1B−1=e where e
is the identity element of the group.
∴AB=BA
n=1;[A,B1]=(1)B0[A,B]=e
[A,B2]=AB2A−1B−2=ABBA−1B−1B−1=BBAA−1B−1B−1
Where in the last step I have used the fact that A and B commute to rearange the terms. However, it is plain to see that this last term simply reduces to the identity as well and for the n = 2
case we have:
[A,B2]=e≠2B[A,B]=2Be=2B
Clearly I have assumed something I shouldn't have. The fact that there is a multiplicative factor of n
implies I should be adding things, but I thought if I kept it as general as possible, the answer should just fall out naturally. I don't want an answer please, only guidance.
Answer
It seems that the question (v1) is caused by the fact that there are two different notions of the commutator:
One for group theory: [A,B] := ABA−1B−1
(or sometimes [A,B]:=A−1B−1AB, depending on convention), which is relatively seldom used in physics.One for rings/associative algebras: [A,B]:=AB−BA,
which is the definition usually used in physics. (This latter definition (2) generalizes to a supercommutator in superalgebras.)
The identity
[A,Bn] = nBn−1[A,B]
holds in the latter sense (2), if [[A,B],B]=0. (It is not necessary to demand [A,[A,B]]=0.) More generally, for a sufficiently well-behaved function f, we have
[A,f(B)] = f′(B)[A,B],
if [[A,B],B]=0.
The group commutator (1) is dimensionless, which (among other things) makes the identity (*) unnatural to demand for group commutators.
No comments:
Post a Comment