Inner products on a Hilbert space

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the definition of inner products in Hilbert spaces, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics as presented in Griffiths' textbook. The inner product for eigenfunctions of Hermitian operators is defined as $$ \langle f(x)| g(x) \rangle = \int f(x)^{*} g(x)\, dx $$, while the coefficients for expressing functions as linear combinations of eigenfunctions are derived using Fourier's trick. The confusion arises when transitioning from the integral form to the finite-dimensional inner product, represented as $$c_+ = \langle \chi_{x+}| \chi\rangle = (\chi_{x+})^{\dagger} \chi$$, where the integral appears to be omitted. This is clarified by noting that the finite-dimensional inner product uses a sum instead of an integral, maintaining the conjugate for complex vectors.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hilbert spaces and their properties
  • Familiarity with Hermitian operators in quantum mechanics
  • Knowledge of inner product definitions in both infinite and finite dimensions
  • Basic grasp of Fourier transforms and their applications in quantum mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Hermitian operators in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the differences between finite-dimensional and infinite-dimensional inner products
  • Explore the application of Fourier transforms in quantum state representation
  • Investigate the implications of complex conjugation in inner products
USEFUL FOR

Students of quantum mechanics, particularly those using Griffiths' textbook, as well as physicists and mathematicians interested in the mathematical foundations of quantum theory and inner product spaces.

Decimal
Messages
73
Reaction score
7
Hello,

I am taking a quantum mechanics course using the Griffiths textbook and encountering some confusion on the definition of inner products on eigenfunctions of hermitian operators. In chapter 3 the definition of inner products is explained as follows: $$ \langle f(x)| g(x) \rangle = \int f(x)^{*} g(x)\, dx $$ Should you need to express some function ##f(x)## as a linear combination of functions ## f_n(x)## then the appropriate constants ##c_n(x)## can be found using Fouriers trick: $$c_n(x) = \langle f_n(x)| f(x) \rangle$$ This I understand. In chapter 4 this idea is applied to find the probability of measuring a certain spin of spin 1/2 particle in the x direction. The spinor ##\chi## will need to be expressed in the eigenfunctions of ##\textbf{Sx}##: ##\chi_{x+}## and ##\chi_{x-}##. So to find the appropriate coefficients one can apply fouriers trick again. $$c_+ = \langle \chi_{x+}| \chi\rangle$$ However when this inner product is calculated according to Griffiths: $$c_+ = \langle \chi_{x+}| \chi\rangle = (\chi_{x+})^{\dagger} \chi$$ It seems like the integral from the original definition has disappeared? Why is this? I understand you are working with vectors here instead of scalar valued functions, but does that change the definition of the inner product on the Hilbert space? This result looks a lot more like the standard definition of the inner product, yet the first vector is also conjugated. Can someone explain this difference to me? Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
These belong to a different space. It is finite dimensional, so it is the standard inner product. And it is complex, hence the conjugate.
 
Decimal said:
It seems like the integral from the original definition has disappeared?

There is a sum here (as is present when you write out the individual terms of the standard inner product for vectors represented in column form) instead of an integral. The sum and integral are analogous, except that one is for finite dimensional spaces and the other is for an infinite dimensional space.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K