Calculating the effect of an operator on an arbitrary state

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Fantini
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator State
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the effect of the operator $\widehat{R} \equiv \Pi_i \left( \widehat{Q} - q_i \right)$ on an arbitrary state $\Psi$, given the condition $\widehat{Q} \varphi_i = q_i \varphi_i$. Participants assert that the result of applying $\widehat{R}$ to $\Psi$ should yield zero, contingent upon the commutation of operators $(\widehat{Q} - q_i)$ and the proper manipulation of indices. The final expression derived indicates that the product of differences $(q_j - q_i)$ leads to a result that confirms the conjecture of zero, assuming convergence is maintained throughout the operations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics operators and states
  • Familiarity with basis sets in Hilbert spaces
  • Knowledge of operator commutation relations
  • Experience with infinite series and convergence in mathematical analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of commuting operators in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about convergence criteria for infinite series in functional analysis
  • Explore the implications of basis expansion in quantum states
  • Investigate the application of the product rule in operator algebra
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, mathematicians specializing in functional analysis, and students studying operator theory in quantum mechanics will benefit from this discussion.

Fantini
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
267
Reaction score
0
Hello. I need help with the following:

Suppose a basis set of states $\varphi_i$. Calculate the effect of the operator $\widehat{R} \equiv \Pi_i \left( \widehat{Q} -q_i \right)$ on an arbitrary state $\Psi$, assuming that the equation $\widehat{Q} \varphi_i = q_i \varphi_i$ is satisfied.

I'm convinced that the answer is zero, but I don't know how to manipulate the indices to reflect that. I've calculated explicitly the cases for $n=2$ and $n=3$.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Fantini,

It may help to note that all of the operators $Q-q_{i}$ commute; i.e.
$$(Q-q_{i})(Q-q_{j})=(Q-q_{j})(Q-q_{i})$$
If we use this observation, I think we can avoid dealing with messy indices.

Does this help move things in the right direction? Let me know if anything is unclear/not quite right.
 
Hi GJA. This doesn't really point me somewhere. I'm still lost at how to do the abstract computation. I'm conjecturing the result holds only for a finite index.
 
You can write
$$\Psi=\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}a_j \, \varphi_j,$$
since $\{\varphi_j\}$ is a basis. Then compute
$$\hat{R} \, \Psi=\prod_{i=1}^{\infty}(\hat{Q}-q_i) \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}a_j \, \varphi_j.$$
Can you continue?
 
No, I can't. I tried that, but I don't know how to actually perform the product/distribution to show that it equals zero.
 
Ok, so we get
\begin{align*}
\hat{R} \, \Psi&=\prod_{i=1}^{\infty}(\hat{Q}-q_i) \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}a_j \, \varphi_j \\
&= \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}a_j \, \prod_{i=1}^{\infty}(\hat{Q}-q_i)\varphi_j \\
&=\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}a_j \, \prod_{i=1}^{\infty}(\hat{Q} \,\varphi_j-q_i \, \varphi_j) \\
&=\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}a_j \, \prod_{i=1}^{\infty}(q_j \,\varphi_j-q_i \, \varphi_j) \\
&=\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\prod_{i=1}^{\infty}(q_j -q_i ) \, a_j \, \varphi_j.
\end{align*}
This all assumes the necessary convergence so that we can switch the order of operations. Does the result look like zero?
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K