How to find admissible functions for a domain?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the identification of admissible functions for operators in quantum mechanics, particularly focusing on the momentum operator and its adjoint. Participants explore the nature of these functions, their mathematical properties, and the methods used to derive them, with references to quantum chemistry and literature such as Bohm's "Quantum Theory."

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the momentum operator is not self-adjoint and discuss the implications of its adjoint acting on a different space of functions.
  • There is a reference to an example function, ##f(x)=e^{-x^2}g(x)##, where g is a polynomial, as a typical admissible function, but questions arise about the method of deriving such functions.
  • One participant questions whether finding admissible functions is a trial and error process based on experience, suggesting a lack of systematic methods in the literature.
  • Another participant emphasizes the mathematical expectation that readers should understand why certain functions are considered admissible, particularly the dominance of exponential functions over polynomials.
  • Concerns are raised about the exclusion of certain exponential functions, such as ##f(x)=e^{-ix}g(x)##, and the conditions under which functions must be square integrable.
  • Participants discuss the differences between real and complex exponentials and the implications for admissibility in the context of quantum mechanics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the methods for identifying admissible functions and the criteria for their acceptance, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

There are references to the mathematical properties required for functions to be admissible, such as square integrability and differentiability, but the discussion does not resolve the specific criteria or methods for identifying these functions.

SemM
Gold Member
Messages
194
Reaction score
13
Hi, in a text provided by DrDu which I am still reading, it is given that "the momentum operator P is not self-adjoint even if its adjoint ##P^{\dagger}=-\hbar D## has the same formal expression, but it acts on a different space of functions."

Regarding the two main operators, X and D, each has a domain in ##\mathscr{H}## which represent the set of admissible functions, and that satisfy the completeness relation in ##\mathscr{H}## and the inner product.

In practice in quantum chemistry or in quantum physics, one would like to know the form of these functions. In Bohms "Quantum Theory" Bohm shows an explicitely example of such a function ##f(x)=e^{-x^2}g(x)## where g is a polynomial. This is an ideal example of such a function, however in this book, as well as in others, it seems that these functions "are pulled out of thin air", without any method to it. Is this a trial and error process fueled by the experience of the mathematician to find such a function? There are, probably other forms than the above-given, so my question is, is there a method to find a list of functions in the the domain of an operator?
Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
SemM said:
Hi, in a text provided by DrDu which I am still reading, it is given that "the momentum operator P is not self-adjoint even if its adjoint ##P^{\dagger}=-\hbar D## has the same formal expression, but it acts on a different space of functions."

Regarding the two main operators, X and D, each has a domain in ##\mathscr{H}## which represent the set of admissible functions, and that satisfy the completeness relation in ##\mathscr{H}## and the inner product.

In practice in quantum chemistry or in quantum physics, one would like to know the form of these functions. In Bohms "Quantum Theory" Bohm shows an explicitely example of such a function ##f(x)=e^{-x^2}g(x)## where g is a polynomial. This is an ideal example of such a function, however in this book, as well as in others, it seems that these functions "are pulled out of thin air", without any method to it. Is this a trial and error process fueled by the experience of the mathematician to find such a function? There are, probably other forms than the above-given, so my question is, is there a method to find a list of functions in the the domain of an operator?
Thanks!

"Pulled out of thin air" in this case is simply "at a level of mathematics that the reader is supposed to be familiar with". No advanced physics text is likely to spend much time explaining that ##f(x)=e^{-x^2}g(x)## (where g is a polynomial) is square integrable, infinitely differentiable, and all its derivatives are square integrable. You're supposed to be familiar with mathematics at this level.

This is not "A" for advanced mathematics. The result required here is simply that an exponential "dominates" a polynomial.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SemM
PeroK said:
The result required here is simply that an exponential "dominates" a polynomial.

This is the key to my question, if the exponential term dominates it, how come several exponential functions are dismissed and thus ##f(x)=e^{-ix}g(x)## is not allowed? The square integrable nature of a function, accounting for that you mean ##\langle |\psi|^2 \rangle## can in some cases have to be calculated numerically, should the function be more complex. .ie. ##f(x)=e^{(-x^2-x)}g(x)##.

Thanks PeroK.
 
SemM said:
This is the key to my question, if the exponential term dominates it, how come several exponential functions are dismissed and thus ##f(x)=e^{-ix}g(x)## is not allowed? The square integrable nature of a function, accounting for that you mean ##\langle |\psi|^2 \rangle## can in some cases have to be calculated numerically, should the function be more complex. .ie. ##f(x)=e^{(-x^2-x)}g(x)##.

Thanks PeroK.

There's a big difference between real exponentials and complex exponentials. Again, no one writing these books is expecting these sorts of questions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SemM
PeroK said:
There's a big difference between real exponentials and complex exponentials. Again, no one writing these books is expecting these sorts of questions.

OK, can't complain on that!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K