Properties of a unitary matrix

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of a unitary matrix, specifically in the context of the scattering matrix (S-matrix) in quantum mechanics. Participants explore definitions, relationships, and implications of the S-matrix, including its unitarity and dependence on momentum.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines the S-matrix in terms of wave functions and proposes a relationship involving momentum and complex conjugation.
  • Another participant questions the definition of S(p) and suggests it may relate to operators in a vector space.
  • A different participant expresses uncertainty about the nature of the parameters A, B, C, and D, suggesting they might be real but lacking a rigorous definition.
  • One participant proposes that if the amplitude given by the scalar product depends only on the difference p2-p1, then S could be expressed as S(p2-p1).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the definitions and implications of the S-matrix, with multiple competing views and uncertainties expressed regarding the nature of the parameters involved.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the lack of rigorous definitions for certain terms and the dependence on assumptions about the parameters A, B, C, and D being real or complex.

JHansen
Messages
8
Reaction score
1
TL;DR
Want to show that ##S(-p) =S^\dagger (p)##.
So let's say that we have som unitary matrix, ##S##. Let that unitary matrix be the scattering matrix in quantum mechanics or the "S-matrix".

Now we all know that it can be defined in the following way:
$$\psi(x) = Ae^{ipx} + Be^{-ipx}, x<<0$$ and $$ \psi(x) = Ce^{ipx} + De^{-ipx}$$.
Now, A and D cmpts. are the ongoing waves and B & C the outgoing ones. So we can define the S-matrix by.

$$
\begin{pmatrix}
C\\
B
\end{pmatrix} =
\begin{pmatrix}
S_{11}& S_{12}\\
S_{21}& S_{22}
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
A\\
D
\end{pmatrix}
$$.

Now, of course, we can show that the matrix is unitary via the probability current density (or time-reversal symmetry I think?). Anyway,how would I actually show that ##S(-p) = S^\dagger (p)## ? hmmHere are my thoughts. We notice that letting p -> -p in the wave functions is the same thing as letting i-> -i, i.e. taking the complex conjugate. So what remains to show is that ##S^* = S^\dagger##, or that ##S^* S = 1## as well. And this can be achieved via time-reversal symmetry. But maybe this restricts our potential to be real?I would like something more rigorous to be more certain.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the definition of S(p)?
I can see what is an operator depending on time. is it a field of operators on a vector space?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: JHansen
So I just think p is the momenta. Sorry but I don't have a rigorous definition so I don't really know. But I can prove it with my argument if I assume that A,B,C,D are all real which I'm not certain they are.
 
If the amplitude given by the scalar product <p1|S|p2> only depends on p2-p1 we can write it S(p2-p1). Is it the case here?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K