How unitary change of basis related to Trace?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the invariance of the trace of an operator under unitary changes of basis, specifically addressing the equation Tr(Ω) = Tr(U†ΩU). Participants clarify that a unitary transformation T relates two matrices A and B through the equation A = T^(-1)BT, emphasizing that the trace remains unchanged despite the transformation. The key identity used is Tr(AB) = Tr(BA), which confirms that the trace is invariant under cyclic permutations. Understanding linear algebra concepts is essential for grasping these relationships.

PREREQUISITES
  • Linear algebra fundamentals, including matrix operations
  • Understanding of unitary transformations and their properties
  • Familiarity with the trace operation in matrix theory
  • Knowledge of cyclic permutations in mathematical expressions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of unitary matrices and their applications
  • Learn about the trace operation and its significance in linear algebra
  • Explore cyclic permutations and their implications in matrix theory
  • Investigate the relationship between different bases in vector spaces
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are working with linear transformations, matrix theory, or quantum mechanics will benefit from this discussion.

Shing
Messages
141
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Shanker 1.7.1
3.)Show that the trace of an operator is unaffected by a unitary change of basis (Equivalently, show TrΩ=TrU^{\dagger}ΩU

Homework Equations



I can show that via Shanker's hint, but I however can't see how a unitary change of basis links to TrΩ=TrU^{\dagger}ΩU, (and it really giving me a headache!) Would anyone be kind enough to explain to me?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There is some identity which tells you that \mathrm{Tr}(AB) = \mathrm{Tr}(BA) (more generally one could state that the trace is invariant under cyclic permutations). Use it and your problem should be as good as solved.
 
Forgive my ignorance,
But shouldn't "unaffected by a unitary change of basis" be expressed asTrUΩ=TrΩ
 
Last edited:
Shing said:
Forgive my ignorance,
But shouldn't "unaffected by a unitary change of basis" be expressed asTrUΩ=TrΩ

No. A matrix A is a change of basis of a matrix B if A=T^(-1)BT for a nonsingular matrix T.
 
Thanks for reply,
So here is my understanding: we map A to B, A and B represent the same thing in different bases, and their mathematical relation is A=T^{-1}AT
am I right?
I have a rough picture now, but Sadly, I still can't see the physical picture, neither the mathematics.
, and shanker surely was telling the truth! One should know a bit more of linear algebra before embrace into it!

Thanks guys, anyway :)
 
Now I got it a bit!
For column vector (1,0) -> (0 ,1)
And T is {(0,1),(1,0)} :)
Did I get it right?
 
Shing said:
Now I got it a bit!
For column vector (1,0) -> (0 ,1)
And T is {(0,1),(1,0)} :)
Did I get it right?

If T is unitary then sure that's an option. So T takes (1,0) -> (0,1) and (0,1) -> (1,0). T^(-1) (which happens to be the same as T, but that's usually not the case) does the opposite. So to figure out what A is 'equivalent' (not equal!) to B, you use T to rotate a vector to the basis of B, then let B act on it, then undo the rotation with T^(-1), so A=T^(-1)BT. I know this is vague. But none of this vagueness should stop you from being able to show Tr(B)=Tr(A)=Tr(T^(-1)BT). That change of bases don't change the trace.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 146 ·
5
Replies
146
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K