Confusion Regarding a Spectral Decomposition

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the spectral decomposition of an operator in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing the formulation and interpretation of the equation representing the operator in terms of its matrix elements. Participants seek clarification on the validity and derivation of the spectral decomposition, as well as the relationship between operators and their matrix representations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the spectral decomposition and requests an explanation.
  • Another participant asserts that the original equation presented is nonsensical, providing a corrected form of the operator in terms of its matrix elements.
  • Several participants discuss the mapping from operators to matrix elements, emphasizing the completeness relation and its role in the derivation of the spectral decomposition.
  • There is a reiteration of the relationship between the operator and its matrix elements, with examples provided to illustrate the calculations involved.
  • Participants engage in a back-and-forth regarding the derivation of the equality relating the operator to its matrix representation, with some confirming the validity of the steps involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the initial equation presented, with some participants contesting its validity and others providing corrections. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of the spectral decomposition and the clarity of the initial claims.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the completeness relation and the properties of orthonormal bases, but there are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions and context of the operator and its matrix elements.

ARoyC
Messages
56
Reaction score
11
Hi. I am not being able to understand how we are getting the following spectral decomposition. It would be great if someone can explain it to me. Thank you in advance.
Screenshot 2023-07-07 145114.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's simply a non-sensical equation. On the one side you write down a matrix, depicting matrix elements of an operator and on the other the operator itself. Correct is
$$\hat{A}=v_3 |0 \rangle \langle 0| + (v_1-\mathrm{i} v_2) |0 \rangle \langle 1| + (v_1+\mathrm{i} v_2) |1 \rangle \langle 0| - v_3 |1 \rangle \langle 1|.$$
The matrix elements in your matrix are then taken with respect to the basis ##(|0 \rangle,|1 \rangle)##.
$$(A_{jk})=\langle j|\hat{A}|k \rangle, \quad j,k \in \{0,1 \}.$$
To see this, simply use ##\langle j|k \rangle=\delta_{jk}##. Then you get, e.g.,
$$A_{01}=\langle 0|\hat{A}|1 \rangle=v_1-\mathrm{i} v_2.$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: strangerep and dextercioby
vanhees71 said:
It's simply a non-sensical equation. On the one side you write down a matrix, depicting matrix elements of an operator and on the other the operator itself. Correct is
$$\hat{A}=v_3 |0 \rangle \langle 0| + (v_1-\mathrm{i} v_2) |0 \rangle \langle 1| + (v_1+\mathrm{i} v_2) |1 \rangle \langle 0| - v_3 |1 \rangle \langle 1|.$$
The matrix elements in your matrix are then taken with respect to the basis ##(|0 \rangle,|1 \rangle)##.
$$(A_{jk})=\langle j|\hat{A}|k \rangle, \quad j,k \in \{0,1 \}.$$
To see this, simply use ##\langle j|k \rangle=\delta_{jk}##. Then you get, e.g.,
$$A_{01}=\langle 0|\hat{A}|1 \rangle=v_1-\mathrm{i} v_2.$$
Oh! Then we can go to the LHS of the equation from the RHS. Can't we do the reverse?
 
Sure:
$$\hat{A}=\sum_{j,k} |j \rangle \langle j|\hat{A}|k \rangle \langle k| = \sum_{jk} A_{jk} |j \rangle \langle k|.$$
The mapping from operators to matrix elements with respect to a complete orthonormal system is one-to-one. As very many formal manipulations in QT, it's just using the completeness relation,
$$\sum_j |j \rangle \langle j|=\hat{1}.$$
 
vanhees71 said:
Sure:
$$\hat{A}=\sum_{j,k} |j \rangle \langle j|\hat{A}|k \rangle \langle k| = \sum_{jk} A_{jk} |j \rangle \langle k|.$$
The mapping from operators to matrix elements with respect to a complete orthonormal system is one-to-one. As very many formal manipulations in QT, it's just using the completeness relation,
$$\sum_j |j \rangle \langle j|=\hat{1}.$$
How are we getting the very first equality that is A = Σ|j><j|A|k><k| ?
 
$$\hat{A}=\hat{1}\hat{A}\hat{1}=\left(\sum_{j} |j \rangle \langle j|\right)\hat{A}\left(\sum_{k} |k \rangle \langle k|\right)=\sum_{j,k} |j \rangle \langle j|\hat{A}|k \rangle \langle k| = \sum_{jk} A_{jk} |j \rangle \langle k|.$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Haborix said:
$$\hat{A}=\hat{1}\hat{A}\hat{1}=\left(\sum_{j} |j \rangle \langle j|\right)\hat{A}\left(\sum_{k} |k \rangle \langle k|\right)=\sum_{j,k} |j \rangle \langle j|\hat{A}|k \rangle \langle k| = \sum_{jk} A_{jk} |j \rangle \langle k|.$$
Oh, okay, thanks a lot!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
692