Hermitian adjoint operators (simple "proofs")

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around properties of Hermitian adjoint operators in linear algebra, specifically focusing on proving various properties related to the adjoint of a linear operator. The original poster presents a series of statements to prove regarding the linearity of the adjoint, the relationship between an operator and its adjoint, and the behavior of compositions of operators.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the definition of the adjoint operator and its implications for linearity. They discuss the relationships between operators and their adjoints, questioning the assumptions about the spaces involved. There is also an exploration of how to approach proving the properties listed in the original poster's questions.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided feedback on the original poster's attempts, indicating that their reasoning appears sound. Hints have been offered to guide the original poster in their exploration of the proofs, particularly for the more challenging statements. The discussion is ongoing, with participants clarifying concepts and confirming the correctness of interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the operator T can map between different spaces, and there is no strict requirement for it to map from V to W. This flexibility in the definition of linear operators is a point of clarification in the discussion.

Incand
Messages
334
Reaction score
47

Homework Statement


I'm having some trouble with questions asking me to "show" or "prove" instead of computing an answer so I'm looking for some input if I'm actually doing what I'm supposed to or not (and for the last one I don't know where to get started really.)
1. Show that ##T^*## is linear.
2. Show that ##(T^*)^* = T##.
3. Show that ##\langle v,Tw\rangle = \langle T^*v,w\rangle##.
4. Show that ##(ST)^* = T^*S^*##.

I realize this is quite a lot so even taking a look at one of the above would be very kind!

Homework Equations


The adjoint to the linear operator ##T:V \to W## is the mapping ##T^*:W \to V## that is defined by ##\langle Tv,w \rangle = \langle v,T^*w\rangle## for all ##v\in V## and ##w \in W##.

The Attempt at a Solution


1. Using the definition for adjoint and the scalar product we have
##\langle v, T^*(w+u)\rangle = \langle Tv,w+u \rangle = \langle Tv,w\rangle + \langle Tv,u\rangle = \langle v,T^*w\rangle + \langle v,T^*u\rangle = \langle v,T^*w +T^* u \rangle##.
And for ##\langle v, T*(\alpha w)\rangle = \langle Tv,\alpha w\rangle = \bar \alpha \langle Tv,w\rangle = \bar \alpha \langle v, T^* w \rangle = \langle v, \alpha T^*w\rangle##.
Since ##v## is any vector in ##V## we have that ##T^*(v+w) = T^*v+T^*w## and ##T^*(\alpha v) = \alpha T^*v## are the only possibilities and that should show the linearity.

2. From the definition and using the conjugate symmetry of the scalar product we have
##\langle T^*v,w \rangle = \langle v, (T^*)^*w\rangle = \overline{ \langle (T^*)^*,v \rangle }##
But we also have
##\langle T^*v,w \rangle = \overline{\langle w, T^*v\rangle}= \overline{\langle Tw,v\rangle } ##. Again since ##v## is any vector in ##V## we have ##(T^*)^* = T##.

3. As I understand the question this means either that the operators switches roles i.e. ##T: W\to V## and ##T^*:V\to W##. Is this true or I'm supposed to show this when the operators don't even operate on the same space?? If it's as I imagine, doesn't this follow immediately from (2)?

4. This is the one I'm not sure how to do. Writing up the definition I have and using (2)
##\langle STv , w\rangle = \langle v, (ST)^*w\rangle = \langle (S^*T^*)^*v,w \rangle## and I don't know how to push ahead.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Incand said:

Homework Statement


I'm having some trouble with questions asking me to "show" or "prove" instead of computing an answer so I'm looking for some input if I'm actually doing what I'm supposed to or not (and for the last one I don't know where to get started really.)
1. Show that ##T^*## is linear.
2. Show that ##(T^*)^* = T##.
3. Show that ##\langle v,Tw\rangle = \langle T^*v,w\rangle##.
4. Show that ##(ST)^* = T^*S^*##.

I realize this is quite a lot so even taking a look at one of the above would be very kind!

Homework Equations


The adjoint to the linear operator ##T:V \to W## is the mapping ##T^*:W \to V## that is defined by ##\langle Tv,w \rangle = \langle v,T^*w\rangle## for all ##v\in V## and ##w \in W##.

The Attempt at a Solution


1. Using the definition for adjoint and the scalar product we have
##\langle v, T^*(w+u)\rangle = \langle Tv,w+u \rangle = \langle Tv,w\rangle + \langle Tv,u\rangle = \langle v,T^*w\rangle + \langle v,T^*u\rangle = \langle v,T^*w +T^* u \rangle##.
And for ##\langle v, T*(\alpha w)\rangle = \langle Tv,\alpha w\rangle = \bar \alpha \langle Tv,w\rangle = \bar \alpha \langle v, T^* w \rangle = \langle v, \alpha T^*w\rangle##.
Since ##v## is any vector in ##V## we have that ##T^*(v+w) = T^*v+T^*w## and ##T^*(\alpha v) = \alpha T^*v## are the only possibilities and that should show the linearity.

2. From the definition and using the conjugate symmetry of the scalar product we have
##\langle T^*v,w \rangle = \langle v, (T^*)^*w\rangle = \overline{ \langle (T^*)^*,v \rangle }##
But we also have
##\langle T^*v,w \rangle = \overline{\langle w, T^*v\rangle}= \overline{\langle Tw,v\rangle } ##. Again since ##v## is any vector in ##V## we have ##(T^*)^* = T##.

3. As I understand the question this means either that the operators switches roles i.e. ##T: W\to V## and ##T^*:V\to W##. Is this true or I'm supposed to show this when the operators don't even operate on the same space?? If it's as I imagine, doesn't this follow immediately from (2)?

4. This is the one I'm not sure how to do. Writing up the definition I have and using (2)
##\langle STv , w\rangle = \langle v, (ST)^*w\rangle = \langle (S^*T^*)^*v,w \rangle## and I don't know how to push ahead.

Your answers to 1-2 look good to me. For 3, there's no law that says that T must act on V into W. An arbitrary linear operator T can just as well act on W into V. And, for 3, T is just such an operator.

For 4, hint ##Tv## is a vector.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Incand
PeroK said:
Your answers to 1-2 look good to me. For 3, there's no law that says that T must act on V into W. An arbitrary linear operator T can just as well act on W into V. And, for 3, T is just such an operator.

For 4, hint ##Tv## is a vector.
Thank you for going over the exercises! So for (3) is ##T## and operator ##T:U\to U## where ##U = V\cup W##? Or did I misunderstand you?
If this is true then ##\langle v, Tw \rangle = \overline{\langle Tw,v \rangle } = \overline{\langle w,T^*v \rangle} = \langle T^*v,w\rangle##.

That hint made it a whole lot of easier ##\langle v,(ST)^*w \rangle = \langle STv,w\rangle = \langle Tv,S^*w \rangle = \langle v,T^*S^*w \rangle##.
 
Incand said:
Thank you for going over the exercises! So for (3) is ##T## and operator ##T:U\to U## where ##U = V\cup W##? Or did I misunderstand you?
If this is true then ##\langle v, Tw \rangle = \overline{\langle Tw,v \rangle } = \overline{\langle w,T^*v \rangle} = \langle T^*v,w\rangle##.

That hint made it a whole lot of easier ##\langle v,(ST)^*w \rangle = \langle STv,w\rangle = \langle Tv,S^*w \rangle = \langle v,T^*S^*w \rangle##.

In 3, you can infer that ##T: W \rightarrow V##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Incand
PeroK said:
In 3, you can infer that ##T: W \rightarrow V##
Alright so it's enough that ##T: W \rightarrow V## with ##T:U\to U## being a special case. But other than that it's correct?
 
Incand said:
Alright so it's enough that ##T: W \rightarrow V## with ##T:U\to U## being a special case. But other than that it's correct?
Yes. In general, the linear operator may map one inner product space to another; or, the two spaces could be the same.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Incand

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
1K