Undergrad Motivation behind the Operator-Formalism in QM

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The motivation behind representing observables in quantum mechanics (QM) as hermitian operators stems from the requirement that eigenvalues must be real to correspond to measurable quantities. The eigenvalue equation, expressed as $$ \hat A\ket{\psi} = A_i\ket{\psi}$$, establishes a direct relationship between the state of a system and the measurement outcomes. This formalism arises from experimental observations of discrete measurement values, leading to the conclusion that states can be expressed as superpositions of eigenstates. Understanding this relationship is crucial for analyzing quantum systems and their observable properties.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly superposition and measurement.
  • Familiarity with hermitian operators and their properties in quantum theory.
  • Knowledge of eigenvalue equations and their significance in linear algebra.
  • Basic comprehension of inner product spaces and their application in quantum states.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of hermitian operators in quantum mechanics and their role in observables.
  • Explore the mathematical foundations of eigenvalue equations in linear algebra.
  • Investigate the physical interpretation of superposition in quantum states.
  • Learn about the measurement postulates in quantum mechanics and their derivation.
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in quantum mechanics, physicists interested in the mathematical foundations of quantum theory, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of observable properties in quantum systems.

deuteron
Messages
64
Reaction score
14
TL;DR
What is the motivation behind the eigenvalue equations corresponding the the observables in QM?
I have a problem understanding the motivation behind why all observables are represented via a hermitian operator.
I understand that from the eigenvalue equation
$$ \hat A\ket{\psi} = A_i\ket{\psi}$$
after requiring that the eigenvalues be real, the operator ##\hat A## needs to be hermitian.
However, I do not understand the motivation behind the eigenvalue equation in the first place, from where do we come to this? Why do we require, that applying an operator on an eigenstate would correspond physically to the measurement of the corresponding eigenvalue?
As far as I have understood, the steps on creating the mathematical formalism are:
- observe experimentally that the measurement of a particle gives discrete values for the same measurement
- deduce that the particle must be in the superposition of the states ##\ket{\phi_i}## corresponding to the measured values
$$ \ket{\Psi} = \displaystyle\sum_i c_i\ket{\phi_i}$$
- observe that we have a value-state pair
- (this is the step I don't understand)
- create the eigenvalue equation where the operator applied to the eigenstate gives the measured value times the state

Is there a physical motivation behind the eigenvalue equation, or is there another set of axioms, from which the eigenvalue equation can be derived mathematically?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
deuteron said:
I do not understand the motivation behind the eigenvalue equation in the first place, from where do we come to this?
If ##\hat{A}## represents an observable (and in principle any Hermitian operator can represent an observable), then a state ##\ket{\psi}## that satisfies the eigenvalue equation for ##\hat{A}## will have a definite value for that observable, whereas a state that doesn't satisfy the eigenvalue equation won't. Knowing which states have definite values for observables is very valuable in analyzing problems in QM.
 
deuteron said:
However, I do not understand the motivation behind the eigenvalue equation in the first place, from where do we come to this? Why do we require, that applying an operator on an eigenstate would correspond physically to the measurement of the corresponding eigenvalue?
Let me say what I think for MOTIVATION you say. In CM we feel no necessity to distinguish between physical state and physical value. So the state is (a gourp of ) numbers, e,g, coordinates, energy value, x,y,z-components of momentum, etc. In QM we know the states are vectors which is used to express priciple of superposition. Then how do we get physical value from the state vectors ? Usually in mathematics by making inner products with itself we get number scalar from vector.
<\xi'|\xi'>
But here there's no information what physical value we measure, x, p, E? So this plain self inner product has no physical meaning. we make it 1.
<\xi'|\xi'>=1
In statistical physics we use distribution function for getting mean value, variance, etc. of any physical variables by multipling them, e.g. x,p,E to distribution function and make whole integration. In analgy we try. First for measurement of physical variable ##\xi##
\xi<\xi'|\xi'>=\xi
this is physical qunatitiy measurement itsellf with no information of states so meaningless. We must sandwith ##\xi##. Say ##|\xi'>## is state vector which correspond to the value ##\xi'## for measuring ## \xi##, we expect
<\xi'|\xi|\xi'>=\xi'=\xi'<\xi'|\xi'>=<\xi'|\xi'|\xi'>
Comparing the most LHS and the most RHS we expect the relation
\xi|\xi'>=\xi'|\xi'>
Now we know mathematically ##\xi## is an operator which transform one vector state to another.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes cianfa72 and deuteron
anuttarasammyak said:
Let me say what I think for MOTIVATION you say. In CM we feel no necessity to distinguish between physical state and physical value. So the state is (a gourp of ) numbers, e,g, coordinates, energy value, x,y,z-components of momentum, etc. In QM we know the states are vectors which is used to express priciple of superposition. Then how do we get physical value from the state vectors ? Usually in mathematics by making inner products with itself we get number scalar from vector.
<\xi'|\xi'>
But here there's no information what physical value we measure, x, p, E? So this plain self inner product has no physical meaning. we make it 1.
<\xi'|\xi'>=1
In statistical physics we use distribution function for getting mean value, variance, etc. of any physical variables by multipling them, e.g. x,p,E to distribution function and make whole integration. In analgy we try. First for measurement of physical variable ##\xi##
\xi<\xi'|\xi'>=\xi
this is physical qunatitiy measurement itsellf with no information of states so meaningless. We must sandwith ##\xi##. Say ##|\xi'>## is state vector which correspond to the value ##\xi'## for measuring ## \xi##, we expect
<\xi'|\xi|\xi'>=\xi'=\xi'<\xi'|\xi'>=<\xi'|\xi'|\xi'>
Comparing the most LHS and the most RHS we expect the relation
\xi|\xi'>=\xi'|\xi'>
Now we know mathematically ##\xi## is an operator which transform one vector state to another.
thank you! this was exactly what I was trying to understand!
 
  • Like
Likes anuttarasammyak
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
816
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K