Hermitian Operators: Evaluating PX + XP & XPX

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of Hermitian operators in quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on the combinations PX + XP and XPX. The original poster is exploring whether these combinations are Hermitian, given that the individual operators P (momentum) and X (position) are not Hermitian by themselves.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to calculate expectation values to determine the Hermitian nature of PX + XP but questions the validity of this method. They also inquire about the commutation of three operators in the context of XPX.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide guidance on using the adjoint (dagger) operation to show that the combinations may be Hermitian. Others raise concerns about the implications of unbounded operators in this context, suggesting that the proof of symmetry for the operator XP + PX is complex. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being explored, particularly regarding the properties of the operators involved.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the unbounded nature of the operators X and P, which may complicate the analysis. The discussion reflects a mix of foundational concepts and advanced considerations in quantum mechanics, with references to educational gaps in certain curricula.

holden
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
asking here because i originally asked in the wrong place :)

this question is two parts, both dealing with telling if combinations of hermitian operators are hermitian.

the first combination is PX + XP, where P stands for the momentum operator, (h bar /i)(d/x), and X is the "x operator", x. i have figured out that PX and XP are not hermitian by themselves, but i don't have any idea how to go about showing their linear combination is or isn't. so far i have tried calculating the expectation values for PX + XP and it's conjugate to see if they were the same, but i get the feeling this isn't a correct method.

the second combination is XPX.. i know if you have two operators multiplied, their product can only be hermitian if their commutator is zero.. but how do you do a commutator of a product of three operators?

any help is greatly appreciated! thanks so much.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You should take a dagger to this new operator and show it is equal to the operator itself, example:

* means dagger!
(PX+XP)* = (PX)* + (XP)* = X*P* + P*X* ={X*=X}= XP + PX = (PX + XP)
 
oo thanks :)
 
think i got it - but how about the XPX combination? can you do the same technique of moving from the bra to the ket and vice versa, since the individual operators are hermitian?
 
As you know (AB)* = B*A*, so the same reversal of the order will apply to three operators so (XPX)*=X*P*X*=XPX.
If you want a more rigorous proof:
(ABC)*=C*(AB)*=C*(B*A*)=C*B*A*
 
cool, that's what i was thinking too. thanks so much again.
 
Ahmes said:
You should take a dagger to this new operator and show it is equal to the operator itself, example:

* means dagger!
(PX+XP)* = (PX)* + (XP)* = X*P* + P*X* ={X*=X}= XP + PX = (PX + XP)

This is nonsense, since the X & P operators are unbounded on [itex]\mathcal{H}=L^{2}(\mathbb{R})[/itex].

A proof for the symmetry of the [itex]XP+PX[/itex] operator is quite difficult.

Daniel.
 
Can you allaborate?
From what I know this was enough, proofs like this were shown to us in class.
What did you mean by unbounded?
 
Ahmes said:
What did you mean by unbounded?

An linear operator A on a Hilbert is unbounded if for any positive real number c, there exists a Hilbert space element psi such that the Hilbert space element (A psi) is at least as large as the length of psi muliplied by c.

It turns out that for any state space, at least one of the operators X and P must be unbounded.

This type of stuff often is not mentioned in North American quantum theory courses because often it does not cause problems. Occasionally, however, it can lead one astray - see https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=122063" that I started.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
Thanks! This thread looks very interesting. I'll read it all when I have time.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
16K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K