Associativity problem with observables

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zetafunction
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    observables
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the associativity problem with non-commuting observables in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing the expression (A x B) x C versus A x (B x C). It is established that non-commutativity does not equate to non-associativity, as demonstrated by non-Abelian groups and matrices, which maintain associative properties despite non-commuting elements. The confusion arises from the implications of non-commutativity in quantum mechanics, but it is clarified that associative operations can still be valid.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly observables
  • Familiarity with non-commuting operators in quantum theory
  • Knowledge of non-Abelian groups and their properties
  • Basic linear algebra, specifically matrix operations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of non-Abelian groups in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the implications of non-commuting observables on quantum measurements
  • Learn about matrix representations of quantum operators
  • Investigate the role of associativity in quantum mechanics and its mathematical foundations
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, mathematicians specializing in linear algebra, and students studying quantum mechanics who seek to understand the implications of non-commuting observables and their associative properties.

zetafunction
Messages
371
Reaction score
0
let be A , B and C three non-commuting observables

my question is how can one solve the problem with associative property ? i mean

[tex](AxB)xC[/tex] will in general be different from [tex]Ax(BxC)[/tex]

and if we had 4 A, B ,C ,D instead of three the problem is even worse , how can anyone deal with it ?? i mean since the observable do not commute and we can not apply the associative property is there any ambiguity in QM ?? or similar ??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Non-commutativity does not imply non-associativity, so I do not really see your problem here... (for example a non-Abelian group is still associative; the same goes for matrices).
 

Similar threads

Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K