Is the Adjoint of a Commutator Negative of the Commutator?

  • Thread starter Thread starter stumpoman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Commutator
stumpoman
Messages
10
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Show that
\left [ A,B \right ]^{\dagger}=-\left [A,B \right ]

Homework Equations


\left [ A,B \right ] = AB-BA\left (AB \right)^{\dagger}= B^{\dagger}A^{\dagger}

The Attempt at a Solution


\left [ A,B \right ]^{\dagger}=\left (AB-BA \right )^{\dagger}=\left (AB \right )^{\dagger}-\left (BA \right )^{\dagger}=B^{\dagger}A^{\dagger}-A^{\dagger}B^{\dagger}=-\left (A^{\dagger}B^{\dagger}-B^{\dagger}A^{\dagger} \right )=-\left [ A^{\dagger},B^{\dagger} \right ]
I can only see this working if the operators are Hermitian but the question did not specify it as such.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby
Physics news on Phys.org
A quick way to solve the problem of being given a potentially incorrectly specified question is to look for a counterexample. Keep it as simple as possible. In this case, you can choose two 2 x 2 real matrices that are non-symmetric - hence non-Hermitian. Then do the calc and see if the result holds.

I used the following R code to test this (the 't' function performs a transpose and %*% does matrix mult)

A=array(c(1,0,1,2),dim=c(2,2))
A=array(c(2,1,0,1),dim=c(2,2))
t(A%*%B-B%*%A)
-(A%*%B-B%*%A)
t(A%*%B-B%*%A)-(-(A%*%B-B%*%A))
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top