Proving the Identity for Non-Commuting Operators A and B | Operator Algebra

  • Thread starter Thread starter S.G.
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operators
S.G.
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
How do you prove the following identity for non-commuting operators A and B?

[[[A,B],B]A]=[B,[A,[A,B]]]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello S.G.,

you could first use the abbreviation C:= [A,B], so the equation
looks better:

[[[A,B],B]A]=[B,[A,[A,B]]]
<=>
[[C,B],A] = [B,[A,C]]

Then use the definition of the commutator [Y,Z] = YZ-ZY
and in the end, instead of C, use [A,B] again.
 


To prove this identity, we can use the properties of operator algebra, specifically the Jacobi identity. This identity states that for any three operators A, B, and C, we have [[A, B], C] + [[B, C], A] + [[C, A], B] = 0.

Now, let's apply this identity to our equation: [[[A, B], B], A] = [[B, [A, B]], A] + [[A, B], [B, A]].

Since A and B do not commute, [A, B] is not equal to [B, A], so we cannot simply swap the order of these operators. However, we can use the Jacobi identity to rewrite the second term as [[A, [A, B]], B].

Substituting this into our equation, we get: [[[A, B], B], A] = [[B, [A, B]], A] + [[A, [A, B]], B].

Now, we can use the Jacobi identity again to rewrite the first term as [[A, B], [B, A]]. Substituting this into our equation, we get: [[[A, B], B], A] = [[B, [A, B]], A] + [[A, [A, B]], B] = [[B, [A, B]], A] + [[A, B], [B, A]].

Since A and B do not commute, we cannot further simplify this expression. However, we can see that the right side of the equation is equal to the left side, therefore proving the identity: [[[A, B], B], A] = [[B, [A, B]], A] + [[A, B], [B, A]].
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top