Continuous set of eigenvalues in matrix representation?

Click For Summary
Observables are represented by Hermitian operators, which can be expressed in matrix form with eigenvalues on the diagonal, but this becomes complex with continuous spectra. In such cases, the representation is not a matrix but a distribution, as seen with the position operator in one-dimensional space. The position operator's spectrum is continuous, leading to a representation involving a delta function rather than a traditional matrix. The action of the operator on a vector is performed through a convolution integral instead of a standard matrix-vector product. This distinction is crucial for understanding how continuous spectra operate in quantum mechanics.
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,762
Reaction score
248
Let's see if I have this straight: Observables are represented by Hermitian operators, which can be, for some appropriate base, represented in matrix form with the eigenvalues forming the diagonal. Sounds nice until I consider observables with continuous spectra. How do you get something like that into matrix form?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The representation of operators in the eigenbasis is not a matrix, if there are continuous spectra. Then you have distributions. Take the position representation of the position operator in one-dimensional space. Its spectrum is entirely continuous (entire ##\mathbb{R}##). It's position representation is
##X(x_1,x_2)=\langle x_1|\hat{x} x_2 \rangle=x_2 \delta(x_1-x_2).##
That's not a matrix but a distribution. The action of the operator on a vector in such a case is not given by a usual matrix-vector product but by a convolution integral. Of course, in position representation that's very simple
##\langle x|\hat{x} \psi \rangle=\int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} x' X(x,x') \langle x'|\psi \rangle=\int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d} x' X(x,x') \psi(x')=x \psi(x)##
as it must be due to the direct evaluation
##\langle x|\hat{x} \psi \rangle = \langle \hat{x} x|\psi \rangle=x \langle x |\psi \rangle=x \psi(x).##
 
  • Like
Likes nomadreid
Thanks very much, vanhees71. That clears up my question completely. :)
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K