Additional understanding needed on proof involving Hermitian conjugates

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheFerruccio
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hermitian Proof
TheFerruccio
Messages
216
Reaction score
0
I encountered this part in Griffith's Introduction to Quantum Mechanics that I have been unable to figure out. It is probably obvious, but I am not seeing it. I probably need more practice with operators in order to have it fully understood.

Equation 2.64 in the second edition states:

\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}{f^*}(a_{\pm}g)dx = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}(a_{\mp}f)^*gdx

It starts out by making the substitution where a_\pm = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\hbar m\omega}}(\mp\hbar\frac{d}{dx}+m\omega x)...

\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f^*(a_\pm g)dx=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\hbar m\omega}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f^*(\mp\hbar\frac{d}{dx}+m\omega x)gdx

From there, it states that the integrals must exist, which means that f(x) and g(x) must go to zero. This makes sense, since what is being done is normalizing, and a normalizable function must have values of 0 at the extrema.

What I don't understand is the next step, whereby it states that integration by parts takes \int f^*(\frac{dg}{dx})dx to -\int(\frac{df}{dx})^*gdx

How did they arrive at this? I tried writing it out, but I think I am not dealing with the operators correctly. What are the steps to arrive at this conclusion? It says that it has to do with the fact that the function values at the extrema disappear, but I am not seeing it when I write it out. It just ends up getting messy. The book skips over these steps, but I always include the explicit steps in my notes.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let g' be the thing you integrate during integration by parts, and f^{*} the thing you differentiate. Then remember exactly what you said earlier, that these functions (g, f) are zero at the bounds of integration...
 
jfy4 said:
Let g' be the thing you integrate during integration by parts, and f^{*} the thing you differentiate. Then remember exactly what you said earlier, that these functions (g, f) are zero at the bounds of integration...

I think I am starting to see it.

I took \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f^*(\mp\hbar\frac{d}{dx}+m\omega x)gdx = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f^*\mp\hbar\frac{dg}{dx}dx+\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f^*(m\omega x)dx

That allows me to continue on to the final part of the proof. Thanks!

However, one thing I do not understand, is how the * moves about during the proof.

For instance, when I used the integrals, I was able to arrive at:

\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\hbar m\omega}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}(\pm\hbar g(\frac{df}{dx})^*+f^*m\omega xg)dx

But, I do not see how I am to go from there to...

\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\hbar m\omega}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}((\pm\hbar\frac{d}{dx}+m\omega x)f)^*gdx

Also, wow, my LaTeX is breaking for me. I don't see what I'm doing wrong that's causing the crazy errors. I'm getting lots of W's with lines through them, in boxes.

Anyway, in hopes that the LaTeX doesn't break again, here's another example of my confusion:

\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}(a_\pm\psi_n)^*(a_\pm\psi_n)dx = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}(a_\mp a_\pm\psi_n)^*\psi_n dx

I am absolutely not seeing why the * orders that way. Why can't it be...

\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}{\psi_n}^*a\mp a\pm\psi_n dx ?
 
Last edited:
TheFerruccio said:
Also, wow, my LaTeX is breaking for me. I don't see what I'm doing wrong that's causing the crazy errors.
The two broken LaTeX formulas both contain an expression of the form
Code:
\frac{A}{\sqrt{B}
That seems to be the only problem here. In case you're not aware of the 50 character bug, you also need to know that if you type 50 characters without a space, vBulletin will insert one that usually breaks the code. The workaround is to type more spaces.

I also recommend tex tags instead of itex when you want the math image to appear on a line of its own. (When you use tex tags, don't type any line breaks before and after. If you want a comma or a period at the end, put it before the closing tex tag).
 
Consider
<br /> \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}(f^* \frac{\partial g}{\partial x} + f^* x g)dx<br />
Let u=f^* and v&#039;=g&#039;. Then using integration by parts
<br /> uv-\int u&#039;v=\int uv&#039;<br />
we can see that
<br /> \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f^* \frac{\partial g}{\partial x} dx=f^* g |_{-\infty}^{\infty}-\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{\partial f^{*}}{\partial x} g dx<br />
but what are f, g at infinity? The result follows.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top