Matrix representation of operators

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the matrix representation of linear operators in quantum mechanics, specifically operators ##\hat{A} = -i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial x}## and ##\hat{B} = x##. A contradiction arises when comparing the left-hand side (LHS) and right-hand side (RHS) of the equation ##\hat{A}(\hat{B}u)##, revealing a mistake in the RHS calculation due to improper notation. The correct representation of ##\hat{B}## is clarified as the operator that transforms a function ##\Psi(x)## into ##x\Psi(x)##. The discussion concludes that all linear operators, including non-Hermitian ones, can indeed be represented by matrices.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linear operators in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with matrix multiplication and representation
  • Knowledge of Hermitian and non-Hermitian operators
  • Basic calculus, particularly differentiation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the matrix representation of non-Hermitian operators
  • Learn about the implications of operator notation in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the concept of operator algebra in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the role of wave functions in operator applications
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of linear operators in physics.

Happiness
Messages
686
Reaction score
30
Let the operators ##\hat{A}## and ##\hat{B}## be ##-i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial x}## and ##x## respectively.

Representing these linear operators by matrices, and a wave function ##\Psi(x)## by a column vector u, by the associativity of matrix multiplication, we have

##\hat{A}(\hat{B}##u##)##=##(\hat{A}\hat{B})##u.

By the definitions of ##\hat{A}## and ##\hat{B}##, we have

LHS ##= -i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\big(x\ \Psi(x)\big) = -i\hbar\big(x\frac{\partial\Psi(x)}{\partial x} + \Psi(x)\big)##

RHS ##= -i\hbar\Psi(x)##

LHS ##\neq## RHS, a contradiction. Where is the mistake?

The extract from a textbook below only talks about the matrix representation of a Hermitian operator. But is it true that all linear operators can be represented by matrices, not just those that are Hermitian?

Screen Shot 2016-01-03 at 6.48.28 am.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Happiness said:
Let the operators ##\hat{A}## and ##\hat{B}## be ##-i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial x}## and ##x## respectively.

Representing these linear operators by matrices, and a wave function ##\Psi(x)## by a column vector u, by the associativity of matrix multiplication, we have
...
RHS ##= -i\hbar\Psi(x)##

LHS ##\neq## RHS, a contradiction. Where is the mistake?
The mistake is in the RHS calc. It arises from the abuse of notation of writing ##\hat B## as ##x##. THe correct representation of ##\hat B## is ##\Psi(x)\mapsto x\Psi(x)##. That is, it is the operator that, given a function of ##x##, returns a new function that is the original function, multiplied by x. So we get:
##\hat A\hat B=-i\hbar\partial_x \Big(\Psi(x)\mapsto x\Psi(x)\Big)=
\Psi(x)\mapsto -i\hbar \Big(\Psi(x)\partial_x( x)+x\partial_x\Psi(x)\Big)## which will match the LHS when applied to a specific ket.
The extract from a textbook below only talks about the matrix representation of a Hermitian operator. But is it true that all linear operators can be represented by matrices, not just those that are Hermitian?
Yes. The matrix element given in formula 5.156 is just as meaningful for non-Hermitian operators. It will just be (in most cases) a non-Hermitian matrix.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU, Happiness, bhobba and 1 other person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
921
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
566
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K