Mathematical Quantum Statistics: Why is A*rho of trace class?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the properties of density operators in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing why the product A*rho is of trace class when A is a bounded operator and rho is a density operator of trace class. It is established that while A*rho is trace class for bounded operators, the situation changes for unbounded operators, where A*rho is generally not trace class due to the potential for infinite expectation values. The key takeaway is that the expectation value of an observable represented by an unbounded operator may not be finite, complicating the trace class condition.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of density operators in quantum mechanics
  • Knowledge of trace class operators
  • Familiarity with bounded and unbounded operators
  • Basic concepts of functional analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of trace class operators in infinite-dimensional spaces
  • Study the implications of unbounded operators in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the spectral theory of self-adjoint operators
  • Explore the mathematical foundations of quantum statistics
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, mathematicians specializing in functional analysis, and students studying quantum mechanics who seek a deeper understanding of operator theory and its implications in quantum statistics.

Illuvatar
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi,

as we know a density operator [itex]\rho[/itex] is defined to be a non-negative definite operator of trace class (with trace 1).
We also know that for a given observable A, which is a (possibly unbounded) self-adjoint operator, the expectation value can be calculated as [itex]\operatorname{tr}(A \cdot \rho)[/itex].

But that's where I just paused: In my lecture about functional analysis I learned that calculating traces in infinite dimensional spaces is a tricky thing. For a given operator O, you must first check that it is of trace class, only then do you know that [itex]\sum \langle \psi_n | O | \psi_n \rangle[/itex] makes sense (i.e. gives the same value for all complete orthogonal sets [itex]\{ \psi_n \}[/itex]).
In that lecture, we did prove that [itex]A \cdot \rho[/itex] is of trace class if [itex]\rho[/itex] is of trace class and A is an arbitrary bounded operator. But what happens if A is an unbounded operator?

Thank you for reading and I hope you can give me a hint to the solution :smile:

(I wasn't sure if I should post this here or in the Calculus & Analysis forum... please tell me if my choice was wrong :wink:)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[itex]A\rho[/itex] is generally not trace class. For unbounded operators the expectation value needn't be finite (as their spectrum needn't be finite), so there's no problem if [itex]A\rho[/itex] is unbounded.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
9K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
11K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K