Hi,(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

in the text I am reading I found the following implicit definition of an adjoint transformation:

[tex]\overline{f}( \textbf{a}) \ast \textbf{b} = \textbf{a} \ast f(\textbf{b})[/tex]

then it is said that [tex]\overline{f^{-1}} = (\overline{f})^{-1}[/tex]. Basically the inverse and ajoint are interchangeable, and this property is (supposed to be) easily shown from the definition above.

Unfortunately I have problems figuring out how to prove it. Any ideas?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Adjoint transformation (inverse)

Loading...

Similar Threads - Adjoint transformation inverse | Date |
---|---|

A Hilbert-adjoint operator vs self-adjoint operator | Jan 24, 2018 |

I Doubt about proof on self-adjoint operators. | Nov 11, 2017 |

I Normal but not self-adjoint | Apr 19, 2016 |

I Adjoint representation and the generators | Apr 14, 2016 |

Spectral theorem for self-adjoint linear transformations | Feb 22, 2010 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**