Expectation Value: My Understanding vs. Prof.

dEdt
Messages
286
Reaction score
2
My understanding was that the expectation value of an observable H for a state |a> is just <a|H|a>. But in a homework problem, my prof. used <H> = <a|H|a>/<a|a>. I'm a little confused by the discrepancy, why the discrepancy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The first formula assumes a ray(a vector of norm 1). The second one does not.
 
How do you derive the second equation then?
 
And what's the point of discussing the expectation value of a state if its norm isn't 1 (ie isn't physical)?
 
Are you dealing with variation principle (method) of QM ?
Variation Principle : the expectation value of any hermitain operator w.r.t. any vector in hilbert space is larger than the smallest eigenvalue of that hermitain operator.
how given any hermitain operator H, chossing any state |a> will give the expectation value of H if (1) if |a> normalized, use the first equation
(2) if |a> is not normalized or don't know if it is normalized ( that's the general vector in hilbert space. then use the second equation.
 
dEdt said:
How do you derive the second equation then?

You derive the first equation from the second. Why the second? Because the expectation value of the identity operator H=I (eigenvalue 1 and every nonzero vector is an eigenvector) should be 1.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Thread 'Lesser Green's function'
The lesser Green's function is defined as: $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\langle C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\rangle=i\bra{n}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\ket{n}$$ where ##\ket{n}## is the many particle ground state. $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{n}e^{iHt'}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(0)e^{-iHt'}e^{iHt}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ First consider the case t <t' Define, $$\ket{\alpha}=e^{-iH(t'-t)}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ $$\ket{\beta}=C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt'}\ket{n}$$ $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{\beta}\ket{\alpha}$$ ##\ket{\alpha}##...
Back
Top