Is the unitary operator unique?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Demon117
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the uniqueness of the unitary operator U as defined in Sakurai's quantum mechanics text. It is established that if two sets of base kets satisfy orthonormality and completeness, a unitary operator U exists such that |b^{(i)}> = U|a^{(i)}> for i = 1 to n. The conditions for U include U^{t}U=1 and UU^{t}=1, confirming its unitary nature. The conclusion drawn is that fixing the basis sets uniquely determines the elements of U, thus suggesting that U is indeed unique.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics concepts such as kets and operators
  • Familiarity with the properties of unitary operators
  • Knowledge of orthonormality and completeness in vector spaces
  • Basic proficiency in linear algebra, particularly matrix operations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the proof of the existence of unitary operators in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the implications of the uniqueness of unitary operators in quantum state transformations
  • Learn about the role of basis sets in quantum mechanics and their influence on operators
  • Investigate the mathematical framework of Hilbert spaces as it relates to quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for quantum mechanics students, physicists, and mathematicians interested in the properties of unitary operators and their applications in quantum theory.

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 [itex]U[/itex] such that

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

By a unitary operator we mean an operator fulfilling the conditions

[itex]U^{t}U=1[/itex]

as well as

[itex]UU^{t}=1[/itex]

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

That is what I thought, but I wanted a second opinion. Thank you.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K