Inner products and wavefunctions

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dyn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wavefunctions
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies that the inner product of a bra and a ket, denoted as < x | ψ >, results in a complex number, specifically the value of the wavefunction ψ(x) at position x. The notation < x | ψ > is an abstraction that represents a function mapping each position x to the corresponding complex number, rather than implying that the inner product itself yields a function. This distinction is crucial for understanding the mathematical properties of kets and bras in quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of Hilbert spaces.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics terminology, specifically kets and bras.
  • Familiarity with Hilbert spaces and their properties.
  • Knowledge of wavefunctions and their representation in quantum mechanics.
  • Basic grasp of complex numbers and functions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical properties of Hilbert spaces in quantum mechanics.
  • Learn about the representation of operators on wavefunctions and their implications.
  • Explore the concept of square integrable functions and their role in quantum mechanics.
  • Investigate the differences between finite-dimensional and infinite-dimensional vector spaces in quantum theory.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics, theoretical physicists, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of wavefunctions and their representations.

dyn
Messages
774
Reaction score
63
Hi
As far as i am aware taking the inner product of a bra and a ket results in a (complex) number or scalar. So why does < x | ψ > give ψ ( x ) , the wavefunction in position space ? Surely < x | ψ > should give a number not a function ?
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The notation ##\braket{x | \psi} = \psi(x)## is actually a slight abuse of notation. What it says is: the function ##\psi(x)##, for a given ket ##\ket{\psi}##, is that function that maps each position ##x## to the number ##\braket{x | \psi}##, where ##\bra{x}## is the bra corresponding to the eigenstate of position in which the position is ##x##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark
Thanks for your reply. Is there a mistake in the Latex as it does not seem to be displaying properly ?
 
dyn said:
Is there a mistake in the Latex as it does not seem to be displaying properly ?
Do you mean in my post? It displays fine for me. You might have to reload the page, log out/back in, restart your browser, clear your cookies for physicsforums.com, or some combination of those.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark
Yes , it displays fine now. Thank you. So is it correct to say that an inner product of a bra and a ket always gives a number not a function ?
 
dyn said:
is it correct to say that an inner product of a bra and a ket always gives a number not a function ?
If you're talking about a single bra and a single ket, yes. The notation ##\braket{x | \psi} = \psi(x)## is actually using ##\bra{x}## to refer to an infinite collection of bras (one for each position ##x##), not just one.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark, atyy, dyn and 1 other person
Thank you. I'm trying to picture what the kets | ψ > and | x > look like. I know they are infinite-dimensional vectors. Is the ket | ψ > an infinite column vector consisting of the value of ψ( x ) at each of the infinite values of x ? Is the general ket | x > an infinite column vector consisting of the number 1 at each of the infinite values of x . ie an infinite collection of basis vectors ? When calculating < x | ψ > the bra is an infinite collection of zero's with the exception of a 1 at the exact position of the value of x in ψ ( x ) . have i got that right ?
Thanks
 
dyn said:
have i got that right ?
All of these things are highly heuristic (i.e., be careful how you use them) ways of describing kets and bras. Or more precisely, describing a (vaguely defined) representation of kets and bras.

Kets (and bras) are in general best left unvisualized, so to speak: when trying to prove anything about them in general, you should only use their known general mathematical properties, which will be valid regardless of any choice of representation. The only time you should choose a representation is when you have to--i.e., when there is no other way to do some particular calculation you want to do.

For the specific kets and bras you are talking about, i.e., those in the Hilbert space of a single particle (and its dual), there actually is no well-defined "infinite vector" representation. The only really well-defined representation you will see in most textbooks is the wave function representation, where ##\psi(x)## is a function (and operators on the Hilbert space are represented as operators on functions, mostly but not always differential operators). The technical issue with this representation is that, strictly speaking, the Hilbert space only consists of square integrable functions, and the eigenfunctions of the position and momentum operators, namely the "delta function" ##\delta(x)## and the plane wave ##e^{i k x}##, which are often used as two possible choices of basis for the Hilbert space, are not square integrable, so they aren't actually in the Hilbert space. There are ways of dealing with this, which is why it is only a technical issue and does not invalidate the wave function representation.

Many other Hilbert spaces, such as those for spin, are finite dimensional, so there is a valid vector representation (with operators being matrices), which is easier to use.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark, atyy and dyn
dyn said:
Hi
As far as i am aware taking the inner product of a bra and a ket results in a (complex) number or scalar. So why does < x | ψ > give ψ ( x ) , the wavefunction in position space ? Surely < x | ψ > should give a number not a function ?
Thanks
Technically, ##\psi(x)## is a number. ##\psi## is the function and ##x## is the variable.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark and dyn
  • #10
This confusion arises, because physicists are sloppy in never making a difference between a function ##\psi## and the value ##\psi(x)## evaluated at the argument ##x##. So they say "##\psi(x)## is the wave function". What they mean is that ##\psi:\mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{C}## is a function ##x \mapsto \psi(x)##, i.e., it maps the real position coordinate to a complex number.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark, dyn, PeroK and 1 other person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K