| Thread Closed |
Hermite but not observable |
Share Thread | Thread Tools |
| Feb26-10, 02:35 PM | #52 |
|
|
Hermite but not observable |
| Feb26-10, 05:40 PM | #53 |
|
Recognitions:
|
like "X is a subspace of V", I've been tacitly assuming X the same kind of space as whatever V is. I.e., if V is a vector space, then X is also a vector space, or if V is a Hilbert space, then X is also a Hilbert space, etc. But I probably shouldn't be assuming that's what you meant. Such ambiguity is probably the source of any misunderstandings. |
| Feb26-10, 06:01 PM | #54 |
|
Mentor
|
You're right, I didn't think about the fact that a "subspace" of a Hilbert space should be complete. I meant subspace in the vector space sense. I'm a bit busy right now, so I haven't had time to think about how or if that changes the stuff I said.
|
| Feb27-10, 07:42 PM | #55 |
|
|
Hi.
Let A and B be each Hermitian and OBSERVABLE in the sense that whose eigensubspaces contain all the maximal orthogonal sets, i.e. basis. A+B is Hermite. Is A+B OBSERVABLE? e.g. X + h' P^-1. Can any Hermitian be diagonalized? Regards. |
| Feb27-10, 08:12 PM | #56 |
|
Mentor
|
I assume that you're trying to say that there's a basis for the Hilbert space that only contains eigenvectors of the operator. (If you're going to talk about eigenspaces, you'll have to say that the direct sum of the eigenspaces is the entire Hilbert space).
If the above is true for A and B separately, is it also true for A+B? Yes, it is, because A+B is hermitian too. (And for the record, I still think that's a bad definition of "observable"). |
| Feb27-10, 10:14 PM | #57 |
|
|
Hi, Fredrik. Thank you so much.
With help of your teachings I could confirm that Hamiltonian of a particle in any artificial potential, say H=P^2/2m + V(X), has eigenstates and is OBSERVABLE whatever V(X) is. Regards. |
| Feb27-10, 11:53 PM | #58 |
|
Mentor
|
Yes. H must be hermitian because exp(-iHt) must be unitary.
|
| Mar1-10, 07:53 AM | #59 |
|
|
Hi.
I still have a little concern on the description below. But I cannot imagine an operator that is Hermitian but not OBSERVABLE i.e. the direct sum of whose eigensubspaces is the whole space. Now I stop wondering about this subject. Thanks a lot to you all. ![]() In 9.2, Mathematical Methods for Physicists, George Arfken ------------------------------------------------------ 1. The eigenvalues of an Hermite operator are real. 2. The eigen functins of an Hermite operator are orthogonal. 3. The eigen functins of an Hermite operator form a complete set.* * This third property is not universal. It does hold for our linear, second order differential operators in Strum-Liouville (self adjoint) form. ------------------------------------------------------ |
| Thread Closed |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads for: Hermite but not observable
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | ||
| Hermite polynomials | Calculus | 1 | ||
| Hermite Polynomials | Advanced Physics Homework | 9 | ||
| Hermite Polynomials. | Calculus | 4 | ||
| hermite polynomials | General Math | 3 | ||
| Hermite Polynomials | Advanced Physics Homework | 0 | ||