Is Dirac Notation Appropriate for Proving Hermitian Conjugates of Operators?

  • Thread starter Thread starter natski
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hermitian
natski
Messages
262
Reaction score
2
This didn't seem appropriate for College level so I thought I'd post it here. I'm struggling to find a way to prove that the product of two operators P and Q written PQ have the hermitian conjugate Q*P* where the star denotes hermitian conjugate. Really just can't get off the first line with it. Any help would be a appreciated.

Natski
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
<PQx,y> = <Qx,P*y>

the rest is left as an exercise for the reader...
 
As you can see the problem is trivial if you're using the notation that Matt's using. Maybe the problem is that you're using Dirac notation. The Dirac notation isn't very good when you're trying to prove things like this. Actually, you have to prove a bunch of "things like this" to understand why the Dirac notation even makes sense.

Note that the equation that defines the Hermitean conjugate is just <P*x,y>=<x,Py> in the notation that Matt's using. In Dirac notation (with |x> instead of x, and |y> instead of y), this equation takes the form (<x|P) |y>=<x| (P|y>), which looks more like an associativity rule than anything else.

If you don't understand exactly why this is so (and probably even if you do), it's better to stay away from the Dirac notation when you're doing proofs.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top