B Adjoint Operation in Shankar's "Principles of Quantum Mechanics

Getterdog
Messages
83
Reaction score
6
TL;DR Summary
Confused
In R Shankar text on “principles of quantum mechanics’ discussing the adjoint operation, 1.3.8 shows that a|V> => <V|a*. Then 1.3.9 then states

that <aV| = <V|a*. Is this a typo error?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Getterdog said:
Summary:: Confused

In R Shankar text on “principles of quantum mechanics’ discussing the adjoint operation, 1.3.8 shows that a|V> => <V|a*. Then 1.3.9 then states

that <aV| = <V|a*. Is this a typo error?
It might help if you were more explicit about what all these symbols mean. For example, what does this mean?
$$a|V \rangle \ \Rightarrow \ \langle V|a^*$$
 
PeroK said:
It might help if you were more explicit about what all these symbols mean. For example, what does this mean?
$$a|V \rangle \ \Rightarrow \ \langle V|a^*$$
Well.a is a complex number, <v| is a row vector, |V> is a column vector.
 
Getterdog said:
Well.a is a complex number, <v| is a row vector, |V> is a column vector.
Ah! When you said "adjoint operation" I thought ##V## was an operator. That makes sense.

I would say that ##\langle V|## is a bra and ##|V \rangle## is a ket.

It's not a typo. What are ##\langle aV|## and ##\langle V| a^*##? Before you can see they are equal you first have to understand fully what they are. Can you describe each precisely?
 
  • Like
Likes Getterdog
Getterdog said:
Well.a is a complex number, <v| is a row vector, |V> is a column vector.
And, I guess ##\Rightarrow## means "is associated with" via the mapping of kets to bra?

I would tend to write ##\leftrightarrow##, as it's a two-way association. But, if that's Shankar's notation, then stick with it.
 
Getterdog said:
a is a complex number

A complex number or an operator? I think it's the latter (since otherwise ##a^*## would not need to multiply the bra ##\langle V \vert## from the right).
 
PeterDonis said:
A complex number or an operator? I think it's the latter (since otherwise ##a^*## would not need to multiply the bra ##\langle V \vert## from the right).

I think I've seen that convention where complex scalars are shown on the right of bras.
 
He states that a is a scalar. And I presume complex.
 
PeroK said:
Ah! When you said "adjoint operation" I thought ##V## was an operator. That makes sense.

I would say that ##\langle V|## is a bra and ##|V \rangle## is a ket.

It's not a typo. What are ##\langle aV|## and ##\langle V| a^*##? Before you can see they are equal you first have to understand fully what they are. Can you describe each precisely?
Inside the bra ,<aV |would be a complex scalar times V which is presumed to be the complex conjugate in row form of some other vector v in column form. Since complex multiplication is communitive, I assume <Va| is the same. I’m not clear why taking the a outside of the bra,creates the scalars complex conjugate
 
  • #10
Getterdog said:
Inside the bra ,<aV |would be a complex scalar times V which is presumed to be the complex conjugate in row form of some other vector v in column form. Since complex multiplication is communitive, I assume <Va| is the same. I’m not clear why taking the a outside of the bra,creates the scalars complex conjugate
##\langle aV |## is the bra associated with the ket ##|aV \rangle##

If you don't immediately see that, just let ##U = aV##.

And, what can you now say about ##|aV \rangle##?
 
  • #11
PeroK said:
##\langle aV |## is the bra associated with the ket ##|aV \rangle##

If you don't immediately see that, just let ##U = aV##.

And, what can you now say about ##|aV \rangle##?
Ok, doesn’t that mean that in <aV|, both a and V are complex conjugates of |aV> ?
 
  • #12
Getterdog said:
Ok, doesn’t that mean that in <aV|, both a and V are complex conjugates of |aV> ?
Complex conjugate applies only to complex numbers. You don't have the complex conjugate of a ket.

Let me explain this then.

First, as I already said: ##\langle aV |## is the bra associated with the ket ##|aV \rangle##

And, we know that ##|aV \rangle = a |V \rangle##.

Then, we know from your original post that the bra associated with ##a |V \rangle## is ##\langle V|a^*##.

Putting this all together we have: ##\langle aV | = \langle V|a^*##

Note that bras and kets are intended to form the inner product, which in QM is linear in the second argument. In other words we have:
$$\langle V|aU \rangle = a \langle V|U \rangle \ \text{and} \ \langle aV|U \rangle = a^* \langle V|U \rangle$$
And that's another reason that when you take a complex scalar outside of a bra you get its complex conjugate.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes PeterDonis
  • #13
Getterdog said:
Ok, doesn’t that mean that in <aV|, both a and V are complex conjugates of |aV> ?
Yep got the obvious,, now. I guess my confusion what why it’s not marked inside the bra as it is outside. Presumably to avoid confusion when doing further inner product calculation. I seems obvious now. I feel stupid! Thanks
 
  • #14
PeroK said:
Complex conjugate applies only to complex numbers. You don't have the complex conjugate of a ket.

Let me explain this then.

First, as I already said: ##\langle aV |## is the bra associated with the ket ##|aV \rangle##

And, we know that ##|aV \rangle = a |V \rangle##.

Then, we know from your original post that the bra associated with ##a |V \rangle## is ##\langle V|a^*##.

Putting this all together we have: ##\langle aV | = \langle V|a^*##

Note that bras and kets are intended to form the inner product, which in QM is linear in the second argument. In other words we have:
$$\langle V|aU \rangle = a \langle V|U \rangle \ \text{and} \ \langle aV|U \rangle = a^* \langle V|U \rangle$$
And that's another reason that when you take a complex scalar outside of a bra you get its complex conjugate.
Yep,got it now. Thanks.your last equation clears it up.
 
Back
Top