I No problem at all, happy to help! Have a great weekend as well.

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Frost_Xue
  • Start date Start date
Frost_Xue
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I was reading Dirac's "The principle of QM" and bit of confused.
In equation (21) does the number 1 in the sum or outside of the sum? If out side how come the sum over r is 1? X function is the quotient when the factors diveded by single one factor. for example if a*b*c*d then X_b is a*c*d
i
IMG_20160723_155740.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1 is outside the sum, and it should be the identity operator, not a number (but this is a very common abuse of notation).

An observable (Hermitian operator) ##\xi## can be decomposed as a sum ##\xi = \sum_r c_r |r\rangle \langle r|## of its orthonormal eigenvectors ##\{ |r \rangle \}## written as projection operators ##|r\rangle \langle r|##, and eigenvalues ##c_r##.

What Dirac is doing is the converse. How can we write each projection operator as a function of ##\xi## ? Let's first look at $$\chi_r (\xi) = \prod_{q \neq r} ( \xi - c_q \hat{1}), $$ where ##\hat{1}## is the identity operator. Each term in the product annihilates ## | q \rangle ## i.e. ## (\xi - c_q \hat{1} )|q \rangle = 0##. So it is easy to see in the basis in which ## \xi ## is diagonalized that ##\chi_r (\xi)## has a bunch of zeros in the diagonal. In fact, the only vector not annihilated by ##\chi_r (\xi)## is ##|r\rangle. ## Moreover, $$\chi_r (\xi) = \prod_{q \neq r} (c_r - c_q)|r\rangle \langle r|.$$ Note that ##|r\rangle \langle r|## could be inside or outside the product. It doesn't matter, because ##(|r\rangle \langle r|)^2 = |r\rangle \langle r| ##. Therefore, \begin{aligned} \frac{\chi_r (\xi) }{\chi_r (c_r)} &= |r \rangle \langle r| \\ \sum_r \frac{\chi_r (\xi) }{\chi_r (c_r)} &= \hat{1}, \end{aligned} where I used the fact that ##\{ |r\rangle \}## forms a resolution of the identity in the last line.

Perhaps an easier way to say all of this is that, whenever we have the resolution of the identity ##\sum_r |r\rangle \langle r| = \hat{1}##, we can expand any vector in the ##|r \rangle ## basis by inserting the identity $$ |P\rangle = \hat{1} |P\rangle = \sum_r \langle r|P \rangle |r\rangle. $$
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Mentz114, vanhees71 and jim mcnamara
Truecrimson said:
1 is outside the sum, and it should be the identity operator, not a number (but this is a very common abuse of notation).

An observable (Hermitian operator) ##\xi## can be decomposed as a sum ##\xi = \sum_r c_r |r\rangle \langle r|## of its orthonormal eigenvectors ##\{ |r \rangle \}## written as projection operators ##|r\rangle \langle r|##, and eigenvalues ##c_r##.

What Dirac is doing is the converse. How can we write each projection operator as a function of ##\xi## ? Let's first look at $$\chi_r (\xi) = \prod_{q \neq r} ( \xi - c_q \hat{1}), $$ where ##\hat{1}## is the identity operator. Each term in the product annihilates ## | q \rangle ## i.e. ## (\xi - c_q \hat{1} )|q \rangle = 0##. So it is easy to see in the basis in which ## \xi ## is diagonalized that ##\chi_r (\xi)## has a bunch of zeros in the diagonal. In fact, the only vector not annihilated by ##\chi_r (\xi)## is ##|r\rangle. ## Moreover, $$\chi_r (\xi) = \prod_{q \neq r} (c_r - c_q)|r\rangle \langle r|.$$ Note that ##|r\rangle \langle r|## could be inside or outside the product. It doesn't matter, because ##(|r\rangle \langle r|)^2 = |r\rangle \langle r| ##. Therefore, \begin{aligned} \frac{\chi_r (\xi) }{\chi_r (c_r)} &= |r \rangle \langle r| \\ \sum_r \frac{\chi_r (\xi) }{\chi_r (c_r)} &= \hat{1}, \end{aligned} where I used the fact that ##\{ |r\rangle \}## forms a resolution of the identity in the last line.

Perhaps an easier way to say all of this is that, whenever we have the resolution of the identity ##\sum_r |r\rangle \langle r| = \hat{1}##, we can expand any vector in the ##|r \rangle ## basis by inserting the identity $$ |P\rangle = \hat{1} |P\rangle = \sum_r \langle r|P \rangle |r\rangle. $$
That was great answer. Thank you so much for the help and time. Sorry to bother you with such trivial question. have a good weekend.
 
I am not sure if this falls under classical physics or quantum physics or somewhere else (so feel free to put it in the right section), but is there any micro state of the universe one can think of which if evolved under the current laws of nature, inevitably results in outcomes such as a table levitating? That example is just a random one I decided to choose but I'm really asking about any event that would seem like a "miracle" to the ordinary person (i.e. any event that doesn't seem to...
Back
Top