Problems about eigenvector in quantum mechanics

wowowo2006
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I am learning about the basic quantum mechanics
I know that an operator ,call it M^, is generally a matrix
And we also can be represent it b a matrix representation M, associated with certain basis |e>

M^ = sigma ( Mij |e> <e|)
I,j
Where Mij is matrix element of M

So now I wonder which matrix should I use, M^ or M
To find the eigenvector?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
An operator \hat M is an object that takes a vector and gives another vector. It is not a matrix but it has a matrix representation which depends on the base set used. If the base set is \{|n\rangle\}_{n=0}^{\infty}, the matrix elements of \hat M in this basis are M_{mn}=\langle m | \hat M | n \rangle. This is the only matrix associated to \hat M(up to change of basis, of course).
 
Shyan said:
An operator \hat M is an object that takes a vector and gives another vector. It is not a matrix but it has a matrix representation which depends on the base set used. If the base set is \{|n\rangle\}_{n=0}^{\infty}, the matrix elements of \hat M in this basis are M_{mn}=\langle m | \hat M | n \rangle. This is the only matrix associated to \hat M(up to change of basis, of course).
So that means,
When I change the basis, the matrix representation change
So do the eigenvector changes too?
 
wowowo2006 said:
So that means,
When I change the basis, the matrix representation change
So do the eigenvector changes too?

I see what's your problem.
You should be able to distinguish between abstract mathematical constructs and their representations. The operators and vectors are entities independent of their representations. They don't change when you change basis, its just that their components w.r.t. different bases are different. Its like vectors in Euclidean space. They are the same no matter you use a particular set i,j,k or another set rotated w.r.t. to the first one. The vector is the same, only the component changes to comply with the change of basis.
So no, eigenvectors do not change, they only have different components w.r.t. to different bases.
 
Let's clarify this issue a bit. You have a linear operator on Hilbert space (usually defined on a dense subset). This we denote with \hat{A}. Then you can choose any representation you like by taking a complete orthonormal set |u_{j} \rangle of vectors, fulfilling
\langle u_j | u_k \rangle=\delta_{jk}, \quad \sum_{j} |u_j \rangle \langle u_j|=\hat{1}.
Now you can represent the operator in terms of its matrix elements with respect to this basis,
A_{jk}=\langle u_j |\hat{A} u_k \rangle.
You get back the operator by inserting two identity operators in terms of the completeness relation for the basis,
\hat{A}=\sum_{j,k} |u_j \rangle \langle j|\hat{M} u_k \rangle \langle u_k |=\sum_{jk} M_{jk} |u_j \rangle \langle u_k|.
I hope, now at least the formalities are a bit more clear.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top