Commutator Algebra Homework: Analyzing Functions of Operators

  • Thread starter Thread starter helpcometk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra Commutator
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the analysis of analytic functions of operators, specifically focusing on the function g(x) = exp(xA)Bexp(-xA) and its derivatives at x=0. The problem involves understanding the implications of operator algebra and Taylor expansions in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the meaning of evaluating derivatives of operator functions at x=0 and question how to manipulate the commutator in the context of Taylor expansions. There is also discussion about the application of the product rule and chain rule in operator calculus.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided hints regarding the properties of matrix multiplication and the use of the product rule. Others have expressed confusion about the notation and the implications of the derivatives, leading to clarifications about the correct interpretation of the problem.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of fatigue affecting participants' understanding, which may influence the clarity of their contributions. The discussion also highlights the need for a deeper exploration of the relationships between the operators involved.

helpcometk
Messages
71
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Analytic functions of operators (matrices) A are defined via their Taylor expansion about A=0 .Consider the function

g(x) = exp(xA)Bexp(-xA)

Compute : dng(x) /dxn |x=0
for integer n

and then show that :exp(A)Bexp(-A)= B+[A,B] +1/2 [A,[A,B]] +1/6[A,[A,[A,B]]]+ ...

Homework Equations



for the first part of the question i don't understand what x=0 means in the formalism and it is unclear how one should proceed ,because we are dealing with operators.

about the second part i would like to note that :

g(1) =g(0) +g'(0) +1/2 g''(0)+ ...
if A=0 e^0 =1 and we start with B in the expansion formula

The Attempt at a Solution



About the first part i cannot imagine how i could proceed ,but about the second question i think we must use somehow a taylor expansion to resemble the monsterous expression of the RHS. But what i can't see is how one should manipulate [A,B], how could this come from a taylor expansion of the exponential ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
x is a scalar. Some hints:
  • Matrix multiplication is transitive, but not necessarily commutative. That the latter is the case is the point of the commutator.
  • The chain rule still works as expected with your dg(x)/dx. You will either need to show this or cite the relevant theorem from your text/lectures.
  • For any square matrix A, exp(A) commutes with An for all nonnegative integers n. Once again, you will either need to show this or cite the relevant passage.
  • What is [itex]\frac{d}{dx} \exp(xA)[/itex]?
 
If chain rule is correct ,then i would have that the derivative is equal to 0 ,right?
about the second part do i just take the taylor expansions of both exponentials and mmultiply them ?
 
helpcometk said:
If chain rule is correct ,then i would have that the derivative is equal to 0 ,right?
No! You apparently don't understand the notation.

helpcometk said:
Compute : dng(x) /dxn |x=0
This means you are to compute the value of the nth derivative of g with respect to x at x=0. It says nothing about the derivative being zero.
D H said:
The chain rule still works as expected with your dg(x)/dx. You will either need to show this or cite the relevant theorem from your text/lectures.
Ooops. My bad. Sorry about that. I meant product rule, not chain rule.
 
I understand the notation ,but I am very tired because i don't sleep overnight and i make a mistake ,
so we have :
dng(x) /dxn = -2xAg(x) ,do you agree with this ?
 
helpcometk said:
I understand the notation ,but I am very tired because i don't sleep overnight and i make a mistake ,
so we have :
dng(x) /dxn = -2xAg(x) ,do you agree with this ?
Sorry for the very late response. I didn't see that you had added a post until just now.

No, I don't agree with that. Let's start with [itex]dg/dx[/itex]. Applying the product rule (which is still valid because matrix multiplication is associative),
[tex]\begin{align}<br /> \frac {d\,g(x)}{dx} &= \frac d {dx} \bigl(\exp(xA)\,B\,\exp(-xA)\bigr) \\<br /> &= \frac{d\exp(xA)}{dx}\,B\,\exp(-xA) +<br /> \exp(xA)\,B\,\frac{d\exp(-xA)}{dx}<br /> \end{align}[/tex]
The key challenge is to evaluate [itex]d\exp(xA)/dx[/itex]. Using the fact that [itex]A[/itex] and [itex]\exp(xA)[/itex] commute (show this!), you can reduce the derivative to something of the form
[tex] \frac {d\,g(x)}{dx} = \exp(xA)\,C\,\exp(-xA)[/tex]
where [itex]C[/itex] is some matrix. The question itself suggests a form for this matrix: It has to somehow involve the commutator. (Hint: It is the commutator.) See if you can get to that. With this, getting [itex]d^ng/dx^n[/itex] should be a snap.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K