QM2 HM2
QM2 HM2
QM2 HM2
1. Parity is often treated as a mirror reflection. This is certainly true in 1 dimension, where
x → −x may be viewed as the effect of reflecting through a (point) mirror at the origin. In
three dimensions when we use a plane mirror (say lying on the x − y plane), only one (z)
coordinate gets reversed, whereas the parity transformation reverses all three coordinates.
Verify that reflection in a mirror in the x − y plane is the same as parity followed by a π
(180◦ ) rotation about the z axis. Since rotational invariance holds for weak interactions,
noninvariance under mirror reflection implies noninvariance under parity.
2. Let Td denote the translation operator (with displacement vector d); D(n̂, φ) the rotation
operator (n̂ and φ are the axis and angle of rotation, respectively); and π the parity operator.
Which, if any, of the following pairs commute? Why?
1
4. Because of weak (neutral-current) interactions there is a parity-violating potential between
the atomic electron and the nucleus as follows:
where S and p are the spin and momentum operators of the electron, and the nucleus is
assumed to be situated at the origin. As a result, the ground state of an alkali atom, usually
characterized by |n, l, j, mi actually contains very tiny contributions from other eigenstates
as follows:
X
|n, l, j, mi → |n, l, j, mi + Cn0 l0 j 0 m0 |n0 , l0 , j 0 , m0 i. (2)
n0 l0 j 0 m0
On the basis of symmetry considerations alone, what can you say about (n0 , l0 , j 0 , m0 ), which
give rise to nonvanishing contributions? Suppose the radial wave functions and the energy
levels are all known. Indicate how you may calculate Cn0 l0 j 0 m0 . Do we get further restrictions
on (n0 , l0 , j 0 , m0 )?