How to Prove This Hermitian Operator Statement?

abcs22
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
1. Homework Statement prove the following statement:
Hello, can someone help me prove this statement

PzXRBBp.jpg


A is hermitian and {|Ψi>} is a full set of functions

Homework Equations


Σ<r|A|s> <s|B|c>[/B]

The Attempt at a Solution


Since the right term of the equation reminds of the standard deviation, I tried using its definition but it didn't yield any results. Also, I tried to use the hermicity of the operator A to get the complete set but after that I got stuck.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is prety simple if you assume ##\psi_i## form a basis for the Hilbert space of states. Just use the complex relation ##|z|^2=z z^*## for the left hand side, and use the completeness relation for ##\psi_i##. Is this what you meant by a full set of functions?
 
Yes, I did, I apologize, English is not my mother language. I tried but I can't get those two terms on the right side
 
abcs22 said:
Yes, I did, I apologize, English is not my mother language. I tried but I can't get those two terms on the right side
No problem. The two terms come as a property of the summation. The completeness relation assumes you sum over all ##i##. The first term comes from the completeness relation. The second term comes from the fact that you are missing the ##i=j## in the summation on the left hand side. The key equation you need to use is
$$
\langle \psi_j | A^2 | \psi_j \rangle=\sum_i \langle \psi_j | A | \psi_i \rangle \langle \psi_i | A | \psi_j \rangle
$$
 
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