Question about operator and eigenvectors

einai
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Hi, I encountered the following HW problem which really confuses me. Could anyone please explain it to me? Thank you so much!

The result of applying a Hermitian operator B to a normalized vector |1> is generally of the form:

B|1> = b|1> + c|2>

where b and c are numerical coefficients and |2> is a normalized vector orthogonal to |1>.

My question is: Why B|1> must have the above form? Does it mean if |1> is an eigenstate of B, then b=!0 and c=0? But what if |1> is not an eigenstate of B?

I also need to find the expectation value of B (<1|B|1>), but I think I got this part:

<1|B|1> = <1|b|1> + <1|c|2> = b<1|1> + c<1|2> = b

since |1> and |2> are orthogonal and they're both normalized. Does that look right?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


Originally posted by Ambitwistor
You can decompose any vector, such as B|1>, into two components that are proportional to and orthogonal to some vector. If |1> is an eigenvector of B, then B|1> = b|1>; b can be zero or nonzero. If |1> isn't an eigenstate of B, then neither b nor c have to be zero. You correctly computed <1|B|1>.

Thank you very much. I got it :).
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top