How to interpret wave function as a matrix

Black Integra
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
As we all know, we can write schrodinger equation in Linear algebraic form.
Also, Dirac had introduced his matrix mechanics.
And we can write any linear operator as matrix.
and so on...

How can we write wave function as matrix?
What is the dimension of this matrix?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Black Integra said:
As we all know, we can write schrodinger equation in Linear algebraic form.
Also, Dirac had introduced his matrix mechanics.
And we can write any linear operator as matrix.
and so on...

How can we write wave function as matrix?
What is the dimension of this matrix?
\infty\times 1. You can write \psi=\sum_{k=1}^\infty a_k e_k, where the e_k are basis vectors. The "matrix" of components of \psi relative to the ordered basis \langle e_i\rangle_{k=1}^\infty is \begin{pmatrix}a_1\\ a_2\\ \vdots\end{pmatrix}
 
Thank you for your reply.
but if the dimension is inf how can I apply this to, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_equation" , where the dimension of its operator is 4x4.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Black Integra said:
Thank you for your reply.
but if the dimension is inf how can I apply this to, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_equation" , where the dimension of its operator is 4x4.
You wouldn't. If you're talking about a theory in which a solution to the classical Dirac equation is considered an (\mathbb R^4-valued) wavefunction, then you could write \psi=\sum_{\mu=0}^3\sum_{k=1}^\infty a^\mu_k e_\mu u_k where the e_\mu are the standard basis vectors for the space of 4×1 matrices, and the u_k are members of an orthonormal basis for the space of square-integrable functions. I suppose you could arrange the a^\mu_k into another infinite column matrix if you want to, but I think that would be a rather pointless thing to do.

Anyway, the theory that interprets a classical Dirac field as a wavefunction is obsolete. The Dirac equation is still used in quantum field theory, but now the Dirac field (the solution to the equation) isn't a wavefunction. It's an operator.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, that's very interesting.
Thanks for those information!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Back
Top