Help with expected value of non-hermitian operators

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of expectation values for non-Hermitian operators in quantum mechanics. Participants explore the challenges and methodologies associated with defining expectation values when the eigenbasis is not orthonormal, contrasting this with the well-established case of Hermitian operators.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant explains that for Hermitian operators, expectation values can be calculated using probabilities derived from the eigenvalues and the state vector's projections onto the eigenvectors.
  • Another participant questions the validity of defining expectation values for non-Hermitian operators, suggesting that the eigenbasis is not orthonormal and inquiring about the necessary adjustments.
  • A participant provides an example using the harmonic oscillator, noting that the creation operator lacks eigenkets and emphasizing the need for caution when dealing with non-Hermitian operators.
  • Some participants mention that non-Hermitian operators are significant in fields like quantum field theory and supersymmetry, indicating a broader context for their relevance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty regarding the proper methods for calculating expectation values of non-Hermitian operators, with no consensus on whether a meaningful definition exists. Multiple competing views are presented about the implications and methodologies involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the non-orthonormal nature of eigenbases for non-Hermitian operators and the potential complexities in defining expectation values, but do not resolve these issues.

lemma28
Messages
18
Reaction score
1
I know that with an Hermitian operator the expectation value can be found by calculating the (relative) probabilities of each eigenvalue: square modulus of the projection of the state-vector along the corresponding eigenvector.
The normalization of these values give the absolute probabilities.
Alternatively it's possible to calculate directly the expectation value by the compact formula <A>=<psi|A|psi>.

I got stumbled considering what adjustment to take in case of an operator that is not Hermitian.
In this case the eigenbasis is not orthonormal. But I feel that there should be some way to calculate the expectation value of the operator nonetheless.

Am I wrong? Or there's no meaningful way to define it in the non hermitian case?

If the procedure is more or less the same with some adaptation to make then:

Which projection to take? the components in the eigenbasis or the orthogonal projections of psi along the eigenvectors?
Is there an analog of the formula <A>=<psi|A|psi> that is correct in the non.orthonormal basis?

Any help appreciated
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, the problem with the eigenbasis is even worse than you think it is. Let's use the harmonic oscillator as an example to illustrate a few points:

The creation operator has no eigenkets! To see this, let's take a look at what a normal eigenket would look like in the harmonic oscillator basis:
<br /> | \lambda \rangle = \sum_n c_n |n \rangle<br />
So, you act the raising operator on it, but where do you get the lowest nonzero term? Gotta create it from somewhere, but there's nothing there!

That said, the expectation value of an operator \mathcal{O} for a state |\Psi\rangle is pretty much defined as
<br /> \langle \mathcal{O} \rangle = \langle \Psi | \left ( \mathcal{O} | \Psi \rangle \right )<br />
For hermitian operators, the fact that the operator acts on the ket is irrelevent, but for non-hermitian operators, there is a possibly big difference, so you just have to be careful about what you do with non-hermitian operators more so than hermitian operators.
 
lemma28:” Help with expected value of non-hermitian operators”

Quantum River:” there seems to be a lot of physics in the non-hermitian operators”

Notice that entire QFT is formulated in terms of non-hermitian operators (second quantization).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K