Is the Expectation Value Relation for QM Operators Valid?

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1 replies · 2K views
Niles
Messages
1,834
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi

My book uses the following in a calculation
[tex] \left\langle a \right\rangle \left\langle {b^\dagger } \right\rangle + \left\langle {a^\dagger } \right\rangle \left\langle b \right\rangle = 2\operatorname{Re} \left[ {\left\langle a \right\rangle \left\langle {b^\dagger } \right\rangle } \right][/tex]
where a and b are QM operators. I agree with the relation [itex]z^*+z=\text{Re}(z)[/itex] (for z a complex variable), but in the above case the conjugation is on the operator, not the expectation value itself. Is the relation valid?Niles.
 
Last edited:
on Phys.org
Ahh, I see it now. The relation is valid, as <b^+> = <b>*.