Home work of General Physics 20250510

Due: 20250517

Instructions
• Show all mathematical steps clearly and provide justifications.

• Give physical interpretations where appropriate.

• Keep track of assumptions and approximations.

• Submit written solutions, including derivations, diagrams (as needed), and explana-
tions.

Part I: Pauli Matrices

1. Pauli Matrices Overview
Recall the three Pauli matrices:
     
0 1 0 −i 1 0
σx = , σy = , σz = .
1 0 i 0 0 −1

These are 2 × 2 Hermitian matrices that act on spin- 21 states.

(a) Eigenvalues and Eigenstates of σz

1. Write down the eigenvalue equation

σz |ψ⟩ = λ |ψ⟩.

2. Solve for λ and the corresponding eigenstates. Explain why these eigenvalues are
physically significant for a spin- 21 particle.

(b) Eigenvalues and Eigenstates of σx and σy

1. Derive the eigenvalues and normalized eigenstates for σx .

2. Repeat for σy .

3. Show how the eigenstates of σx relate to those of σz by a suitable rotation (change of

basis).

1
(c) Commutation Relations and Measurements
1. Verify that [σx , σy ] = 2i σz .

2. Discuss the physical interpretation of why σx and σy do not commute and what this
means in terms of simultaneous measurements of spin in different directions.

Part II: The Stern–Gerlach Experiment

1. Basic Principle
(a) Briefly describe the setup of the original Stern–Gerlach experiment:

• What type of particles are used?

• What property of the particles is being measured?
• How is the measurement performed?

(b) Experimental Observations:

• Explain why the silver atoms in the original experiment split into discrete beams
rather than forming a continuous distribution.
• How do you interpret these results in terms of quantum spin?

2. Sequential Measurements
(a) Consider a spin- 12 particle passing through two consecutive Stern–Gerlach apparatuses
(SGA). The first SGA is oriented along the z-axis, and the second along the x-axis.

• Draw or outline the possible paths the particles can take.

• Calculate the probability of finding the particle in each path.
• Interpret these results in terms of collapse of the wavefunction and the non-
commuting nature of spin operators.

(b) If a third Stern–Gerlach apparatus oriented again along the z-axis is placed after the
second (oriented along the x-axis), describe the resulting beam pattern and connect
it to the concept of the wavefunction “resetting” after measurement along a different
basis.

2
Part III: Quantum Statistics of Fermions, Bosons, and
Classical Particles
1. Identifying the Statistics
• Fermions follow Fermi–Dirac (FD) statistics; they obey the Pauli exclusion principle.

• Bosons follow Bose–Einstein (BE) statistics; multiple bosons can occupy the same
quantum state (Bose–Einstein condensation).

• Classical particles follow Maxwell–Boltzmann (MB) statistics and do not exhibit the
aforementioned quantum-statistical restrictions.

(a) Behavior at Room Temperature

1. Consider an ideal gas of fermions, bosons, and classical particles at room temperature
(T ≈ 300 K).

• Which of these are likely to show distinguishable quantum-statistical effects under

ordinary laboratory conditions?
• Under what conditions (e.g., densities, volumes) might Fermi–Dirac or Bose–
Einstein statistics become significant even at room temperature?

2. Provide a brief qualitative discussion of how the distribution functions for each type
of particle differ at higher temperatures.

(b) Behavior at Very Low Temperature

1. For fermions, describe how the occupancy of quantum states evolves as T → 0. Relate
this to the concept of a Fermi sea or Fermi energy (as in metals).

2. For bosons:

• Discuss the onset of Bose–Einstein condensation in an ideal bosonic gas as T

approaches zero.
• Identify a physical system or experimental setup where this is observed (e.g.,
liquid 4 He or ultracold atomic gases).

3. For classical (Maxwell–Boltzmann) particles:

• Explain why classical particles “lose” their classical behavior at low temperatures
and must be described by quantum statistics.
• Provide an example in which classical approximations still work (e.g., when the
de Broglie wavelength is much smaller than the interparticle spacing).

3
2. Problem on Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein Occupation Num-
bers
(a) Write down the Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein distribution functions
1 1
fFD (ϵ) =   , fBE (ϵ) =   .
exp kϵ−µ
BT
+ 1 exp kϵ−µ
BT
− 1

(b) Qualitatively sketch both distributions vs. ϵ at finite T

Mark the major differences around ϵ = µ. Discuss the behavior of each distribution near
that point.

(c) In the limit T → 0, discuss how each distribution changes

Explain what happens for ϵ < µ and ϵ > µ for both Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein distri-
butions.

(d) Derive the distribution (Detailed Derivation)

We outline the standard derivation of the Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein distributions using
the grand canonical ensemble, focusing on the average occupation number ⟨nϵ ⟩ of a single-
particle state of energy ϵ.

Grand Canonical Ensemble A system in the grand canonical ensemble can exchange
both energy and particles with a reservoir. The probability P of being in a microstate i with
energy Ei and particle number Ni is
 
P (i) ∝ exp −β (Ei − µ Ni ) ,

where β = 1/(kB T ) and µ is the chemical potential.

Occupation Numbers

• Fermions: nϵ ∈ {0, 1} (Pauli exclusion).

• Bosons: nϵ ∈ {0, 1, 2, . . . }.

Partial Partition Function for One Single-Particle State Denote by Zϵ the sum over
possible occupation numbers nϵ of a state with energy ϵ. Then,
X  
Zϵ = exp −β(ϵ − µ) nϵ .
nϵ

• Fermi–Dirac: nϵ = 0 or 1.
Zϵ(FD) = 1 + e−β(ϵ−µ) .

4
 • Bose–Einstein: nϵ = 0, 1, 2, . . ..
∞
X 1
Zϵ(BE) = e−β(ϵ−µ) nϵ = .
nϵ =0
1− e−β(ϵ−µ)

Average Occupation Number

P  
nϵ n ϵ exp −β(ϵ − µ) n ϵ
⟨nϵ ⟩ = P   .
nϵ exp −β(ϵ − µ) nϵ

• Fermi–Dirac (FD) Since nϵ ∈ {0, 1}:

0 · 1 + 1 · e−β(ϵ−µ) 1
⟨nϵ ⟩FD = −β(ϵ−µ)
=   .
1+e exp β(ϵ − µ) + 1

• Bose–Einstein (BE) Since nϵ ∈ {0, 1, 2, . . . }, use the geometric series:

∞ ∞
X x X 1
n xn = , xn = , where x = e−β(ϵ−µ) .
n=0
(1 − x)2 n=0
1−x

Hence
x/(1 − x)2 x 1 1
⟨nϵ ⟩BE = = = 1 = β(ϵ−µ) .
1/(1 − x) 1−x x
−1 e −1

Final Forms  1
  , (FD)
exp β(ϵ − µ) + 1


⟨nϵ ⟩ =
1
, (BE)


  
exp β(ϵ − µ) − 1
These are the standard Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein distributions. In the classical limit
where exp[β(ϵ − µ)] ≫ 1, both reduce to the Maxwell–Boltzmann form
 
⟨nϵ ⟩ ≈ exp −β(ϵ − µ) .

Summary Paragraphs
On Measuring Spin (Stern–Gerlach Experiments) Spin is intrinsically quantum me-
chanical and cannot be fully visualized with classical analogies. The discrete splitting of
atomic or particle beams in Stern–Gerlach devices illustrates quantization of the spin com-
ponent along the measurement axis. Sequential SG measurements along different axes high-
light the non-commuting nature of spin operators, leading to probabilistic outcomes and
wavefunction collapse.

5
On Statistics (Fermions, Bosons, and Classical Particles) Fermions obey the Pauli
exclusion principle, leading to occupancy of states up to the Fermi energy at low temperature.
Bosons can occupy the same quantum state, giving rise to Bose–Einstein condensation at
sufficiently low temperature. Classical (Maxwell–Boltzmann) statistics is a limiting case,
valid at higher temperatures or lower densities, where quantum effects are negligible.

6
Part I
(9)

In

8z = (i)
6 (1) = X /1)

Let 11) = (b) ,

G + b" 1 =
I normalize

= (i)(i) =
X(b)

2( i)(5) -
=
(i)(d)

1 (8) x
=0

(1 x)( - 1 x) a
-
=
-

X = I

Far x =
1 For x = +

((1 ((1-(-1) [
-
1) .
2+ 0 .
b= a .

G +o .
b=0

0 a + (+ -

1) b =
. c 0 .
a + + -
) ] bi .

= ) -
zb = 0 = ) 29 = 0

due to the
normalization a= I due to the normalization ,
b1
=

|+ =
(d) 1 -
z
=
(b)
(b)
I .

8x = ( %!)

·x(k) =
x(I)
Let 14 = (5) ,
a+ b2 : 1

( ! )(b)
%
= x( )

I ) (b) =

1 -
x)" -
1 = a

x =
I)

For X = Far x = -

a +b
1-a+b S
= C

a + b = 0

= G= b = = a =
E , bi -
| x)x = (i) 1 -
x = (t)
2 ,

Oy =
( *)
Gy(q) = x1 * >

Far x
( =)(5)
* For x = = =
= X ( )
labi ja-ib
= a

( : )(5)
ia + b= c
=
=)
: s = b = a= E , b= -
(-x)" -

[i ·
(i)] = a 1 +)
y = (i) 1 +y = (t)
X -
1 = 0

x= 11
3 .

1 +>z (d)
(1 - S
=

= (9)

=)
| +( = ((t)z + 1 + z)

1 -
>
X = (( +z -
1 - z)
↓T
rotation matrix

Ry(0) =
eiy -
/s
Ry(0) 1 + >z = 1 +
>x Ry(0')1 -z = 1 -
x

/)()()
=
sin
= (i) -

l = (sin = ) 0

(C)
In

8x = 1 ! ) y =
( *)
[0x18y] =
Oxy -

Oy Ox

=
(ii)( : ) -Eli ) :

:
(i) -

(i) =
wil ! i
= 2i8z
2

Because of Ox and Oy do not commute , they cannot be simultaneously

diagonalized. This implies that spin in the x-direction and spin in the y-direction
cannot both be known with arbitary precision . A measurement of Ox disturbs a

subsequent measurement of Oy ,
and vice versa .
This is a manifestation of the

uncertainty principle for non-commuting observables.

Part #I
In

(a)
·
Silver atom (Ag)
·

magnetic dipole moment (spin , is = -

·
Silver (Ag) atom are heated in an even and escape through a small hole,

forming a beam .
This beam passes through a collimation and then enters an

inhomogeneous magnetic field produced by a pair of specially shaped magnetic pole pieses.
A silver atan consists of 47 elevious Of .
these, 46 electrons effectively farm a closed,

spherically symmetric electron cloud with zere not angular momentum .

Only the 47th

electron occupying the 53 abital contribute a net angular momentum due to its intrinsic
, ,

spin .
As a result, the silver atam has a
magnetic momentum arising solely from the

spin of this single unpaired electron .

In other words , the atan's magnetic momentum M is

proportial to the spin angular momentum S of the 4th electron .

When placed in an inhomogeneous magnetic field , this magnetic momentum experiences

an interaction energy of-u B .

,
which results in a farce given by
& Bz
F = ( . ) E MJ7

assuming the
magnetic momentum is aligned along the field direction.

Therefore ,
silver atans with different spin crientations experience different
forces along the z-axis and are deflected to different positions a

a detection screen or photographic plate .

(b)
·
In classical physics , one would the magnetic moments of atans to be randomly
expect

oriented , leading to a continuous range of deflections in the magnetic field and thus

a continuous distribution on the screen. However ,

in the Stern-Gerlach experiment,

the beam of silver atans splits into two distinct parts . This is because the

spin angular momentum of the 4th electron in each silver atan is quantized
and can only take one of two possible values along the direction of the magnetic
field-spin down As result , the experience possible
up or .
a atans
only the

values of magnetic force , leading to two discrete impact regions on the detector

rather than a continuous spread.

·
The silver beam distinct spots direct evidence
splitting of the atan into two provides
of quantum spin quantization . In quantum mechanics ,
the spin of a spin-112 particle
such as the silver atan's cuter electron does not continuously vary but instead has
two allowed projection values along chosen axis :/ and -12. The Stern-Gerlach
any

experiment thus demonstrates that spin is an intrinsic quantum property with discrete

eigenvalues. The measurement effectively projects each atam into ane of these two

spin eigenstates with respect to the magnetic field direction.

2 -

(a)
Path 1
&
Sx+ camp.
satcamp .

Say
x-camp
oven
SGE
Sx+ camp.

Sz-camp .
Say
x-camp

·
For Path 1
.

After passing through the first SGA ,

the particle has 59% to become
Sat component ,
and we know
(t) = (( + + 1 - )

P(( + ( + (z) =
=> For path 1
,
the probability is i= (same for different pathes (
·
The wavefunction collapse to 12 or 12 after the first measurement.

Since 3x and 32 are non-commuting operators , measuring along X-axis does

not preserve the information from the z measurement .
As a result, the

measurement along X rests the state , yielding a 50% probability of being

in 1 + >x a 1 x.

(b)
| t)x = ((tz + 1 -

z)
3
: 1 3
-

= ((t)z -

1- z)

From 1t3x
50%
P([ + 1 + x) = 2 = go to 1 +
z
14 z
P(z -
1 + >) = = =) 50 % go
to

Fram 1->x
P(E + 1 -(x) =
= = 5%% go to 1 +
z
14 z
P(q -
1 =x) = z = 50 % go
to

The measurement along the X-axis destroys the previous Z-basis information

and the third z-axis SGA measures a new spin component that has no

of the firstI measurement. This illustrates the non-commutative

memory
nature of quantum spin measurements and how each measurement resets the

System's state to a new eigenstate of the corresponding observable .