Expressing Wavefunction psi(x) Using Eigenstates |ai> for State |psi>

jrevill
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Given a state |psi> and an operator A with (non-degenerate) eigenstates |ai> corresponding to real eigenvalues ai, express the wavefunction psi(x) corresponding to the state |psi> in terms of |psi>

Now this was a question in last year's exam that my lecturer went through, but his answer on the whiteboard was:

psi(r) = <r|psi>

But the question asked for psi(x), not psi(r). Are the two then interchangeable?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you know what a spectral decomposition of a linear selfadjoint operator is ? If so, then write it down and then act with it on |psi>.

Daniel.
 
Okay, well from Wikipedia: "The spectral decomposition of an operator A which has an orthonormal basis of eigenvectors is obtained by grouping together all vectors corresponding to the same eigenvalue."

So you're referring to a spectral decomposition of the r operator? And the orthonormal basis of eigenvectors would be... x, y and z?
 
This is the spectral decomposition of A (self-adjoint)

A=\sum_{i} a_{i}|a_{i}\rangle \langle a_{i}|

, where the sigma symbol means, as usually, the sum over the discrete spectrum and an integral over parameter space for the continuous spectrum.

Since you need \psi (x)= \langle x|\psi\rangle, and A is self-adjoint, therefore its (possibly generalized) eigenvectors span a basis in the (rigged) Hilbert space of the system, so then |a_{i}\rangle form a complete set, all you need to do is find \psi (x) in terms of a_{i}(x).

Daniel.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top