Is the unitary operator unique?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Demon117
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator
Demon117
Messages
162
Reaction score
1
So there is a theorem at the beginning of section 1.5 in Sakurai that states the following:

Given two sets of base kets, both satisfying orthonormality and completeness. there exists a unitary operator U such that

|b^{(1)}> = U|a^{(1)}>,|b^{(2)}> = U|a^{(2)}>,...,|b^{(n)}> = U|a^{(n)}>

By a unitary operator we mean an operator fulfilling the conditions

U^{t}U=1

as well as

UU^{t}=1

So this is not difficult to prove. But my real question is can we prove that U is unique or is that just not the case and why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The elements of U are U_{nm} = \langle a_n | U | a_m \rangle = \langle a_n | b_m \rangle, so if you fix the basis sets then you fix U.
 
Physics Monkey said:
The elements of U are U_{nm} = \langle a_n | U | a_m \rangle = \langle a_n | b_m \rangle, so if you fix the basis sets then you fix U.

That is what I thought, but I wanted a second opinion. Thank you.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top