Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Hermiticity and expectation value

  1. Oct 7, 2006 #1
    is there a better way to check for hermicity than doing expecation values? for example, what if you had xp (operators) - px (operators), or pxp (operators again); how can you tell if these combos are hermetian or not, without going through the clumsy integration (that doesn't give a solid result, as far as i can tell)? thanks.
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 7, 2006 #2
    [tex](AB+CD)^\dagger = B^\dagger A^\dagger + D^\dagger C^\dagger[/tex]
  4. Oct 7, 2006 #3
    heh, thanks. i suck.
  5. Oct 7, 2006 #4
    although, actually, i still have a question.. where does that come from, is it just an accepted property? i can't seem to derive it or find a place where it has been derived.
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2006
  6. Oct 8, 2006 #5
    [tex]\left< (AB)x,y \right> = \left< A(Bx),y \right> = \left< Bx, A^\dagger y \right> = \left< x, (B^\dagger A^\dagger) y \right>[/tex]

    By definition, this shows that [tex](AB)^\dagger=B^\dagger A^\dagger[/tex].
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2006
  7. Oct 9, 2006 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    What Euclid wrote is valid only for bounded operators. The "x" and "p_x" operators are unbounded, so care is needed in order not to write some garbage.

  8. Oct 17, 2006 #7
    However, in the context of what holden wrote, what Euclid stated is valid enough, because holden wants to check for hermicity and hermitian operators are symmetric and bounded.

    On the other note, I want to see a somewhat rigorous proof that
    [tex]\left(A+B\right)^{\dagger} = A^{\dagger}+B^{\dagger} [/tex]

    All the sources say this property, but they don't bother proving it.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook