Is Q Self-adjoint Given Certain Conditions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter noblegas
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
13 replies · 3K views
noblegas
Messages
266
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Show that if the operator Q satifies

[tex](\phi,Q\phi)=(Q\phi,\phi)[/tex] for all [tex]\phi[/tex], then Q is self-adjoint , that is

[tex](\varphi,QX)=(Q\varphi,X).[/tex] Consider the functions

[tex]\phi_1=\varphi+X[/tex],[tex]\phi_2=\phi+i*X[/tex]

Note: X is NOT a matrix. Could not find the latex code for the curvy X so i just typed X

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



[tex](\phi,Q\phi)=(Q\phi,\phi)[/tex] =[tex](\phi_1,Q\phi_1)=(Q\phi_1,\phi_1)=(\varphi+X),Q(\varphi+X),[/tex] (Q\phi,\phi)=[tex](\phi_2,Q\phi_2)=(Q\phi_1,\phi)=(\varphi+X)i,Q(\varphi+X)i[/tex] ? Am I off in the right direction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is hard to sort out what you are doing because your Latex code is mangled up. I would start with what is known, namely

[tex]((\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi+\chi))=(Q(\varphi+\chi),(\varphi+\chi))[/tex]

and develop each side separately, i.e.

Left side =
Right side =

Set the two sides equal and use that

[tex](\chi,Q\chi)=(Q\chi,\chi);\ (\varphi,Q\varphi)=(Q\varphi,\varphi)[/tex]

to get some terms to cancel. After that you should be able to see how to finish. BTW "curvy X" is \chi.
 
kuruman said:
It is hard to sort out what you are doing because your Latex code is mangled up. I would start with what is known, namely

[tex]((\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi+\chi))=(Q(\varphi+\chi),(\varphi+\chi))[/tex]

and develop each side separately, i.e.

Left side =
Right side =

Set the two sides equal and use that z

[tex](\chi,Q\chi)=(Q\chi,\chi);\ (\varphi,Q\varphi)=(Q\varphi,\varphi)[/tex]

to get some terms to cancel. After that you should be able to see how to finish. BTW "curvy X" is \chi.


shouldn't I plug in [tex]\phi_2[/tex] as well ?
 
Yes, that is part 2. Do this one first to see how it works, then do the other one following the same procedure.
 
kuruman said:
Yes, that is part 2. Do this one first to see how it works, then do the other one following the same procedure.

[tex] ((\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi+\chi))=q(\varphi+\chi), (\varphi+\chi))=q*(\varphi+\chi), (\varphi+\chi))[/tex], q is some number.
So now what?
 
Are you given that Qφ = qφ where q is some number? It does not appear so. You need to distribute Q and get four terms on each side.
 
kuruman said:
Are you given that Qφ = qφ where q is some number? It does not appear so. You need to distribute Q and get four terms on each side.

no, it is given in a section of my textbook but not in the problem.[tex](\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi+\chi)=(\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi)+Q(\chi)=(\varphi,Q\varphi)+(\chi,Q(\chi)[/tex] given that
[tex] (\phi,Q\phi)=(Q\phi,\phi)[/tex],then [tex](\varphi,Q\varphi)+(\chi,Q(\chi)=Q(\varphi,\varphi)+Q(\chi,\chi)?[/tex]
 
What does your textbook say the definition of the notation

[tex](\varphi,Q\varphi)[/tex]

is? Is there any reason to believe that

[tex](\varphi,Q\varphi)=Q(\varphi,\varphi) ?[/tex]

The parentheses with the comma in between them mean something. What is it?
 
kuruman said:
What does your textbook say the definition of the notation

[tex](\varphi,Q\varphi)[/tex]

is? Is there any reason to believe that

[tex](\varphi,Q\varphi)=Q(\varphi,\varphi) ?[/tex]

The parentheses with the comma in between them mean something. What is it?

it is the notation for the inner product. I think that I can only move Q out side when its a constant, but Q is a matrix. my book says: [tex](\varphi,Q\varphi)=(Q\varphi,\varphi)[/tex]
 
Right. So you cannot move Q outside the parentheses. It is a matrix and it needs a vector to operate on. This means that Q needs to be inside the parentheses either on the left or on the right side of the comma. What you wrote in posting #8 is incorrect. Try again.
 
[tex] (\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi+\chi)=(\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi)+Q(\chi)=(\varphi,Q\varphi)+(\chi,Q(\chi)= (\varphi,Q\varphi)+(\chi,Q(\chi)=(Q\varphi,\varphi )+(Q\chi,\chi)=(Q\varphi+Q\chi,\varphi+\chi)=(Q(\varphi+\chi),(\varphi+\chi)?[/tex]

therefore[tex](\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi+\chi))=(Q(\varphi+\chi),(\varphi+\chi))[/tex] and is self-adjointed?
 
Last edited:
One more time. Start with the left side and split it into two terms

[tex]((\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi+\chi))=((\varphi+\chi),Q\varphi)+((\varphi+\chi),Q\chi)[/tex]

the last result can be split into four terms

[tex]=(\varphi,Q\varphi)+(\chi,Q\varphi)+(\varphi,Q\chi)+(\chi,Q\chi)[/tex]

Now do the same with the right side which is

[tex](Q(\varphi+\chi),(\varphi+\chi))[/tex]

then set the two sides equal.
 
kuruman said:
One more time. Start with the left side and split it into two terms

[tex]((\varphi+\chi),Q(\varphi+\chi))=((\varphi+\chi),Q\varphi)+((\varphi+\chi),Q\chi)[/tex]

the last result can be split into four terms

[tex]=(\varphi,Q\varphi)+(\chi,Q\varphi)+(\varphi,Q\chi)+(\chi,Q\chi)[/tex]

Now do the same with the right side which is

[tex](Q(\varphi+\chi),(\varphi+\chi))[/tex]

then set the two sides equal.

[tex] (Q(\varphi+\chi),(\varphi+\chi))=((Q\varphi,(\varphi+\chi))+(Q\chi,(\varphi+\chi)=<br /> ((Q\varphi,(\varphi+\chi))+(Q\chi,(\varphi+\chi)=(Q\varphi,\varphi)+((Q\varphi,\chi)+(Q\chi, \varphi)+(Q\chi,\chi)=(\varphi,Q\varphi)+((\varphi,Q\chi)+(\chi, Q\varphi)+(\chi,Q\chi) ?[/tex]