Graduate Found a new formula of Dirac calculus

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers around a newly proposed formula in Dirac calculus, specifically the equality |x⟩⟨x| = δ(âx - x). This formula is derived from the spectral decomposition of the position operator âx and is presented as a formal equality that holds under integrals. Participants in the discussion explore the implications of this formula, its rigor, and its potential usefulness in quantum mechanics. The conversation also touches on the definition of the delta function in relation to operators, suggesting that the formula may be valid even without the integral context.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Dirac calculus and quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with operator theory and spectral decomposition
  • Knowledge of delta functions and their properties in functional analysis
  • Basic grasp of test functions and their role in quantum mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the Dirac delta function in quantum mechanics
  • Study the spectral decomposition of operators in Hilbert spaces
  • Explore the mathematical rigor of formal equalities in functional analysis
  • Investigate generalized functions and their applications in quantum theory
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students of quantum mechanics interested in advanced topics in Dirac calculus and operator theory.

Demystifier
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
14,608
Reaction score
7,219
I have found a new formula in Dirac calculus. The formula is elementary, so probably I'm not the first who found it. Yet, I have never seen it before. As many other formulas in Dirac calculus, it is not rigorous in the sense of functional analysis. Rather, it is a formal equality, which is only well defined under integrals, while otherwise it should be used with a grain of salt. But the formula is very elegant and, I believe, can be very useful.

Let ##\hat{x}## be an operator with a continuous spectrum, such as the position operator. Its eigenstates ##|x\rangle## obey ##\hat{x}|x\rangle=x|x\rangle##, where ##x## are the eigenvalues of ##\hat{x}##. The operator has a formal spectral decomposition
$$\hat{x}=\int dx\, x |x\rangle\langle x|$$
On the other hand, we can also write a formal identity
$$\int dx\, x\delta(\hat{x}-x)=\hat{x}$$
Comparing the two equation above, one finds the formula
$$|x\rangle\langle x|=\delta(\hat{x}-x)$$
which seems to be something new, or at least new to me.

Have you seen this formula before? For the mathematically inclined, have you got any idea how to make it more rigorous?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Demystifier said:
On the other hand, we can also write a formal identity
$$\int dx\, x\delta(\hat{x}-x)=\hat{x}$$
Comparing the two equation above,
Well, since ##\hat{x}## is supposed to be an operator, ##\delta(\hat{x}-x)## is "not yet" defined. So your "formal identity" could instead be used as a definition of (the meaning of) ##\delta(\hat{x}-x)##.

Demystifier said:
one finds the formula
##|x\rangle\langle x|=\delta(\hat{x}-x)##
which seems to be something new, or at least new to me.

Have you seen this formula before? For the mathematically inclined, have you got any idea how to make it more rigorous?
Are we sure that comparing the two equations really gives anything? I tried to make it more rigorous, started by rewritting the "definition" of ##\delta(\hat{x}-x)## to a definition for ##\delta(\hat{y}-x)##
$$\int dx\, x\delta(\hat{y}-x)=\hat{y}$$

Then I wanted to introduce test function to be integrated over, but then I no longer understood why we should be able to conclude from two integrals being equal that their integrants were equal too.
 
gentzen said:
Then I wanted to introduce test function to be integrated over, but then I no longer understood why we should be able to conclude from two integrals being equal that their integrants were equal too.
For an arbitrary test function ##f(x)## we have
$$\int dx\, f(x) \delta(\hat{x}-x)=f(\hat{x})$$
that's how the functional ## \delta(\hat{x}-x)## is defined. Using my formula
$$\delta(\hat{x}-x)=|x\rangle\langle x|$$
this becomes
$$\int dx\, f(x) |x\rangle\langle x|=f(\hat{x})$$
which is nothing but the standard spectral decomposition of the operator ##f(\hat{x})##. The formula is therefore valid for any test function, so in a sense it is valid even without the integral.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and gentzen
By the way, I have found this in an attempt to find a counterexample to the statement than any operator (in the Hilbert space of one particle in one dimension) can be written as ##F(\hat{x}, \hat{p})##. It occurred to me that ##|x\rangle\langle x|## could be a counterexample, so I found that it's not a counterexample, if ##F## can be a generalized function (i.e. functional).
 
Demystifier said:
The formula is therefore valid for any test function, so in a sense it is valid even without the integral.
So you succeded yourself to make it more rigorous. My mistake was to introduce ##y## in the wrong place. I should have kept ##\hat{x}## and renamed the free/integration variable to ##y##. Then I can "rewrite" your answer, such that it reads:
For an arbitrary test function ##f(x)## we have
$$\int dy\, f(y) \delta(\hat{x}-y)=f(\hat{x})$$
that's how the functional ## \delta(\hat{x}-y)## is defined. Using "the proposed" formula
$$\delta(\hat{x}-y)=|y\rangle\langle y|$$
this becomes
$$\int dy\, f(y) |y\rangle\langle y|=f(\hat{x})$$
which is nothing but the standard spectral decomposition of the operator ##f(\hat{x})##.
Of course, one can discuss whether ## \delta(\hat{x}-x)## or ##|y\rangle\langle y|## is more confusing. Perhaps a compromise would be to use ##x'## instead of ##y##, and then claim that neither ## \delta(\hat{x}-x')## nor ##|x'\rangle\langle x'|## should be confusing.
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
For a spinless particle in non-relativistic QM the Heisenberg algebra of ##\hat{\vec{x}}## and ##\hat{\vec{p}}## is sufficient to describe all one-particle operators by definition. You can ensure this by analyzing the ray represenstations of the Galilei group.
 
My next project is to find a similar formula for ##|x\rangle\langle x'|##.
 

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K