Lebesgue Integral in QM: Tutorial & Reference

  • Thread starter Thread starter teddy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qm
AI Thread Summary
A tutorial on the Lebesgue integral in quantum mechanics (QM) highlights its generality over the Riemann integral, as it is based on measure theory. For physicists, the differences may not significantly impact the understanding of QM, as Riemann integration suffices for many applications. Key points include that Lebesgue integration divides the y-axis into intervals, ensuring consistent results for wave functions of equivalent systems, while Riemann integration may yield different outcomes. Additionally, Dirac measures are used for distribution functions, which do not fit within the Hilbert space framework. Overall, the Lebesgue integral provides a more rigorous approach, accommodating a broader range of functions than the Riemann integral.
teddy
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
hi
can anyone give me a short tutorial on lebesgue integral in QM.
I am doing my first course in QM and got stuck in the mathematical formalism of Hilbert space .Even a good reference on the web will do.
my math back ground is only upto Reimann(spelling?) integral.
thanks

bye.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The main difference between Lebesgue and Riemann from a user perspective is that Lebesgue integration is more general, based on measure theory. For a physicist, I don't believe there is enough of a difference as far as understanding QM.

If you want to get some quick background try using google and search for "Lebesgue". You will get a lot of good hits.
 
As for Hilbert space L^2 stands, the whole point is that two functions that are different in a set of null measure are to be considered the same function.

This does not apply to distributions (ie delta functions and pure waves), which do not live in Hilbert space, although they are used as a "rigged" structure over it.

I believe that for most aplications the imaginery of Riemannian integration is enough, even if the rigour asks for Lebesgue.
 
thanks.

On going thru your replies and the web i got the following points :

1) in Lebesgue integ we divide the y-axis into small intervals instead of x-axis for integration.

2)the lebesgue integration of wave-fn for two physically equivalent systems is always same while riemann integration may differ due to 1)

3)For distribution functions we use Dirac measure instead of lebesgue.

am i missing something ?
is it more to it,speaking in physical terms ?
 
Actually, whenever a function is Riemann integrable, the Lesbegue integral gives the same result. The reason the Lesbegue integral is "better" is because the Lesbegue integral works for a much vaster set of functions than the Riemann integral.

Hurkyl
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
I am attempting to use a Raman TruScan with a 785 nm laser to read a material for identification purposes. The material causes too much fluorescence and doesn’t not produce a good signal. However another lab is able to produce a good signal consistently using the same Raman model and sample material. What would be the reason for the different results between instruments?

Similar threads

Back
Top