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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the effect of the operator $\widehat{R} \equiv \Pi_i \left( \widehat{Q} -q_i \right)$ on an arbitrary state $\Psi$, given a basis set of states $\varphi_i$ and the condition $\widehat{Q} \varphi_i = q_i \varphi_i$. Participants explore the manipulation of indices and the implications of commuting operators in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confidence that the result of applying the operator $\widehat{R}$ to the state $\Psi$ is zero but struggles with the index manipulation required to demonstrate this.
  • Another participant suggests that the commutation of the operators $(\widehat{Q}-q_i)$ may simplify the computation, although this does not provide a clear path forward for the original poster.
  • A later reply proposes expressing the state $\Psi$ as a sum over the basis states and outlines a series of steps to compute $\hat{R} \, \Psi$, leading to a product involving the differences $(q_j - q_i)$.
  • There is a concern raised about the convergence of the series and whether the result indeed approaches zero, indicating uncertainty in the final outcome.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the result of applying the operator $\widehat{R}$ to the state $\Psi$ is definitively zero. There is ongoing uncertainty regarding the manipulation of indices and the convergence of the series involved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations related to the assumptions of convergence and the handling of infinite products, which remain unresolved.

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