Identity Operator Proving without Bra-Ket Notation

In summary, an analogous expression to the bra-ket identity theorem can be written without the use of state vectors. Just define a set of linear functions in the Hilbert space, and use the identity operator to equate the two expressions.
  • #1
johng23
294
1
I am trying to follow a derivation in a book which is written without bra-ket notation, and presumably without the concept of state vectors. I can easily follow it if I may use the fact that [itex]\sum_{n}|\varphi_{n}\rangle\langle\varphi_{n}|[/itex] is the identity operator.

Analogously to the way I would prove that the above expression is the identity operator: I write [itex]\psi=\sum_{n}c_{n}\varphi_{n}[/itex] as the expansion of a wavefunction on the complete basis set [itex]\varphi_{n}[/itex]. If I use the fact that [itex]c_{m}=\int\varphi^{*}_{m}\psi d^{3}\textbf{r}[/itex], I can write [itex]\psi=\sum_{n}\varphi_{n}\int\varphi^{*}_{n}\psi d^{3}\textbf{r}[/itex]. The statement which I would like to prove is identical to this, If I replace [itex]\psi[/itex] on both sides by another expression [itex]\hat{w}\varphi_{n}[/itex]. Thus I would like to extract [itex]\psi[/itex] from the RHS and equate the rest of the expression to identity. How can I do this? The operator [itex]\hat{w}[/itex] has no special relation to the basis functions [itex]\varphi_{n}[/itex].
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hello,

To translate from braket notation to your notation:
[tex]\mid \phi_n \rangle \leftrightarrow \phi_n[/tex]
[tex]\langle x \mid y \rangle \leftrightarrow \int x^* y \mathrm d^3 r[/tex]

Note that in the braket notation one formally rewrites [itex]\langle x \mid y \rangle[/itex] as [itex]\left( \langle x \mid \right) \left( \mid y \rangle \right)[/itex] where the x-thing is seen as an operator working on the y-thing.

In this formalism, and translating, we get

[tex]\int \phi_m^* \psi \mathrm d^3 r \leftrightarrow \langle \phi_m \mid \psi \rangle = \left( \langle \phi_m \mid \right) \left( \mid \psi \rangle \right)[/tex]

and thus:

[itex]\boxed{ \mid \psi \rangle} \leftrightarrow \psi=\sum_{n}\varphi_{n}\int\varphi^{*}_{n}\psi d^{3}\textbf{r} \leftrightarrow \boxed{ \sum_n \mid \phi_n \rangle \langle \phi_m \mid \left( \mid \psi \rangle \right) }[/itex]
 
  • #3
Thanks for your answer. Actually though, I was more wondering whether it was possible to show that without introducing the concept of state vectors at all. The book doesn't use them so it seems there must be a way.
 
  • #4
Oh, I see, you didn't want to prove the bra-ket identity theorem, but rather wanted an analogous expression without the Dirac notation (such that my whole post was redundant), correct?

If I understand you correctly, I think this might be an answer:
yes you can,
just define a set of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_functional" as [itex]\omega_n: H \to \mathbb C: \psi \mapsto \int \phi_n(\textbf r)^* \psi(\textbf r) \mathrm d^3 \textbf r[/itex] where H is the hilbert space that we're working in.

With this entity, you can see (using your calculations) that the operator [itex]A : H \to H: \psi \mapsto \sum_n \phi_n \omega_n(\psi)[/itex] is equal to the identity operator.

In shorthand, you can write [itex]I = \sum_n \phi_n \omega_n[/itex], where the definition of the operator is implicit. This is actually the same as what happens in the Dirac-notation, but less ambiguous.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

What is "Identity Operator Proving without Bra-Ket Notation"?

"Identity Operator Proving without Bra-Ket Notation" is a method used in quantum mechanics to prove the identity operator, which is a mathematical tool used to describe the properties of a quantum system. This method does not use the traditional bra-ket notation, but instead uses matrix operations to prove the identity operator.

Why is "Identity Operator Proving without Bra-Ket Notation" important?

Understanding and being able to prove the identity operator is crucial in quantum mechanics because it allows scientists to accurately describe and predict the behavior of quantum systems. This method is important because it offers an alternative approach to proving the identity operator without using the traditional notation, which may be more intuitive for some scientists.

How does "Identity Operator Proving without Bra-Ket Notation" differ from traditional methods?

Traditional methods of proving the identity operator in quantum mechanics use the bra-ket notation, which involves complex mathematical formulas and can be difficult to understand. "Identity Operator Proving without Bra-Ket Notation" uses matrix operations, which may be more familiar and easier to understand for some scientists.

What are the benefits of using "Identity Operator Proving without Bra-Ket Notation"?

The main benefit of using this method is that it offers an alternative approach to proving the identity operator in quantum mechanics. Some scientists may find it easier to understand and use, and it may also provide new insights and perspectives on the properties of quantum systems.

Are there any drawbacks to using "Identity Operator Proving without Bra-Ket Notation"?

One potential drawback is that this method may not be as widely used or accepted as traditional methods of proving the identity operator. Therefore, it is important for scientists to carefully consider the specific context and audience when deciding whether to use this method or the traditional approach.

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
842
Replies
1
Views
560
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Back
Top