How Is the Unit Operator Derived in Quantum Many-Body Hilbert Spaces?

welshtill
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
I am reading J.W.Negele and H.Orland's book "Quantum Many-Particle Systems". I don't know how one can derive equation (1.40) on page 6. The question is
For quantum many-body physics, suppose there are N particles. The hilbert space is

H_{N}=H\otimesH\otimes...H.

Its basis can be written as

\left|\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}...\alpha_{N}\right)=\left|\alpha_{1}\right\rangle\otimes\left|\alpha_{2}\right\rangle\...\otimes\left|\alpha_{N}\right\rangle

with closure relation

\sum_{\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}...\alpha_{N}}\left|\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}...\alpha_{N}\right)\left(\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}...\alpha_{N}\right|=1

Now introduce a symmetrization and antisymmetrization operator

P_{B,F}\psi(r_{1},r_{2}...r_{N})=\frac{1}{N!}\sum_{P}\varsigma^{P}\psi(r_{P1},r_{P2}...r_{PN})

where \varsigma=1 for bosons and -1 for fermions. \sum_{P} is sum of all permutations of coordinates.

Using this operator P_{B,F} one can obtain the sub-hilbert space for fermions H_{F} or for bosons H_{B}.

The basis in these two sub-space can be written as

P_{B,F}\left|\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}...\alpha_{N}\right)

My question is how one can derive the following equation

\sum_{\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}...\alpha_{N}}P_{B,F}\left|\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}...\alpha_{N}\right)\left(\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}...\alpha_{N}\right|P_{B,F}=1
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I now understand this relation, 1 is a unit operator in sub-hilbert space Hf or Hb.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top