B Preference for the notation used for the wave function?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the representation of the wave function as a vector in Hilbert Space and the use of the identity operator. It clarifies that there is no preference for one notation over another, as they represent the same quantum state. A participant admits to confusion regarding probability amplitudes and matrix representations, revealing a lack of understanding of quantum mechanics. The conversation highlights the importance of clear communication in scientific discussions. Ultimately, the thread concludes with a note on the challenges of productive dialogue when participants struggle to articulate their questions.
entropy1
Messages
1,232
Reaction score
72
If I am correct, the wave function is presented as a vector in Hilbert Space. Alternatively this vector can be multiplied by the identity operator. Is there a preference for one notation or the other? Are they both possible representations of the same wave function?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
entropy1 said:
the wave function is presented as a vector in Hilbert Space
More precisely, the quantum state is a vector in a Hilbert Space. The wave function is a particular representation of vectors in particular Hilbert Spaces.

entropy1 said:
this vector can be multiplied by the identity operator
Which leaves it unchanged.

entropy1 said:
Is there a preference for one notation or the other?
They aren't different notations for the state vector.

Where are you getting this from?
 
Sorry, I made a mistake.
 
entropy1 said:
Sorry, I made a mistake.
How so?
 
PeterDonis said:
How so?
I was trying, in the finite dimensional Hilbert Space case, to get the probability amplitudes <Ψ|ei> on the diagonal of a matrix. But in the way I mentioned this is not the case.
 
Last edited:
  • Skeptical
Likes weirdoguy
entropy1 said:
I was trying, in the finite dimensional Hilbert Space case, to get the amplitudes λi on the diagonal of a matrix.
What does this mean? Again, where are you getting this from? A reference would be very helpful as your own explanations are garbled.
 
PeterDonis said:
where are you getting this from?
I don't read scientific articles. I am not a scientist. I understand if you want to keep the forum tidy. I just have basic questions about physics.
 
entropy1 said:
I don't read scientific articles.

Then where did you get this phrase:
entropy1 said:
in the finite dimensional Hilbert Space case, to get the probability amplitudes <Ψ|ei> on the diagonal of a matrix.

?
 
weirdoguy said:
Then where did you get this phrase:
I was pondering that by myself. My only knowledge of QM comes from "QM the absolute minimum" by Susskind & co, and PF. I confused the eigenvalue with the probability amplitude. There is a lot I don't understand.
 
  • #10
entropy1 said:
I just have basic questions about physics.
But apparently you can't even frame your questions in a way that anyone else can understand.

entropy1 said:
I was pondering that by myself.
Or even know where you are getting whatever information you are basing your questions on.

This is not a recipe for productive discussion. Thread closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K