I bra-ket with adjoints identity

nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,758
Reaction score
245
TL;DR
I thought that, if B is the adjoint of A, <v|A|w>=<v|(A|w>)=<(v|B)|w>. But a simple example with real matrices trips me up.
Continuing the summary: the example in question is
adjoint.png

Obviously I am understanding some extremely elementary point incorrectly. What? Many thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The correct equation is:
$$\langle v|A|w\rangle = \langle w|A^{\dagger}|v \rangle^*$$
 
nomadreid said:
TL;DR Summary: I thought that, if B is the adjoint of A, <v|A|w>=<v|(A|w>)=<(v|B)|w>. But a simple example with real matrices trips me up.

Continuing the summary: the example in question is
View attachment 357730
Obviously I am understanding some extremely elementary point incorrectly. What? Many thanks!
The formula is
$$
\bigl\langle A(x),y \bigr\rangle = \bigl\langle x, A^\dagger (y) \bigr\rangle .
$$

This means for your example with ##x=(0,1)## and ##y=(3,4)## that
\begin{align*}
\bigl\langle A(x),y \bigr\rangle &=\bigl\langle \begin{pmatrix}1&2\\3&4\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}0\\1\end{pmatrix}\, , \,\begin{pmatrix}3\\4\end{pmatrix} \bigr\rangle =\bigl\langle \begin{pmatrix}2\\4\end{pmatrix}\, , \,\begin{pmatrix}3\\4\end{pmatrix} \bigr\rangle =22\\[12pt]
\bigl\langle x , A^\dagger (y)\bigr\rangle &= \bigl\langle \begin{pmatrix}0\\1\end{pmatrix}\, , \,\begin{pmatrix}1&3\\2&4\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}3\\4\end{pmatrix} \bigr\rangle =\bigl\langle \begin{pmatrix}0\\1\end{pmatrix}\, , \,\begin{pmatrix}15\\22\end{pmatrix} \bigr\rangle =22
\end{align*}
or the other way around
$$
\bigl\langle A^\dagger (x),y \bigr\rangle = \bigl\langle x, A(y) \bigr\rangle =25 .
$$
What you have calculated was the associativity of matrix multiplication with two different matrices:
##XAY \neq_{i.g.} XA^\dagger Y.##
 
  • Like
Likes nomadreid and PeroK
Many,many thanks, PeroK and fresh42!
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K