Additional understanding needed on proof involving Hermitian conjugates

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TheFerruccio
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hermitian Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding a proof involving Hermitian conjugates as presented in Griffith's Introduction to Quantum Mechanics. Participants explore the mathematical steps and reasoning behind integration by parts in the context of quantum mechanics operators, specifically focusing on the implications of boundary conditions and the manipulation of complex conjugates in integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the application of integration by parts, particularly how the transition from one integral form to another is justified.
  • Another participant suggests that the functions involved vanish at the boundaries, which is crucial for the integration by parts process.
  • There is a discussion about the movement of the complex conjugate symbol (*) during the proof, with one participant questioning the order of operations in the integrals.
  • One participant provides an example of an integral involving Hermitian operators and attempts to clarify the manipulation of terms within the integral.
  • Another participant mentions issues with LaTeX formatting, suggesting that certain formatting problems may arise from specific character limits in the forum software.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the importance of boundary conditions in integration by parts but express differing levels of understanding regarding the manipulation of terms and the application of Hermitian conjugates. The discussion remains unresolved as participants continue to seek clarity on specific steps in the proof.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential misunderstandings of the operators involved, the handling of complex conjugates, and the specific assumptions about the behavior of functions at infinity. There are unresolved mathematical steps that participants are attempting to clarify.

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:

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

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

[itex]\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[/itex]

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 [itex]\int f^*(\frac{dg}{dx})dx[/itex] to [itex]-\int(\frac{df}{dx})^*gdx[/itex]

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 [itex]g'[/itex] be the thing you integrate during integration by parts, and [itex]f^{*}[/itex] 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 [itex]g'[/itex] be the thing you integrate during integration by parts, and [itex]f^{*}[/itex] 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 [itex]\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[/itex]

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:

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

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

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

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:

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

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

[itex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}{\psi_n}^*a\mp a\pm\psi_n dx[/itex] ?
 
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
[tex] \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}(f^* \frac{\partial g}{\partial x} + f^* x g)dx[/tex]
Let [itex]u=f^*[/itex] and [itex]v'=g'[/itex]. Then using integration by parts
[tex] uv-\int u'v=\int uv'[/tex]
we can see that
[tex] \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f^* \frac{\partial g}{\partial x} dx=f^* g |_{-\infty}^{\infty}-\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{\partial f^{*}}{\partial x} g dx[/tex]
but what are [itex]f, g[/itex] at infinity? The result follows.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K