Proving the Hermitian Conjugate Property of Operators

  • Thread starter Thread starter buraqenigma
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hermitian Operator
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the Hermitian conjugate property of operators, specifically the expression \((a_{1} A_{1}+a_{2} A_{2})^{\dagger}=a_{1}^{\ast} A_{1}^{\dagger}+a_{2}^{\ast} A_{2}^{\dagger}\). The context involves bounded and unbounded operators in the framework of functional analysis and quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definition of the adjoint operator and whether the proof requires bounded operators. There is an exploration of using examples from Hilbert spaces and the implications of operator properties.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on starting points for the proof and the use of specific properties of operators. There is acknowledgment of the correctness of certain steps taken, but no explicit consensus on the overall proof has been reached.

Contextual Notes

There are questions regarding the applicability of the proof to unbounded operators and the definitions of adjoints in different contexts. The discussion also touches on the existence of adjoints in Hilbert spaces.

buraqenigma
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
How can i show that (a_{1} A_{1}+a_{2} A_{2})^{\dagger}=a_{1}^{\ast} A_{1}^{\dagger}+a_{2}^{\ast} A_{2}^{\dagger}

notice: a_{1},a_{2}\in C and A_{1}^{\dagger},A_{2}^{\dagger} are hermitian conjugate of A_{1},A_{2} operators
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Use the \dagger to denote the adjoint. Since you're considering the case of bounded operators, just apply the definition of the adjoint operator for a bounded operator.
 
Thanks But ?

Thank you for your correction.

I want to know that to show this equations must i use boundered operator.Can i use unbounded (going to +-infinity) operator to show this.
 
Let's take for example A_{1}, A_{2}:\mathcal{H}\longrightarrow \mathcal{H} and \phi,\psi\in\mathcal{H}. Then the adjoints of the operators exist and are defined everywhere in \mathcal{H} and the same could be said of the sum operator and its adjoint.

\langle \phi,left(a_{1}A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2}\right)\psi\rangle is the object that you should start from.
 
I tried something.Is it regular?

\left\langle\phi|(a_{1}A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2})^{\dagger}\psi\right\rangle = \left\langle(a_{1}A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2}) \phi|\psi\right\rangle then \left\langle\phi|(a_{1}A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2})^{\dagger}\psi\right\rangle =\left\langle(a_{1}A_{1})\phi|\psi\right\rangle + \left\langle(a_{2}A_{2})\phi|\psi\right\rangle so \left\langle\phi|(a_{1}A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2})^{\dagger}\psi\right\rangle =a_{1}^\ast \left\langle A_{1}\phi|\psi\right\rangle + a_{2}^\ast \left\langle A_{2}\phi|\psi\right\rangle in the end
\left\langle\phi|(a_{1} A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2})^{\dagger}\psi\right\rangle =a_{1}^\ast \left\langle \phi|A_{1}^\dagger \psi\right\rangle + a_{2}^\ast \left\langle \phi|A_{2}^\dagger \psi\right\rangle becauuse of a \left\langle\phi| \psi\right\rangle = \left\langle\phi|a \psi\right\rangle(a is complex constant) we can write \left\langle\phi|(a_{1} A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2})^{\dagger}\psi\right\rangle = \left\langle \phi|a_{1}^\ast A_{1}^\dagger \psi\right\rangle + \left\langle \phi|a_{2}^\ast A_{2}^\dagger \psi\right\rangle in the end \left\langle\phi|(a_{1} A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2})^{\dagger}\psi\right\rangle = \left\langle \phi|(a_{1}^\ast A_{1}^\dagger + a_{2}^\ast A_{2}^\dagger) \psi\right\rangle. we 've showed that (a_{1} A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2})^{\dagger} = a_{1}^\ast A_{1}^\dagger + a_{2}^\ast A_{2}^\dagger
 
Last edited:
It looks okay. For the first equality that you wrote you used that A^{\dagger\dagger}=A which is okay for bounded operators in Hilbert spaces.
 
Thank you for your help. see you later in another problem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K