I'm reading in Sakurai's 1st chapter that this follows from the "associative axiom":(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

[tex]

\langle\beta|\cdot\left(X|\alpha\rangle\right) = \left(\langle\beta|X\right)\cdot|\alpha\rangle

[/tex]

so we might as well write [tex]\langle\beta|X|\alpha\rangle[/tex]. I know this is basic stuff, but I thought this notation only made sense when X is hermitian since when you let X act on the bra instead of the ket you must take the hermitian conjugate. Like this:

[tex]

\langle\beta|\cdot\left(X|\alpha\rangle\right) = \left(\langle\beta|X^\dagger\right)\cdot|\alpha\rangle

[/tex]

It's pretty bad that I'm in trouble already in the first chapter (exam next thursday).

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Kets, bras, hermiticity etc.

Loading...

Similar Threads for Kets bras hermiticity | Date |
---|---|

Equations with bras and kets | Sep 14, 2014 |

Bras and kets vs. Einstein summation convention | Oct 27, 2012 |

Order of operations with bras and kets | Sep 12, 2010 |

Bras and Kets | Jul 31, 2008 |

Bras and Kets and Tensors | Jun 22, 2008 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**