Conjugation , involving operators in Dirac Notation.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the adjoint of an operator in Dirac notation, specifically focusing on the operator P defined as P = |a>

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a question about finding the adjoint of the operator P = |a>
  • Another participant reiterates the definition of the adjoint operator and outlines the steps leading to the conclusion that Px = |b>
  • A later reply questions the transition from one mathematical expression to another, specifically regarding the rearrangement of products involving matrix elements.
  • Further clarification is provided that the terms involved in the expressions are indeed numbers, which allows for the rearrangement of products without resulting in a matrix.
  • One participant concludes that the understanding of the nature of the terms involved resolves their confusion regarding the manipulation of the expressions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing levels of understanding regarding the manipulation of bras and kets in the context of adjoint operators. While some clarify the mathematical steps, others remain uncertain about the implications of these manipulations, indicating that the discussion is not fully resolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the properties of complex conjugation and the nature of matrix elements, but there is some ambiguity regarding the implications of these properties when dealing with multiple pairs of bras and kets.

Somali_Physicist
Messages
117
Reaction score
13
In a PDF i was looking through i came about a question
for the operator P = |a><b|
find Px(adjoint)

the adjoint was defined as
<v|Px|u> = (<u|P|v>)* where u and v can be any bra and ket

now for the question:
(<u|a><b|v>)* = <v|Px|u>
this is the confusing step , i thought conjugated simply changed the bras and kets to the pair
e.g for (<a|c><d|b>)* = <c|a><b|d>
however the pdf states:
(<u|a><b|v>)* = <v|b><a|u>
hence the Px = |b><a|

I don't understand this , flipping it will confuse me for say 3 pairs.Does anyone have an explanation for this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Somali_Physicist said:
In a PDF i was looking through i came about a question
for the operator P = |a><b|
find Px(adjoint)

the adjoint was defined as
<v|Px|u> = (<u|P|v>)* where u and v can be any bra and ket

now for the question:
(<u|a><b|v>)* = <v|Px|u>
this is the confusing step , i thought conjugated simply changed the bras and kets to the pair
e.g for (<a|c><d|b>)* = <c|a><b|d>
however the pdf states:
(<u|a><b|v>)* = <v|b><a|u>
hence the Px = |b><a|

I don't understand this , flipping it will confuse me for say 3 pairs.Does anyone have an explanation for this.
'

I'm not sure what your point of confusion is.

  1. ##\langle v|P^\dagger|u\rangle = (\langle u|P|v\rangle)^*##: That's just the definition of ##P^\dagger## (I think ##P^\dagger## is used more often than ##P^x##)
  2. ##= (\langle u|a\rangle \langle b|v\rangle)^*##: That's just using the definition of ##P##.
  3. ##= (\langle u|a\rangle)^* (\langle b|v\rangle)^*##: That's just using the fact that the complex conjugate of a product is just the product of the complex conjugates.
  4. ## = \langle a|u\rangle \langle v|b\rangle##: That's just using the fact that for matrix elements, ##\langle A|B\rangle^* = \langle B | A \rangle##.
  5. ## = \langle v | b \rangle \langle a | u \rangle##: Since matrix elements are just numbers, you can change the order in a product.
So we've shown that ##\langle v | P^\dagger | u \rangle = \langle v | b \rangle \langle a | u \rangle##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Somali_Physicist
stevendaryl said:
'

I'm not sure what your point of confusion is.

  1. ##\langle v|P^\dagger|u\rangle = (\langle u|P|v\rangle)^*##: That's just the definition of ##P^\dagger## (I think ##P^\dagger## is used more often than ##P^x##)
  2. ##= (\langle u|a\rangle \langle b|v\rangle)^*##: That's just using the definition of ##P##.
  3. ##= (\langle u|a\rangle)^* (\langle b|v\rangle)^*##: That's just using the fact that the complex conjugate of a product is just the product of the complex conjugates.
  4. ## = \langle a|u\rangle \langle v|b\rangle##: That's just using the fact that for matrix elements, ##\langle A|B\rangle^* = \langle B | A \rangle##.
  5. ## = \langle v | b \rangle \langle a | u \rangle##: Since matrix elements are just numbers, you can change the order in a product.
So we've shown that ##\langle v | P^\dagger | u \rangle = \langle v | b \rangle \langle a | u \rangle##
Hmm step 4 to 5 got me
for ## \langle a|u\rangle \langle v|b\rangle##:
couldnt ## \langle a|u\rangle## give you a matrix and hence you can't simply change the product around?
 
Somali_Physicist said:
Hmm step 4 to 5 got me
for ## \langle a|u\rangle \langle v|b\rangle##:
couldnt ## \langle a|u\rangle## give you a matrix and hence you can't simply change the product around?
## \langle a|u\rangle## is a number, one that is equal to ## \langle u|a \rangle^*##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Somali_Physicist
Nugatory said:
## \langle a|u\rangle## is a number, one that is equal to ## \langle u|a \rangle^*##
So you can never get a 2 x m bra with m x 2 row?
Implying that for a given pair there will always be a 1 row matrix with n elements along with a 1 column matrix with n elements.

If that's the case then it makes sense!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K