Is the distintion between vector and rays relevant?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter carllacan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rays Vector
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relevance of distinguishing between quantum states represented as vectors and those represented as rays, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics. Participants explore theoretical implications, mathematical formulations, and conceptual understandings related to this distinction.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the importance of distinguishing between vectors and rays in quantum states, seeking examples from physics.
  • Another participant notes that normalization of probabilities is necessary for proper probabilities, implying a connection to the distinction.
  • A participant argues that while many treatments do not differentiate between the two, considering states as rays may better incorporate the concept of global phase as a gauge operation in quantum mechanics.
  • It is mentioned that the Born rule may need adjustments depending on whether states are treated as rays or unit vectors, with most formulations assuming unit vectors.
  • One participant emphasizes that quantum states are not merely elements of a vector space but are positive operators of unit trace, discussing the implications for pure and mixed states.
  • A later reply highlights that the Wigner-Weyl formulation of quantum mechanics fundamentally relies on the distinction between rays and vectors, asserting its significance in the mathematical theory of symmetries.
  • Another participant explains that pure states can be described as density operators and discusses the relationship between pure states as rays and their representation in the Hilbert space.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relevance and implications of the distinction between vectors and rays, with some arguing for its importance in certain contexts while others suggest that in many treatments, the distinction may not be significant. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the overall necessity of this distinction in quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the treatment of quantum states as vectors or rays may depend on specific mathematical frameworks and interpretations, which could influence the application of concepts like the Born rule and the representation of states.

carllacan
Messages
272
Reaction score
3
Hi.

Quantum states are usually represented as vectors, and treated as such, even when distinct states should be represented by rays. Is there any case (in physics) when it is important to take into account this distinction?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not that I know of, other than the obvious fact that you have to normalize your probabilities before you can count them as proper probabilities.
 
As Matterwave says, in most treatments there is no difference, because only normalizable states are physical states. However, there is one conceptual point for which rays as states may be better, and that is that multiplication by a global phase is a gauge operation in quantum mechanics. In principle, the states as rays naturally incorporates the global phase as gauge, while it has to be put in "by hand" or inferred from the Born rule if states are considered as unit vectors.

The Born rule has to be adjusted depending on whether rays or unit vectors are considered states. Most statements of the Born rule assume that states are unit vectors.

Another formalism that takes care of the global phase as gauge automatically is density matrix formalism.
 
The truth is states are not elements of a vector space; they are positive operators of unit trace. The Born Rule is given an operator O the expected value is E(O) = Trace (PO). Pure states are states of the form |x><x|. Mixed states are convex sums of pure states. It can be shown that all states are either mixed or pure. Pure states can be mapped to the underlying vector space, but only up to an arbitrary phase factor c because |cx><cx| = |x><x|. But it must always be borne in mind they are not in general elements of that space, they are really operators.

This is the density matrix formalism Atty referred to. Best to view it that way to avoid confusion.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
Your question is relevant

carllacan said:
Hi.

Quantum states are usually represented as vectors, and treated as such, even when distinct states should be represented by rays. Is there any case (in physics) when it is important to take into account this distinction?

Thanks.

The mathematical theory of symmetries in quantum mechanics as a whole (the so-called Wigner-Weyl formulation of quantum mechanics) is built on the distinction between rays and vectors. Without this, there would be nothing in QM, really.

From a statistical standpoint, you treat pure states as rays in the Hilbert space (= points in the projective Hilbert space) and mixed states as density operators. Since mixed states are a generalization of pure states, you can describe pure states as density operators as well. In particular, if a pure state is described as a ray Psi, you can write the density operator for that state as a projector from the Hlbert space onto any (normalized) vector from the ray Psi (such a vector is called state representatives) .
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K