A completely algebraic solution of the simple harmonic oscillator

M. Rushka, and J. K. Freericks

Citation: American Journal of Physics 88, 976 (2020); doi: 10.1119/10.0001702

View online: https://doi.org/10.1119/10.0001702
View Table of Contents: https://aapt.scitation.org/toc/ajp/88/11
Published by the American Association of Physics Teachers
A completely algebraic solution of the simple harmonic oscillator
M. Rushkaa) and J. K. Freericksb)
Department of Physics, Georgetown University, 37th and O Sts. NW, Washington, DC 20057
(Received 18 December 2019; accepted 21 July 2020)
We present a full algebraic derivation of the wavefunctions of a simple harmonic oscillator. This
derivation illustrates the abstract approach to the simple harmonic oscillator by completing the
derivation of the coordinate-space or momentum-space wavefunctions from the energy
eigenvectors. It is simple to incorporate into the undergraduate and graduate curricula. We provide
a summary of the history of operator-based methods as they are applied to the simple harmonic
oscillator. We present the derivation of the energy eigenvectors along the lines of the standard
approach that was first presented by Dirac in 1947 (and is modified slightly here in the spirit of the
Schr€odinger factorization method). We supplement it by employing the appropriate translation
operator to determine the coordinate-space and momentum-space wavefunctions algebraically,
without any derivatives. VC 2020 American Association of Physics Teachers.
https://doi.org/10.1119/10.0001702

I. INTRODUCTION from the geometrical fact that it is equal to the product of the
length of each vector multiplied by the cosine of the angle
The Hamiltonian of the simple harmonic oscillator is between them. This suggests that a “representation-
2 independent” derivation of wavefunctions might be possible;
^ ¼ p^ þ 1 mx2 x^2 ;
H (1) indeed, this is achieved by using the translation operator to
0
2m 2 represent the position eigenvector in terms of the position
eigenvector at the origin and additional operator manipula-
where p^ and x^ denote the momentum and position operators, tions. We provide details below for the simple harmonic
which satisfy the canonical commutation relation oscillator. We believe that this should become part of the
½x^; p^ ¼ x^p^  p^x^ ¼ ih (2) standard treatment of the simple harmonic oscillator. We do
want to point out that both B€ohm1 and (the third edition of)
(hats will be used on all operators throughout this work). Merzbacher2 also showed how to compute wavefunctions in
Here, we have the mass m and the frequency x0 of the oscil- a representation-independent fashion, but their approach
lator. Most textbooks solve this problem in two ways: (1) develops recurrence relations between the wavefunctions of
first, one represents the momentum operator in coordinate different energy eigenstates at the same position (and hence
space via p^ ¼ i hðd=dxÞ and solves the resulting differential is different from our approach). The key to our procedure
equation, finding the energy eigenvalues via the condition lies in employing the appropriate translation operators to
that the solution be bounded as jxj ! 1 and (2) an abstract relate the components of a wavefunction to each other (same
operator method is employed to factorize the Hamiltonian eigenstate, different position); this then allows for the entire
and is then used to determine the energy eigenvalues and a wavefunction to be determined algebraically from its value
representation-independent form of the eigenvectors. When at one (spatial) point (which is ultimately determined by nor-
it comes time to determine the wavefunctions in the latter malization). While we do not elaborate further on this point
case, one converts the lowering operator into the coordinate- here, this methodology employing translation operators can
space representation, which yields a first-order differential be used to find the wavefunctions of many other quantum-
equation for the ground state. Then applying the raising mechanical potentials. Examples for particles in square-well
operators in the coordinate representation to the ground state potentials can be found in Ref. 3.
produces the excited state wavefunctions in coordinate Before jumping into the derivation, we briefly summarize
space; a similar approach can also be used in momentum the Schr€odinger factorization method for determining the
space. We want to clarify one way to interpret what a wave- energy eigenvalues and eigenstates of the simple harmonic
function is. In the coordinate representation, the basis vectors oscillator following the textbooks of Green4 and Ohanian5
are the eigenvectors of position given by jxi, which satisfy because the method is not well known to many
x^jxi ¼ xjxi. These eigenvectors are known to produce an (Schr€odinger’s original reference is also quite readable6).
orthonormal basis set by the spectral theorem for essentially We do so here to present the context for our slight change in
self-adjoint operators. A coordinate-space wavefunction is the standard algebraic derivation of the simple harmonic
constructed by calculating the components of a quantum oscillator eigenstates. We employ the Dirac notation for
state vector jwi along all of the basis vectors of the coordi- states in the Hilbert space throughout this work.
nate representation, and can be thought of as the set While Schr€odinger’s discovery of the Schr€odinger equa-
fhxjwi : for all xg. What is interesting about this observation tion is widely known today, his work from the 1940s on the
is that each component of the coordinate-space wavefunc- so-called factorization method is less familiar. This portion
tion, i.e., each element of the set fhxjwi : for all xg, is an of Schr€odinger’s work has been omitted from most quantum
inner product of just one position eigenvector with the quan- textbooks with the exception of its application to the har-
tum state vector. The inner product between any bra and any monic oscillator, the simplest example of this technique. The
ket is just a property of the bra and the ket as is well known general factorization method may appear rather abstract, but

976 Am. J. Phys. 88 (11), November 2020 http://aapt.org/ajp C 2020 American Association of Physics Teachers
V 976
it can be straightforwardly applied to an array of problems. for any state vector jwi. Hence, we learn that the ground
In fact, any problem that can be solved via Schr€odinger’s dif- state j0i of the simple harmonic oscillator requires
ferential equation can also be solved using the factorization
method. Details can be found in the above references. a^j0i ¼ 0; (9)
The goal of the factorization method is to factorize the
Hamiltonian in the form and the ground-state energy is E0 ¼ hx0 =2.
We next find the relevant intertwining relationship: we
^ ¼ A^† A^ þ E
H (3) operate a^† on the right side of Eq. (7) and discover that
   
and one can immediately verify that ^ a^† ¼ hx0 a^† a^ þ 1 a^† ¼ hx0 a^† a^a^† þ 1
H
2 2
1 1  
† † ^
A^ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffi ð^
p  imx0 x^Þ and A^ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffi ð^
p þ imx0 x^Þ ¼ a^ H þ hx0 ; (10)
2m 2m
(4) where the last line follows by applying the commutation
relation of the Dirac operators. We then immediately find
achieves this factorization for the simple harmonic oscillator that the eigenstates satisfy
with E ¼  hx=2. We chose this nonstandard notation because
it matches the notation for the ladder operator method of the ða^† Þn
simple harmonic oscillator given in many early quantum text- jni ¼ pffiffiffiffi j0i; (11)
n!
books. However, the method and notation for the algebraic
solution to the harmonic oscillator differ somewhat in today’s with energies
texts. The abstract method was first introduced in the 1930
 
edition of Dirac’s textbook on quantum mechanics7 (first edi- 1
tion) and further developed in his 1947 edition8 (third edition); En ¼ hx0 nþ : (12)
2
a more complete history is developed below. The framework
for the operator method has remained unchanged, but a differ- This derivation repeatedly uses the intertwining relation to
ent notation has since been universally adopted by quantum determine the energy and the normalization. Finally, we
textbooks. The i factors are moved from the coordinate to the assume the ground state j0i is normalized from the beginning
momentum, and we work with dimensionless a^ and a^† rather (h0j0i ¼ 1). This derivation differs from the standard
than the Schr€ odinger operators. The dimensionless (Dirac) approach, but we think it works better logically since it first
ladder operators are then defined as determines the ground state from the factorization and a pos-
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  itivity argument and then constructs the excited states
mx0 p^ mx0 p^
a^† ¼ x^  i ; a^ ¼ x^ þ i : directly from the intertwining relation. Normalization then
2h mx0 2h mx0 follows as the last step.
(5) Before developing the algebraic derivation of the wave-
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi function, we describe the historical background for the sim-
These operators differ by a factor of 6i= hx0 from the cor- ple harmonic oscillator.
responding Schr€ odinger operators given in Eq. (4). We work
now with the modern Dirac form of these operators due to II. HISTORY OF THE SIMPLE HARMONIC
their familiarity. OSCILLATOR IN QUANTUM MECHANICS
Our next task is to establish the eigenvectors and eigenval-
ues of the simple harmonic oscillator following the Although much work has been done on the history of
Schr€ odinger approach. This methodology is different from quantum mechanics, it seems no one has attempted an in-
Dirac’s 1947 approach, which relies too heavily on the depth exploration of the harmonic oscillator. There is no
matrix mechanics approach in that it exploits the raising and mention in standard quantum historical texts, including
lowering operators to move up and down the spectrum. It is Jammer,10 Taketani and Nagasaki’s11 three-volume work,
more closely aligned with the approach of Ikenberry,9 which and even Mehra and Rechenberg’s12 six-volume set on the
employs instead the 1940 Schr€odinger notion of positivity as history of quantum mechanics. In his discussion of transfor-
the critical criterion for determining eigenstates after facto- mation theory, Purrington13 does mention the introduction of
rizing a Hamiltonian. Here is how it is done. ladder operators for the harmonic oscillator in Born and
The (Dirac) raising and lowering operators satisfy Jordan’s textbook.14 However, our interpretation of Born
and Jordan’s book differs from that of Purrington, as we read
  mx0 i
a^; a^† ¼ 2½p^; x^ ¼ 1 (6) the Born and Jordan text as working with Heisenberg matri-
h mx0
2 ces of the raising and lowering operators. Thus, we do not
consider their approach an abstract operator formalism.
and While the aforementioned texts expound on the evolution of
  a variety of areas in quantum mechanics, none of them trace
^ † 1 the progression of the solutions of the harmonic oscillator.
H¼
hx0 a^ a^ þ : (7)
2 One explanation for this might be a simple lack of interest in
the harmonic oscillator during the early development of
Since a^† a^ is a positive semidefinite operator, it satisfies quantum theory. Most of the original publications that devel-
oped quantum mechanics in the period from 1925-30 were
a † a^jwi ¼ k a^jwi k2  0
hwj^ (8) primarily interested in determining the atomic spectra of

977 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 88, No. 11, November 2020 M. Rushka and J. K. Freericks 977
elements other than hydrogen and in quantizing light. In the wavefunction but also developed the differential equation
addition, the simple harmonic oscillator spectrum was deter- method for treating the harmonic oscillator. Using his time-
mined in the first matrix mechanics papers by Heisenberg15 independent wave equation for a harmonic potential
and Born and Jordan.16 Schr€odinger solved it in his second  
d 2 wn ðqÞ 2m 1
paper,17 providing both the spectrum and the wavefunctions 2 2
þ 2 En  mx0 q wn ðqÞ ¼ 0; (15)
(via a differential equations approach). So the harmonic dq2 h 2
oscillator seems to have slipped through the cracks, and its
historical study remains underdeveloped. Starting from the Schr€odinger found the energies of the harmonic oscillator as
1920s, we seek here to provide an understanding of well as its eigenstates, which he expressed (unnormalized) in
the development of the quantum-mechanical solutions of the the coordinate-space representation as
simple harmonic oscillator. Note that from time to time we rffiffiffiffiffiffi!
will use the original notation employed in the original h2 Þq2
ðmx0 =2 x0
wn ðqÞ ¼ e Hn q ; (16)
articles. We try to make it clear when this is being done h
below.
Heisenberg was the first to find the energies of the har- where Hn denotes the Hermite polynomials. Schr€odinger
monic oscillator in his 1925 paper15 that invented modern thus introduced the differential equation method now univer-
quantum mechanics. His seminal paper relied on classical sally employed in all quantum textbooks, and his articulation
equations of motion and replaced them with their matrix- of the eigenstate enabled the development of the operator
valued quantum counterparts (a strategy similar to the old method in early editions of Dirac’s textbook.7,8 Dirac, like
quantum mechanics method of Bohr-Sommerfeld quantiza- his contemporaries, discussed matrix mechanics in his 1930
tion). Using this matrix-valued equation of motion and the textbook. Indeed, the relationship between matrix mechanics
canonical commutation relation, Heisenberg was able to find and operator methods is quite close.
the quantized energy levels. The first problem treated was Before jumping into the development of the ladder opera-
that of an anharmonic oscillator with a third-order perturba- tor method for the harmonic oscillator, we must mention the
tion term. Heisenberg truncated his result to determine the appearance of bosonic creation and annihilation operators in
energies for the unperturbed harmonic oscillator other areas of quantum theory. As noted earlier, a principal
  concern of many early quantum papers was the quantization
1 of light. Consequently, Dirac,21 Jordan,22 and Fock23 all pub-
W¼ hx0 n þ : (13) lished papers in the late 1920s and early 1930s which include
2
bosonic creation and annihilation operators. While at the
While Heisenberg’s article provided essentially no details time it appears that they were unaware of the relation
for how the calculation was done,18 he did compute the cor- between these operators and the harmonic oscillator, their
rect result. Born and Jordan published a paper16 shortly after publications coincide with the origins of the ladder operator
Heisenberg’s in which they provided the details of the method presented here. Since it was present in other areas of
matrix-mechanics solution for the simple harmonic oscilla- quantum theory at the time, we can see then that the notion
tor. The matrix mechanics methodology does contain many of ladder operators was not unique to the early treatment of
elements of the operator method which Dirac later developed the harmonic oscillator.
in the first three editions of his textbook.7,8,19 Matrix We also mention one other item which was of great inter-
mechanics works by essentially determining the properties est to the quantum pioneers—the theory of canonical trans-
of the position space matrix, defined in modern terms via formations and the formulation of quantum mechanics in
terms of action-angle variables. Here, Dirac led the way in
qmn ðtÞ ¼ hmjeði=hÞHt q^eði=hÞHt jni: (14) his first quantum paper24 on canonical quantization, where
he nearly constructed the raising and lowering operators
One can see that the time-dependence of the matrix goes like toward the end of the paper. He did note that the approach
exp ½iðEn  Em Þt=h. Substituting into the classical equa- works for the simple harmonic oscillator but provided no
tion of motion for the simple harmonic oscillator yields the details. Fritz London produced similar work in a 1926
constraint that En  Em ¼ 6hx0 . Hence, the q^ matrix is tri- paper,25 although the raising and lowering operators do not
diagonal, and the consecutive energy levels are separated in explicitly appear in his work either.
hx0 . Next, the positivity of the Hamiltonian is used
steps of  The first work to formally define two operators which factor-
to show that there must exist some minimum energy level ize the Hamiltonian of the harmonic oscillator is Born and
equal to 12 
hx0 . From this ladder of energies, they deduced Jordan’s 1930 textbook,14 which was completed a few months
that the nth diagonal value of the Hamiltonian is given by before Dirac’s first edition.7 They write the Hamiltonian as
Heisenberg’s result in Eq. (13). The connection between 1 2 a 2
Born and Jordan’s paper and the ladder operator method is H¼ p þ q; (17)
further exhibited in Birtwistle’s textbook,20 which presents 2l 2
diagrams in a ladder formation connecting the different
where l represents mass and a what they call the quasi-
energy levels.
elastic constant. Born and Jordan introduced two matrices
These matrix-mechanics papers failed to treat the eigen-
states of the harmonic oscillator since matrix mechanics has b ¼ Cðp  2pi 0 lqÞ and b† ¼ Cðp þ 2pi 0 lqÞ;
no concept of an eigenfunction. It was not until Schr€odinger (18)
introduced the wavefunction in 1926 that quantum papers pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi † †
began to explicitly refer to the eigenstates of the harmonic where C ¼ 1= 2h 0 l. They noted that bb  b b ¼ 1 and
oscillator. In his paper,17 Schr€odinger not only introduced rewrote the Hamiltonian as

978 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 88, No. 11, November 2020 M. Rushka and J. K. Freericks 978
 h 0 h 0 which he denoted via the unconventional notation eix and
H ¼ h 0 bb†  ¼ h 0 b† b þ : (19) eix , respectively. He noted that we can write the momen-
2 2
tum and position operators as
Born and Jordan’s definition of b and b† , and subsequent rffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
rewriting of the Hamiltonian appears nearly identical to the mx ^1=2 ix 1=2
modern operator method (which instead uses a^ and a^† ). p^ ¼ J e þ eix J^ and
2
Although they referred to them as “Stufenmatrizen,” Born rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
and Jordan did not seem to use b and b† as ladder operators, 1 1=2 1=2
q^ ¼ iJ^ eix þ ieix J^ ; (25)
which act directly on eigenstates. We then do not consider 2mx
this approach to be the initial formulation of the abstract
operator method. Born and Jordan apparently wrote their where J^ was denoted the “action variable” and given by
1930 textbook as a last-ditch-effort to save matrix mechanics ^ 1
from oblivion. This did not happen, and unfortunately the H
J^ ¼  hI: (26)
textbook has been nearly forgotten (in part because it was x 2
never translated into English).
The operator method for the simple harmonic oscillator With Eqs. (24) and (26), we can calculate that
then takes its first form in the 1930 edition7 of Dirac’s text- 1=2 pffiffiffi † 1=2 pffiffiffi
book, although his discussion was quite similar to Born and J^ eix ¼ ha^ and eix J^ ¼ ha^; (27)
Jordan’s and inherits much of the matrix-mechanics argu-
ment. Dirac worked with a dimensionless abstract where a^ and a^† are the ladder operators commonly used to
Hamiltonian first. To find the eigenvalues of treat the harmonic oscillator today (but not introduced by
Dirac in 1930). Furthermore, with Eq. (27) above, we can
^ ¼ p^2 þ q^2 ;
H (20) also see that the form of Eq. (25) is almost identical to the
way the momentum and position operators are defined today
Dirac defined an operator A^ as follows (note A^ is not a ladder in terms of the ladder operators. Finally, Dirac’s 1930 text-
operator here): book seems to be the first to give the wavefunctions of the
harmonic oscillator as the overlap of the energy eigenstates
A^ ¼ ð^
p þ i^
q Þð^
p  i^
q Þ: (21) with position space, which he wrote as an inner product
ðqjnÞ, where jnÞ denoted the nth eigenstate (this was written
A simple calculation showed A^ to be essentially the before Dirac notation was introduced). Dirac used differen-
Hamiltonian for the harmonic oscillator. He defined the tial equations to find the wavefunctions, which he expressed
eigenstates of A^ to satisfy the standard eigenvalue equation with a finite power series in q (using the standard Frobenius
series solution method). While the operator method in his
^ 0 i ¼ A0 jA0 i
AjA (22) 1930 textbook contains remarkable similarities to that in
modern textbooks, there remain a few differences to point
and then proceeded through a matrix-mechanics argument to out. Dirac did not formally define the ladder operators here
show that hA0 jð^ q ÞjA00 i equals zero unless A00 ¼ A0  2.
p þ i^ but instead used expressions of the form ð^ q Þ as ladder
p 6i^
Using this and the non-negativity of p^2 þ q^2 , Dirac found operators—indeed, his approach presaged the Schr€odinger
that the eigenvalues of A^ are all the even non-negative inte- factorization method since it is focused on factorizing the
gers: 0; 2; 4; 6; … and so on. From his earlier assertion that Hamiltonian. We also note that Dirac included the factor of i
on the position operator in Eqs. (21) and (25) above, which
hA0 jð^ q ÞjA00 i ¼ dA00 ;A0 2 ;
p þ i^ (23) differs from the standard notation today, but again agrees
with the Schr€odinger factorization method. However, it is
we can then see how ð^ p þ i^
q Þ acts as a ladder operator on also fair to say that Dirac’s approach is quite similar to the
jA00 i to raise it to the next highest eigenstate of A. ^ Dirac’s matrix mechanics methodology of Born and Jordan. Dirac
expression given in Eq. (21) then showed that A^ is analogous used the Heisenberg matrices to determine the eigenvalues
to the ladder operator formulation of the Hamiltonian. What in a standard matrix mechanics approach. His main differ-
Dirac’s initial treatment lacked was a formulation of the ence is that he was the first to work with the operators by
eigenstate in terms of operators acting on the ground state themselves instead of solely with the matrices (which is how
(which we conjecture is because he adopted a matrix- we interpret the Born and Jordan methodology).
mechanics methodology to find the spectrum and matrix- Other textbooks in the 1920s and 1930s do not treat the
mechanics does not construct eigenstates). Dirac alluded to simple harmonic oscillator by operator methods but usually
the ladder operators by introducing their matrix representation do so by both matrix mechanics and by wave mechanics.
0 1 0 1 This includes texts like Birtwistle (1928),20 Condon and
0 0 0 0 0  0 1 0 0 0  Morse (1929),26 Born and Jordan (1930),14 Mott (1930),27
B C B C Sommerfeld (1930),28 Fock (1932),29 Frenkel (1932),30
B1 0 0 0 0 C B0 0 1 0 0 C
B
B0 1 0 0 0 C
C B
B0 0 0 1 0 C
C Pauli (1933),31 Frenkel (1934),32 Pauling and Wilson
B C B C (1935),33 Jordan (1936),34 Kemble (1937),35 and Dushman
B C B C
B 0 0 1 0 0    C and B 0 0 0 0 1    C; (1938).36 The one exception from the 1930s appears to be
B C B C Rojansky’s 1938 text,37 which provides a treatment nearly
B C B C
B0 0 0 1 0 C B0 0 0 0 0 C identical to Dirac’s 1930 method. But Rojansky makes it
@ A @ A
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. clear that he is working with operators (as his derivation is in
. . . . . . . . . . . . a chapter entitled “The Symbolic Method”), and he strictly
(24) works solely with the operators, never introducing the

979 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 88, No. 11, November 2020 M. Rushka and J. K. Freericks 979
Heisenberg matrices in this section of his book (although he He then gives the real and imaginary parts of As by
does discuss matrix mechanics elsewhere). While he has all
of the elements available to construct the eigenvector 1 pffiffiffi
ReAs ¼ ðAs þ As Þ ¼ pQs
abstractly in terms of the raising operators, he fails to do so. 2
He does, however, employ the intertwining relationship in 1 pffiffiffi
and ImAs ¼ ðAs  As Þ ¼ pPs ; (32)
the derivation, making it closer to the way we proceeded 2i
here.
Intriguingly, Schr€odinger6 developed his factorization which bears a striking resemblance to the way many popular
method in 1940–1941. The first problem he tackled was the textbooks relate p^ and q^ to the ladder operators. If our suspi-
simple harmonic oscillator. In this work, he showed that one cions hold true, the use of a would then stand for
can evaluate the equation a^j0i ¼ 0 for the ground state (in “amplitude.” The origin of this notation would then lie in the
coordinate space) and found a first-order differential equa- early work on quantizing light by the fathers of modern
tion for the ground-state wavefunction. He then simply stated quantum mechanics. Born and Jordan’s textbook14 also
that one can extend the same method to higher eigenstates seems to support this notion, as they explicitly referred to b
but provided no details. Hence, Schr€odinger was, perhaps and b† as “komplexe Amplituden.” One should also note that
aptly, the first to determine all the eigenvectors (and the Frenkel’s 1934 book32 discussed many of these same themes
associated wavefunctions) for the simple harmonic oscillator too when quantizing light, including the same modern nota-
via the operator-based approach. tion as used by Schiff fifteen years later. Frenkel’s approach
The next development of the operator method for the sim- was deeply entrenched in matrix mechanics, as was much of
ple harmonic oscillator appears in the 1947 edition of the work at that time—our interpretation is that the objects
Dirac’s textbook.8 This gives the origin of the modern he worked with were in fact matrices and not abstract opera-
approach adopted by all subsequent textbooks and provides tors in their full generality—but this conclusion is not crystal
the modern abstract derivation. Dirac explicitly defines clear. Interestingly, Frenkel also employed the a; a† notation
dimensionless operators when quantizing light.
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Through the 1950s and 1960s, we see textbooks use a
1 combination of differential equations and Dirac’s 1947 oper-
g¼ ð^p þ imx^ qÞ
2m hx ator method to treat the harmonic oscillator. While every
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 book’s operator treatment follows Dirac’s, we see a swathe
and  g¼ ð^
p  imx^
q Þ; (28) of different notations. We find this in Bohm,40 Landau and
2mhx
Lifshitz,41 Messiah,42 Dicke and Wittke,43 Merzbacher,2
which he uses to establish this modern operator method. He Powell and Crasemann,44 Harris and Loeb,45 Park,46
checks that Gottfried,47 Green,4 Ziman,48 and Fl€ugge.49 From the late
1960s to date, all quantum textbooks use the same notation
g g  g
 g¼1 (29) as Schiff, Messiah, and Park. These include Saxon,50
Baym,51 Gasiorowicz,52 Cohen-Tannoudji,53 and Winter54 in
and shows that g and g act as ladder operators which raise addition to virtually all subsequent textbooks. We could not
and lower the energy of the harmonic oscillator in steps of figure out why all textbooks adopted a standardized notation
hx, respectively. Dirac demonstrates that gg is a positive
 after 1970, but the earliest instance of the modern approach
semi-definite operator and uses this to show that the ground with the modern notation seems to be in Messiah’s 1959
state energy of the harmonic oscillator equals 12 hx. He textbook.42
expresses the nth energy eigenstate as gn j0i and represents In summary, we see the operator method for the simple
the wavefunctions by harmonic oscillator to have developed as follows. The matrix
mechanics approach of Heisenberg15 and Born and Jordan16
hq0 jgn j0i; (30) already has about one third of the abstract method worked
out. That approach uses the positivity of the Hamiltonian and
which he finds using differential equations. While Dirac’s a ladder structure of the matrix elements to determine the
method here is identical to the modern operator method used energy eigenvalues. The ladder operation structure was even
today, his notation differs slightly. He uses g and g to denote illustrated graphically by Birtwistle.20 Next, Born and
the ladder operators and again includes the factor of i on the Jordan’s 1930 textbook14 was the first to represent the ladder
position operator. It is fair to say that it is here, in 1947, that operators in the matrix mechanics formalism, but Dirac’s
today’s popular abstract formulation of the simple harmonic 1930 textbook7 initiated the abstract operator approach with
oscillator is born.
the factorization of the Hamiltonian in terms of operators,
The remainder of the harmonic oscillator’s development
even though it later employed the matrix mechanics method-
consists mainly of notational changes. Leonard Schiff intro-
ology to determine the eigenvalues. Rojansky37 performed
duced, but did not significantly use, the a^ and a^† notation in
the first completely abstract derivation free from matrix
his 1949 quantum textbook.38 We suspect the reason for the
mechanics. Though he was on the precipice of also determin-
use of this letter to denote the ladder operators may lie in the
ing the eigenvectors, he did not. That had to wait for Fock
second volume of Sin-Itiro Tomonaga’s 1953 quantum text-
book.39 Tomonaga uses As to denote the complex time- space23 and Schr€odinger’s use of it in his factorization
dependent amplitude of a De Broglie wave packet method6 before one could construct the eigenvectors
abstractly (but the derivation still required going to coordi-
X
1 nate space to determine the wavefunctions). Finally, Dirac
Wðx; y; z; tÞ ¼ As ðtÞ/ðx; y; zÞ: (31) finished the modern derivation in his 1947 text.8 The opera-
s¼1 tor method was immediately adopted by nearly all other

980 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 88, No. 11, November 2020 M. Rushka and J. K. Freericks 980
textbooks, although the notation did not become the standard This relation is often called the braiding relation. When
one we are accustomed to until the early 1970s. ^ B
½A; ^ commutes with A^ and B,
^ we then have the exponential
re-ordering identity
III. ALGEBRAIC DERIVATION OF THE
eA eB ¼ eB eA e½A;B  ;
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
WAVEFUNCTIONS OF THE SIMPLE HARMONIC (36)
OSCILLATOR
which includes a correction term when the exponential oper-
We begin the algebraic derivation of the wavefunctions by ators are re-ordered.
simply noting that the components are the inner products of To start working with the translation operator, we use the
the energy eigenvectors jni with the position jxi and momen- Hadamard lemma in Eq. (33), which allows us to evaluate
tum jpi eigenvectors, or wn ðxÞ ¼ hxjni and /n ðpÞ ¼ hpjni. the similarity transformation of the operator x^ as follows
Our strategy is to employ operator methods without resorting (with x0 being a real number):
to specific representations of the operators, so we do not
need to introduce the coordinate-space representation of the i x2
eði=hÞx0 p^ x^eði=hÞx0 p^ ¼ x^ þ x0 ½p^; x^  02 ½p^; ½p^; x^ þ   
momentum operator in terms of a derivative with respect to h 2h
the position. Instead, we follow the representation- ¼ x^ þ x0 : (37)
independent operator-based approach initiated by Pauli55
and independently by Dirac56 in 1926. The final equality occurs because ½^p ; x^ ¼ ih is a number,
We assume that an eigenstate exists for position at the ori- not an operator, and subsequently it commutes with all addi-
gin and is denoted jx ¼ 0i. It satisfies x^jx ¼ 0i ¼ 0, and we tional multiple commutators of p^. This truncates the
relate the component hx ¼ 0jni to all other components of Hadamard lemma expression after the first commutator.
the coordinate-space wavefunction. Note that we do not need Next, we multiply both sides of Eq. (37) by exp ðix0 p^=hÞ
to worry about the normalization of the state for anything from the left to yield
that we do here, so we do not discuss this issue further (as its
treatment is well covered in all quantum texts). x^eði=hÞx0 p^ ¼ eði=hÞx0 p^ ð^
x þ x0 Þ: (38)
We will employ the Hadamard lemma, which is given by
With this identity, we establish the eigenvector jx0 i, which
X h
^ A^ ¼ B^ þ
A^
1
1 ^ ^   
^ B^    m ; satisfies x^jx0 i ¼ x0 jx0 i (here, x0 is a number and a label for
e Be A; A; …; A; (33) the Dirac ket)
m¼1
m!

jx0 i ¼ eði=hÞx0 p^ jx ¼ 0i: (39)

where the m subscript on the commutators denotes that there
are m nested commutators; this lemma is also called the Operating x^ onto the state jx0 i yields
Baker-Hausdorff lemma and the braiding relation. But as far
as we can tell, it was first discovered by Campbell in 1897 x^jx0 i ¼ x^eði=hÞx0 p^ jx ¼ 0i ¼ eði=hÞx0 p^ ð^
x þ x0 Þjx ¼ 0i
[see Eq. (19) of the historical discussion of the Baker-
Campbell-Hausdorff relation57] and hence should be called ¼ x0 jx0 i: (40)
the Campbell lemma. Despite significant research, we were
unable to determine where the Hadamard lemma name The last equality follows from x^jx ¼ 0i ¼ 0, the fact that
comes from. numbers always commute with operators and the definition
Before we jump into the derivation of position and of jx0 i. Hence, Eqs. (39) and (40) establish that jx0 i is an
momentum operators, we note that the Hadamard lemma can eigenstate of x^ with eigenvalue x0.
be employed to establish some additional identities. Any Similarly, one can also derive that the momentum eigen-
^ of an operator B^ that can be written as a power
function f ðBÞ states satisfy
^
series in B satisfies
jp0 i ¼ eði=hÞp0 x^ jp ¼ 0i; (41)
X
1
m X
1
m
^
^ A^ ¼ eA^
eA f ðBÞe
^
fm B^ eA ¼
^ ^
^ A
fm eA Be where p0 is both a number and the label for the ket. Note the
m¼0 m¼0 different sign in the exponent of the operator for the position
^ ^ and momentum eigenvectors.
^ A Þ
¼ f ðeA Be We are almost ready to compute the coordinate-space
 X1     wavefunction using purely algebraic methods. The deriva-
^ 1 ^ ^ ^ ^
¼f Bþ A; A; …; A; B    m : tion requires one more identity: the Baker-Campbell-
m¼1
m! Hausdorff (BCH) identity.58–60 The BCH identity is
(34) “halfway” between the two sides of the exponential re-
ordering identity, which rewrites the exponential of the sum
This is an exact relation. Choosing f ðBÞ ^ ¼ exp ðBÞ
^ then of the operators in terms of the two exponential operators
yields an important identity after some simple re-arranging and a correction factor—here, the BCH formula takes a
of terms: product of exponential of operators and rewrites it as the
 exponential of a new operator. Unlike the Hadamard lemma
X1
1 ^ ^     ^ and its application to exponential re-ordering, the BCH iden-
A^ B^ ^ ^ ^
e e ¼ exp B þ A; A; …; A; B    m eA : tity does not have any simple explicit formula for its result in
m¼1
m!
the general case (although one can write the result in closed
(35) form).61,62 Fortunately for us, we need it only for the case

981 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 88, No. 11, November 2020 M. Rushka and J. K. Freericks 981
 ^ B
^ commutes with A^ and B—in^ 1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi †
where ½A; this case, the BCH 2
wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi eðmx0 =4hÞx hx ¼ 0je ðmx0 =2hÞx^a
result greatly simplifies and is given by n!
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n
mx0
eA eB ¼ eAþBþ2½A;B  and eB eA ¼ eAþB2½A;B  :
^ ^ ^ ^ 1 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 1 ^ ^ †
(42)  a^ þ x jn ¼ 0i: (48)
2h

The BCH identity is a well-known and well-established Next, we introduce a new exponential factor with the oppo-
result, so we do not provide its derivation here; in this form, site sign of the exponent multiplying the ground-state wave-
it is often called the Weyl identity. function, because it equals 1 when operating against the
We now have all the technical tools needed to determine state:
the coordinate-space wavefunction wn ðxÞ ¼ hxjni. Using the
position eigenstates and the energy eigenstates, we immedi- 1 2
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi †
ately find that wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi eðmx0 =4hÞx hx ¼ 0je ðmx0 =2hÞx^a
n!
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 n mx0
wn ðxÞ ¼ hxjni ¼ pffiffiffiffi hx ¼ 0jeði=hÞx^p ða^† Þ jn ¼ 0i: (43)  a^† þ x e ðmx0 =2hÞx^a jn ¼ 0i:
n! 2h

The operators p^ and a^† can be easily identified by their hats. (49)
Note that one can think of this representation in the follow-
The general functional braiding relation is used again to
ing way: at the origin, the wavefunction is wn ð0Þ ¼ hx ¼
bring the rightmost exponential factor to the left through the
0jni (which is a number that will ultimately be fixed by nor-
a^† term raised to the nth power
malization) and the translation operator then shifts the wave-
function from the origin to the position x and tells us how the 1 2
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi †
wavefunction value changes in the process. This allows us to wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi eðmx0 =4hÞx hx ¼ 0je ðmx0 =2hÞx^a
n!
compute the wavefunction everywhere by shifting the value
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n
of the coordinate. The algebraic computation then simply 2mx0
evaluates the operator expression.  e ðmx0 =2hÞx^a a^† þ x jn ¼ 0i:
h
The strategy to determine the wavefunction algebraically
now takes a few additional steps. First, we replace the (50)
momentum operator in the exponent of the translation opera-
tor by its expression in terms of the ladder operators Now, we use the BCH relation again to combine the two
exponentials into one which increases the Gaussian exponent
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi by a factor of two,
mhx0 ð
p^ ¼ i a^  a^† Þ: (44) pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi †
2 1 2
wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi eðmx0 =2hÞx hx ¼ 0je ðmx0 =2hÞxð^a þ^a Þ
The wavefunction becomes n!
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2mx0
1 † n  a^† þ x jn ¼ 0i: (51)
wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi hx ¼ 0je ðmx0 =2hÞxð^a ^a Þ ða^† Þ jn ¼ 0i: (45) h
n!

Then we use the first BCH relation in Eq. (42) with A^ / a^† Finally, we use the fact that the sum of the raising and lower-
and B^ / a^ to factorize the translation operator into a factor ing operator is proportional to the position operator
involving the raising operator on the left and the lowering rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
operator on the right. This is given by h
x^ ¼ ða^ þ a^† Þ: (52)
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2mx0
1 2 †
wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi eðmx0 =4Þhx hx ¼ 0je ðmx0 =2hÞx^a
n! We replace the sum of the raising and lowering operator in
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi n
 e ðmx0 =2hÞx^a ða^† Þ jn ¼ 0i: (46) the exponent and let it act on the state to the left, where it
gives 1, because the position operator annihilates the state
Third, we take the relation in Eq. (34) and multiply by hx ¼ 0j. The wavefunction has now become
^ on the right to create the general functional braiding
exp ðAÞ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n
relation and apply it to the matrix element for the wavefunc- 1 ðmx0 =2hÞx2 2mx0
a † Þn . This yields
^ ¼ ð^
tion with f ðBÞ wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi e hx ¼ 0j a^† þ x jn ¼ 0i:
n! h
1 2
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi † (53)
wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi eðmx0 =4hÞx hx ¼ 0je ðmx0 =2hÞx^a
n! We are almost done. We have achieved a reduction of the
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
mx0 problem into a Gaussian function multiplied by a matrix ele-
 a^ þ †
x e ðmx0 =2hÞx^a jn ¼ 0i: (47) ment which is an nth degree polynomial in x. All that is left
2h
is evaluating the polynomial. To do this, we first introduce a
definition of the polynomial, which we will then show is a
The rightmost exponential factor gives 1 when it operates on so-called Hermite polynomial Hn. We write the wavefunc-
the state because a^jn ¼ 0i ¼ 0. Thus, we have tion as

982 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 88, No. 11, November 2020 M. Rushka and J. K. Freericks 982
 rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ! rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ! rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !
1 mx0 2 mx0 mx0 mx0
wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffinffi Hn x eðmx0 =2hÞx hx ¼ 0jn ¼ 0i; Hn x ¼2 xHn1 x
n!2 h h h h
(54) rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !
mx0
 2ðn  1ÞHn2 x : (59)
which defines the Hermite polynomial via h

rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ! pffiffiffiffinffi This recurrence relation, which is of the form Hn ðzÞ

mx0 2
Hn x ¼ ¼ 2zHn1 ðzÞ  2ðn  1ÞHn2 ðzÞ, is the standard Hermite

h hx ¼ 0jn ¼ 0i polynomial recurrence relation when H0 ðzÞ ¼ 1 and H1 ðzÞ
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n ¼ 2z, as we have here.
2mx0 We have now established that the simple-harmonic-oscil-
 hx ¼ 0j a^† þ x jn ¼ 0i:
h lator wavefunction satisfies
(55) rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !
1 mx0 2

Note that the number hx ¼ 0jn ¼ 0i is the normalization con- wn ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffinffi Hn x eðmx0 =2hÞx hx ¼ 0jn ¼ 0i:
n!2 
h
stant for the ground-state wavefunction; we will discuss how
to determine it below. This definition allows us to immedi- (60)
ately determine the first two polynomials H0 and H1.
Choosing n ¼ 0 in Eq. (55) immediately yields H0 ¼ 1. The last task in front of us is to find the normalization factor.
Choosing n ¼ 1, produces This is computed for the ground state via
ð1
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ! rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffi 2
mx0 mx0 2 jhx ¼ 0jn ¼ 0ij2 dxemx0 =hx ¼ 1 (61)
H1 x ¼2 xþ 1

h h hx ¼ 0jn ¼ 0i
or
a † jn ¼ 0i:
 hx ¼ 0j^ (56)
 14
The second term vanishes for the following reason: we first mx0
hx ¼ 0jn ¼ 0i ¼ : (62)
note that a^† jn ¼ 0i ¼ ð^
a † þ a^Þjn ¼ 0i, because the lowering ph
operator annihilates the ground state. Hence a^† jn ¼ 0i
/ x^jn ¼ 0i. But hx ¼ 0j^ x ¼ 0, so this state vanishes when it We have finally produced the wavefunction for the simple
acts against the position eigenstate. harmonic oscillator using algebraic methods. Note that cal-
For the remainder of the Hermite polynomials, we work culus is only needed for the last normalization step.
out a two-term recurrence relation. We focus on the nontriv- We end this section with a brief sketch of how one uses
ial matrix element, and factorize the terms as follows: similar methods to determine the momentum-space wave-
functions. To start, the momentum “translation” operator is
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ! rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n1 given by exp ðip^x =hÞ, and the momentum eigenstates satisfy
†2mx0 † 2mx0
hx ¼ 0j a^ þ x a^ þ x jn ¼ 0i: jpi ¼ eði=hÞp^x jp ¼ 0i: (63)
h h
(57) The wavefunction is given by /n ðpÞ ¼ ðiÞn hpjni; we added
an additional global phase to ensure we reproduce the stan-
The constant term in the first factor can be removed from dard results—you will see why this is important below. The
the matrix element and it multiplies the matrix element with wavefunction can be expressed in terms of the operators as
n – 1 operator factors (which is proportional to Hn1 ). For
the remaining term proportional to a^† , we replace the opera- ðiÞn n
/n ðpÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi hp ¼ 0jeði=hÞp^x ða^† Þ jn ¼ 0i: (64)
tor by a^† ! a^† þ a^  a^. The term proportional to a^† þ a^ is n!
proportional to x^, and so it annihilates when it operates on
the left against the hx ¼ 0j state. The remaining a^ operator The remainder of the calculations proceeds as before for the
can be replaced by the commutator of the n – 1 power of the coordinate-space wavefunction. We start by replacing the x^
a^† term, because a^jn ¼ 0i ¼ 0. Generalizing the standard operator by the sum of raising and lowering operators; in this
result ½^ a † Þn  ¼ nð^
a ; ð^ a † Þn1 , the remaining commutator is case, the coefficients of the raising and lowering operators
straightforward to evaluate via are now purely imaginary. We use BCH to factorize the
2 3 exponential into a raising operator on the left and lowering
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n1 operator on the right. Then we use the braiding identity to
4 2mx0 5
a^; a^† þ x move the exponential through the ð^ a † Þn terms and let it oper-
h ate on the ground state, where it produces 1. The shift term
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi !n2 added to the raising operator is now purely imaginary. Next,
2mx0 we introduce a factor of 1 at the ground state, which is the
¼ ðn  1Þ a^† þ x : (58)
h same exponential operator of the lowering operator but with
the sign of the exponent changed. Then we use the braiding
We can assemble all of these results to find the recurrence identity to bring it back to the left, BCH to place the opera-
relation for the Hermite polynomials, which becomes tors in one exponential, and evaluate the momentum operator

983 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 88, No. 11, November 2020 M. Rushka and J. K. Freericks 983
on the momentum eigenstate. At this stage, the wavefunction operator to shift the wavefunction from the origin and com-
has become pute the change of its value. It employs simple operator iden-
tities (the Hadamard lemma and Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff
ðiÞn 2 ^ B
identity when ½A; ^ commutes with A^ and B) ^ and hence it is
/n ðpÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi ep =2hx0 m
n! easy to understand and follow even for undergraduates in an
pffiffiffi !n introductory course. In addition, we explored the history
† 2p behind the operator method for the simple harmonic oscilla-
 hp ¼ 0j a^  i pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi jn ¼ 0i: (65)
hx0 m tor. Our findings are that this history is much richer than sim-
ply “Didn’t Dirac do that?” Indeed, we discovered that one-
Note the additional factors of i and the replacement of third of the argument can already be found in the matrix
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
mx0 =hx by p= hx0 m. The Hermite polynomial now mechanics works of Heisenberg and Born and Jordan. We
needs to be defined via argue that Dirac’s original 1930 treatment is much closer to
the matrix mechanics approach and that it actually was
  pffiffiffiffinffi n
p 2 i Rojansky in 1938 who made the derivation a completely
Hn pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ¼ abstract operator argument. Even Schr€odinger had a hand in
hx0 m
 hp ¼ 0jn ¼ 0i
this, being the first to use the abstract operators to construct
pffiffiffi !n eigenvectors and coordinate-space wavefunctions in 1940-
† 2p
 hp ¼ 0j a^  i pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi jn ¼ 0i: 1941. Dirac then finished the methodology in 1947.
hx0 m We hope that our completion of this work here will be
(66) adopted by others teaching quantum mechanics, as we feel it
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi is yet another beautiful demonstration of the elegance of the
Starting with H0 ¼ 1 and H1 ¼ 2p= hx0 m, we find the abstract operator approach. Now the entire simple harmonic
same Hermite
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffipolynomials as we found before, but now with oscillator problem can be solved algebraically!
z ¼ p=  hx0 m. The rest of the calculation is similar to the
coordinate space calculation. The normalization factor is ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
found by a simple integral. One can see that this procedure
will lead to the momentum-space wavefunction, which The initial stages of this work were supported by the
finally satisfies National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY-1620555
and the final stages under Grant No. PHY-1915130. In
  addition, J.K.F. was supported by the McDevitt bequest at
1 1 p 2
/n ðpÞ ¼ ffin Hn pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ep =2hx0 m :
1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Georgetown University. The authors thank W. N. Mathews
ðp hx0 mÞ4 n!2 hx0 m
Jr., for a critical reading of the manuscript and Manuel
(67) Weber for the translation of the sections of the original 1930
German textbook of Born and Jordan cited below. The
Aside from some different constants, the coordinate-space authors also thank Takami Tohyama for the help with
and momentum-space wavefunctions have identical func- determining the original Japanese reference to Tomanaga’s
tional forms. This is expected from the outset, because the textbook and Andrij Shvaika for the help with the reference
Hamiltonian is quadratic in both momentum and position. to Fock’s original textbook.
Hence, the wavefunctions must be isomorphic.
This ends our algebraic derivation of the wavefunctions of a)
Electronic mail: [email protected]
b)
the simple harmonic oscillator. Note that it used only the Electronic mail: [email protected]
1
commutator ½^ x ; p^ ¼ ih and the existence of eigenstates of Arno B€ ohm, Quantum Mechanics Foundations and Applications, 3rd ed.
position at the origin and of the ground state of the simple (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993).
2
Eugen Merzbacher, Quantum Mechanics (Wiley, New York, 1961).
harmonic oscillator. We hope that you will try employing it 3
J. Alexander Jacoby, Maurice Curran, David R. Wolf, and James K.
the next time you teach a quantum mechanics class. If you Freericks, “Proving the existence of bound states for attractive potentials
do, we recommend having the students work out the in one and two dimensions without calculus,” Eur. J. Phys. 40, 045404
momentum-dependent wavefunctions as a homework prob- (2019).
4
lem after being shown the derivation of the coordinate-space Herbert S. Green, Matrix Mechanics (P. Noordhoff Ltd., Groningen,
Netherlands, 1965).
wavefunctions. 5
Hans C. Ohanian, Principles of Quantum Mechanics (Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1990).
6
IV. CONCLUSION Erwin Schr€ odinger, “A Method of Determining Quantum-Mechanical
Eigenvalues and Eigenfunctions,” Proc. R. Irish Acad. A 46, 9–16
The simple harmonic oscillator is generally viewed as one (1940–1941). https://www.jstor.org/stable/20490744.
7
of the most important problems in quantum mechanics. The P. A. M. Dirac, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 1st ed. (Oxford U.
operator-based solution of the energy eigenvalues and eigen- P., London, 1930).
8
P. A. M. Dirac, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 3rd ed. (Oxford U.
states (along with the abstract methodology used to evaluate P., London, 1947).
matrix elements) is often the highlight of a quantum- 9
Ernest Ikenberry, Quantum Mechanics for Mathematicians and Physicists
mechanics course. In this work, we tweaked the derivation (Oxford U. P., New York, 1962).
10
of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors to put them in a more Max Jammer, The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics
standard approach motivated by the Schr€odinger factoriza- (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1966).
11
Masayuki Nagasaki and Mituo Taketani, The Formation and Logic of
tion methods instead of Dirac’s 1947 derivation. In addition,
Quantum Mechanics (World Scientific, Singapore, 2001).
we extended the operator-based method to also allow for an 12
Jagdish Mehra and Helmut Rechenberg, The Historical Development of
abstract derivation of the wavefunctions in coordinate and Quantum Theory (Springer-Verlag, Inc., New York, 1982).
13
position space. This approach employed the translation Robert D. Purrington, The Heroic Age (Oxford U. P., New York, 2018).

984 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 88, No. 11, November 2020 M. Rushka and J. K. Freericks 984
14 39
Max Born and Pascual Jordan, Elementare Quantenmechanik (Julius Sin-Itiro Tomonaga, Quantum Mechanics (Misuzu-Shobo, Tokyo, 1953),
Springer, Berlin, 1930). Vol. II (in Japanese).
15 €
Werner Heisenberg, “Uber quantentheoretische Umdeutung kinematischer 40
David Bohm, Quantum Theory (Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs,
und mechanischer Beziehungen,” Z. Phys. 33, 879–893 (1925). New Jersey, 1951).
16 41
Max Born and Pascual Jordan, “Zur Quantenmechanik,” Z. Phys. 34, L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Quantum Mechanics: Non-Relativistic
858–888 (1925). Theory (Pergamon Press, Elmsford, New York, 1958).
17 42
Erwin Schr€odinger, “Quantisierung als Eigenwertproblem II,” Ann. Phys. Albert Messiah, M ecanique Quantique (Dunod, Paris, 1959).
43
(Leipzig) 384, 489–527 (1926). Robert H. Dicke and James P. Wittke, Introduction to Quantum
18
ian J. R. Aitchison, David A. MacManus, and Thomas M. Snyder, Mechanics (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1960).
44
“Understanding Heisenberg’s ‘magical’ paper of July 1925: A new look at John L. Powell and Bernd Crasemann, Quantum Mechanics (Addison-
the calculational details,” Am. J. Phys. 72, 1370–1379 (2004). Wesley, Reading, MA, 1961).
19 45
P. A. M. Dirac, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 2nd ed. (Oxford U. Louis Harris and Arthur L. Loeb, Introduction to Wave Mechanics
P., London, 1935). (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963).
20 46
George Birtwistle, The New Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge U. P., David Park, Introduction to the Quantum Theory (McGraw-Hill, New
Cambridge, 1928). York, 1964).
21 47
P. A. M. Dirac, “The quantum theory of the emission and absorption of Kurt Gottfried, Quantum Mechanics (Benjamin/Cummings, Reading, MA,
radiation,” Proc. R. Soc. A (London) 114, 243–265 (1927). 1966).
22 48
Pascual Jordan, “Zur quantenmechanik der gasentartung,” Z. Phys. 44, J. M. Ziman, Elements of Advanced Quantum Theory (Cambridge U. P.,
473–480 (1927). Cambridge, 1969).
23 49
Vladimir Fock, “Konfigurationsraum und zweite quantelung,” Z. Phys. 75, Siegfried Fl€ ugge, Practical Quantum Mechanics I (Springer-Verlag,
622–647 (1932). Berlin, 1971).
24 50
P. A. M. Dirac, “The fundamental equations of quantum mechanics,” David S. Saxon, Elementary Quantum Mechanics (Holden-Day, San
Proc. R. Soc. A (London) 109, 642–653 (1925). Francisco, 1968).
25
Fritz London, “Uber € die Jacobischen transformationen der 51
Gordon Baym, Lectures on Quantum Mechanics (Benjamin/Cummings,
quantenmechanik,” Z. Phys. 37, 915–925 (1926). Menlo Park, CA, 1969).
26 52
Edward U. Condon and Philip M. Morse, Quantum Mechanics (McGraw- Stephen Gasiorowicz, Quantum Physics (Wiley, New York, 1974).
53
Hill, New York, 1929). Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Bernard Diu, and Franck Lalo€e, Quantum
27
N. F. Mott, An Outline of Wave Mechanics (Cambridge U. P., Cambridge, Mechanics (Hermann, Paris, 1977).
54
1930). RolfG. Winter, Quantum Physics (Wadsworth, Inc., Belmont, CA, 1979).
28
Arnold Sommerfeld, Wave-Mechanics, translated by Henry L. Bose 55
Wolfgang Pauli, “Uber€ das Wasserstoffspektrum vom Standpunkt der
(Methuen & Co., London, 1930). neuen quantenmechanik,” Z. Phys. 36, 336–363 (1926).
29 56
Vladimir Fock, Fundamentals of Quantum Mechanics (Kubuch, P. A. M. Dirac, “The elimination of the nodes in quantum mechanics,”
Leningrad, 1932) (in Russian). Proc. R. Soc. A (London) 111, 281–305 (1926). https://www.jstor.org/
30
J. Frenkel, Wave Mechanics: Elementary Theory (Clarendon Press, stable/94682.
57
Oxford, 1932). R€udiger Achilles and Andrea Bonfiglioli, “The early proofs of the theorem
31
Wolfgang Pauli, “Die allgemeinen prinzipien der wellenmechanik,” in of Campbell, Baker, Hausdorff, and Dynkin,” Arch. Hist. Exact Sci. 66,
Handbuch Der Physik, Ser., edited by H. Geiger and Karl Scheel, Part 1: 295–358 (2012).
58
Quantentheorie Vol. 24, edited A. Smekal (Julius Springer, Berlin, 1933). H. F. Baker, “On the exponential theorem for a simply transitive continu-
32
J. Frenkel, Wave Mechanics: Advanced General Theory (Clarendon Press, ous group, and the calculation of the finite equations from the constants of
Oxford, 1934). structure,” Proc. London Math. Soc. 34, 91–129 (1901); H. F. Baker, “On
33
Linus Pauling and E. Bright Wilson, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics the calculation of the finite equations of a continuous group,” ibid. s1-35,
(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1935). 332–333 (1902).
34 59
Pascual Jordan, Anschauliche Quantentheorie (Julius Springer, Berlin, J. E. Campbell, “On a law of combination of operators bearing on the the-
1936). ory of continuous transformation groups,” Proc. London Math. Soc. s1-28,
35
Edwin C. Kemble, The Fundamental Principles of Quantum Mechanics 381–390 (1896); J. E. Campbell, “On a Law of Combination of Operators
(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1937). (Second Paper)*,” ibid. s1-29, 14–32 (1897).
36 60
Saul Dushman, The Elements of Quantum Mechanics (Wiley, New York, F. Hausdorff, “Die symbolische exponentialformel in der gruppentheorie,”
1938). Ber. Verh. Saechs Akad. Wiss. (Leipzig) 58, 19–48 (1906).
37 61
Vladimir Rojansky, Introductory Quantum Mechanics (Prentice-Hall, Inc., E. B. Dynkin, “Calculation of the coefficients in the Campbell-Hausdorff
New York, 1938). formula,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 57, 323–326 (1947) (in Russian).
38 62
Leonard Schiff, Quantum Mechanics, 1st ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, Ravinder R. Puri, Non-Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge U. P.,
1949). Cambridge, 2017); the derivation of the BCH formula is in Chap. 2.8.

985 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 88, No. 11, November 2020 M. Rushka and J. K. Freericks 985