Writing a random 2N by 2N matrix in terms of Pauli Matrices

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

A 2N by 2N Hermitian matrix can be expressed in the form H = A ⊗ I2×2 + B ⊗ σx + C ⊗ σy + D ⊗ σz, where A, B, C, and D are N by N Hermitian matrices, and σx, σy, σz are the Pauli matrices. This representation covers the entire 2N by 2N complex Hermitian space due to the completeness of the Pauli operators as a basis for two-dimensional Hilbert spaces. The proof involves expressing the operator in a specific basis and demonstrating that the Hermitian condition imposes constraints on A, B, C, and D, ensuring they remain Hermitian.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hermitian matrices and their properties
  • Familiarity with tensor products, specifically A ⊗ I2×2
  • Knowledge of Pauli matrices (σx, σy, σz) and their roles in quantum mechanics
  • Basic concepts of linear algebra and matrix representation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Hermitian matrices and their implications in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about tensor products and their applications in quantum state representation
  • Explore the completeness of the Pauli basis in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate proofs related to the representation of Hermitian matrices in terms of Pauli matrices
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, mathematicians specializing in linear algebra, and anyone involved in quantum computing or quantum information theory will benefit from this discussion.

sokrates
Messages
481
Reaction score
2
Hi,

Wasn't sure if I should post this to Linear Algebra or here.

My question is really simple:

Can a 2N by 2N random, and Hermitian Matrix ( Hamiltonian ) be always written as:

H = A \otimes I_{2\times 2} + B \otimes \sigma_x + C \otimes \sigma_y + D \otimes \sigma_z

where A,B,C,D are all N by N matrices, while the sigma's are the Pauli spin matrices.

My question is, as long as A,B,C,D are random and complex Hermitian matrices of size N by N, do I cover the
whole 2N by 2N complex Hermitian space with this representation?

If yes, do you know a reference, a theorem, or a simple proof of this?A very simple case is when N = 1 , and I know that any 2 x 2 complex , Hermitian matrix can be written as a linear combination of Pauli Matrices.

Many thanks,
sokrates.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, it is. It's just a matter of counting degrees of freedom
 
sokrates said:
My question is really simple:

Can a 2N by 2N random, and Hermitian Matrix ( Hamiltonian ) be always written as:

H = A \otimes I_{2\times 2} + B \otimes \sigma_x + C \otimes \sigma_y + D \otimes \sigma_z

where A,B,C,D are all N by N matrices, while the sigma's are the Pauli spin matrices.

Yes, because the Pauli operators form a basis of the set of operators acting on qubit (two-dimensional Hilbert) spaces. If you're not convinced then note that you can always write your operator in the form

H = A_{00} \otimes \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert + A_{01} \otimes \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert + A_{10} \otimes \lvert 1 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert + A_{11} \otimes \lvert 1 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert​

just by writing it out explicitly in some basis and collecting the terms in \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert, \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert, etc., and then substituting

\begin{eqnarray}<br /> \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert &amp;=&amp; \tfrac{1}{2} ( \mathbb{I} + \sigma_{z} ) \,, \\<br /> \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert &amp;=&amp; \tfrac{1}{2} ( \sigma_{x} + i \sigma_{y} ) \,, \\<br /> \lvert 1 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert &amp;=&amp; \tfrac{1}{2} ( \sigma_{x} - i \sigma_{y} ) \,, \\<br /> \lvert 1 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert &amp;=&amp; \tfrac{1}{2} ( \mathbb{I} - \sigma_{z} ) \,.<br /> \end{eqnarray}​

This works for any operator. If H happens to be Hermitian then this imposes additional constraints. For instance, as you pointed out, the A, B, C, and D from your post must also be Hermitian in that case.
 
Hi , Thank you for the responses ... However, I still don't understand it from a matrix point of view.

Let's take N = 2 , and have a 4x4 H matrix ... can one prove that my representation will always cover the full space ?

I didn't follow it from the Dirac notation,

Many thanks for responses.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K