Is the Square of a Density Matrix Equal to the Density Matrix Itself?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of density matrices in quantum mechanics, specifically whether the square of a density matrix equals the density matrix itself for a pure ensemble.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the definition of a density matrix and its properties, questioning the assumptions about pure states and the implications of the identity matrix. There are attempts to clarify the conditions under which the square of a density matrix equals itself, with some participants providing mathematical expressions and others seeking to understand the implications of these expressions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights and corrections to previous statements. Some guidance has been offered regarding the nature of probabilities in pure states and the mathematical formulation of density matrices. There is a recognition of errors in initial assumptions, leading to further exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that for a pure ensemble, the probabilities associated with the states are not uniform, which affects the formulation of the density matrix. The discussion also highlights the need for a complete orthonormal basis when dealing with density matrices.

Mr confusion
Messages
72
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


to prove : square of density matrix= the density matrix itself (for a pure ensemble)

Homework Equations


density matrix=sum over P(i) ket(i) bra(i) where Pi = probability that random chosen system from ensemble shows state i.
summed over i , where P=1 for pure ensemble

The Attempt at a Solution

i thought it is giving the identity matrix, whose square is also I , hence the proof. but i am not sure about this.:frown:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
No, the density matrix is NOT in general the identity matrix! There are many matrices with the property that [itex]A^2= A[/itex].
 
then how will i prove it?
 
Mr confusion said:
then how will i prove it?

What are the P_i for a pure state?
 
Ok, first we assume that the set [tex]\left \lbrace \left| i \right \rangle \right \rbrace[/tex] forms a complete orthonormal base (otherwise if we have a general state [tex]\left| \psi \right \rangle[/tex] we have to expand it into such a base). Further we just deal with the discrete case, the continuous one can be done similarly.

If [tex]\rho = \sum_{i} \left| i \right \rangle \left \langle i \right|[/tex] is the density matrix, the square is simply given by:

[tex]\rho^{2} = \sum_{i,j} \left| i \right \rangle \langle i \vert j \rangle \left \langle j \right|[/tex]

Now we use [tex]\left \langle i \vert j \right \rangle = \delta_{ij}[/tex] and arrive at:

[tex]\rho^{2} = \sum_{i} \left| i \right \rangle \left \langle i \right| = \rho[/tex].
 
Count Iblis said:
What are the P_i for a pure state?
Pi for pure ensemble=1 since all are in same state, isn't it?
 
parton said:
Ok, first we assume that the set [tex]\left \lbrace \left| i \right \rangle \right \rbrace[/tex] forms a complete orthonormal base (otherwise if we have a general state [tex]\left| \psi \right \rangle[/tex] we have to expand it into such a base). Further we just deal with the discrete case, the continuous one can be done similarly.

If [tex]\rho = \sum_{i} \left| i \right \rangle \left \langle i \right|[/tex] is the density matrix, the square is simply given by:

[tex]\rho^{2} = \sum_{i,j} \left| i \right \rangle \langle i \vert j \rangle \left \langle j \right|[/tex]

Now we use [tex]\left \langle i \vert j \right \rangle = \delta_{ij}[/tex] and arrive at:

[tex]\rho^{2} = \sum_{i} \left| i \right \rangle \left \langle i \right| = \rho[/tex].

i can just say -'COOL.' MANY thanks.
...sorry, just one more thing
how can i just keep them side by side, i mean[tex]\rho[/tex] is a density matrix and to use it as a matrix i need to find its elements in some basis. how can i simply keep the abstract notation?
 
Last edited:
parton said:
Ok, first we assume that the set [tex]\left \lbrace \left| i \right \rangle \right \rbrace[/tex] forms a complete orthonormal base (otherwise if we have a general state [tex]\left| \psi \right \rangle[/tex] we have to expand it into such a base). Further we just deal with the discrete case, the continuous one can be done similarly.

If [tex]\rho = \sum_{i} \left| i \right \rangle \left \langle i \right|[/tex] is the density matrix, the square is simply given by:

[tex]\rho^{2} = \sum_{i,j} \left| i \right \rangle \langle i \vert j \rangle \left \langle j \right|[/tex]

Now we use [tex]\left \langle i \vert j \right \rangle = \delta_{ij}[/tex] and arrive at:

[tex]\rho^{2} = \sum_{i} \left| i \right \rangle \left \langle i \right| = \rho[/tex].

This proof is wrong. What you've done is computing the square of the identity matrix which obviously is the identity matrix.
 
Mr confusion said:
Pi for pure ensemble=1 since all are in same state, isn't it?

No, for a pure state all the P_i are zero, except for one particular value of i (say i = r). So, the state is with certainty some particular state |r>.
 
  • #10
Count Iblis said:
No, for a pure state all the P_i are zero, except for one particular value of i (say i = r). So, the state is with certainty some particular state |r>.
yes. i was wrong.
but does that mean there will be no summation?(for pure ensemble)
then how will i proceed?
 
  • #11
Sorry, the proof is of course wrong, such ugly things should not happen, very embarrassing...

In the pure case there is indeed no summation and we end up with one certain state [tex]\vert r \rangle[/tex].

If this state is normed, i.e. [tex]\langle r \vert r \rangle = 1[/tex] and your density matrix is [tex]\rho = \vert r \rangle \langle r \vert[/tex] than you have the (trivial) relation:

[tex]\rho^{2} = \vert r \rangle \langle r \vert r \rangle \langle r \vert = \vert r \rangle \langle r \vert = \rho[/tex]
 
  • #12
parton, to err is human.
i learned from your mistake. that will not alter my belief that u are a genius. thanks very much for helping me.
doing mistakes is a regular job for confused people like me.:biggrin:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
63
Views
9K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K