QM Orthogonality: Separate & Independent Eigenvalues?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between orthogonality of eigenfunctions and the distinctiveness of eigenvalues in non-relativistic quantum mechanics (QM). Participants explore whether orthogonality implies that eigenvalues are separate and independent, particularly in contexts where probability distributions are peaked, leading to clustered eigenvalues.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that orthogonality of eigenfunctions indicates the separateness of eigenvalues, suggesting that distinct eigenvalues correspond to orthogonal eigenstates.
  • Others challenge this view, questioning how eigenvalues can be considered distinct if they cluster closely together, despite the orthogonality of the eigenfunctions.
  • It is noted that the eigenvalues of an observable are independent of the quantum state, and that the orthogonality of eigenstates is a property of the operator itself.
  • Some participants highlight that degeneracies can occur, where multiple orthogonal eigenstates correspond to the same eigenvalue, complicating the notion of distinctiveness.
  • A specific example is provided regarding the momentum operator, where eigenstates can be orthogonal yet have eigenvalues that are arbitrarily close together.
  • References are requested and provided, but some participants express skepticism about their relevance to the original claims regarding eigenvalue distinctiveness.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus. There are competing views on whether orthogonality implies distinct eigenvalues, with some emphasizing the possibility of degeneracies and others maintaining that orthogonality suggests separateness.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the discussion is limited by assumptions about the nature of eigenvalues and the implications of degeneracies, as well as the specific properties of Hermitian versus non-Hermitian operators.

LarryS
Gold Member
Messages
360
Reaction score
33
In non-relativistic QM, given a Hilbert Space with a Hermitian operator A and a generic wave function
Ψ. The operator A has an orthogonal eigenbasis, {ai}.

I have often read that the orthogonality of such eigenfunctions is an indication of the separateness or distinctiveness of the associated eigenvalues, i.e. that orthogonality in QM means separate and independent.

But what if the probability distribution for Ψ is peaked at one value causing most of the eigenvalues to be clustered in a very narrow range? How could one then say, from a practical point-of-view, that the eigenvalues are separate or distinct, even though the eigenfunctions themselves remain orthogonal?

Thanks in advance
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
referframe said:
I have often read

Can you give some specific references?
 
referframe said:
...what if the probability distribution for Ψ is peaked at one value causing most of the eigenvalues to be clustered in a very narrow range? How could one then say, from a practical point-of-view, that the eigenvalues are separate or distinct, even though the eigenfunctions themselves remain orthogonal?

Thanks in advance

The eigenvalues of an observable define the set of outcomes that such a function can have. For example, the position observable \hat{x} has a continuous spectrum of eigenvalues spanning all the real numbers.

The eigenvalues and eigenstates of an observable depend on the observable, and are completely indpendent of the quantum state |\psi\rangle or the quantum wavefunction \langle x|\psi\rangle = \psi(x).

The eigenstates associated to different eigenvalues of an observable are orthogonal. What this means from a practical standpoint is that if a particle is prepared in an eigenstate |a_{i}\rangle of observable \hat{A}=\sum_{i}a_{i} |a_{i}\rangle\langle a_{i}|, the probability that measuring \hat{A} will give any other eigenvalue is zero, since the inner product \langle a_{i}|a_{j}\rangle = 0 if i\neq j, and the probability goes as the magnitude square of this inner product.
 
referframe said:
I have often read that the orthogonality of such eigenfunctions is an indication of the separateness or distinctiveness of the associated eigenvalues, i.e. that orthogonality in QM means separate and independent.

I have never read that.

referframe said:
But what if the probability distribution for Ψ is peaked at one value causing most of the eigenvalues to be clustered in a very narrow range?

The eigenvalues and eigenvectors of an operator have nothing to do with the particular state of a system - or any particular vector - they are properties of the operator itself.
 
referframe said:
In non-relativistic QM, given a Hilbert Space with a Hermitian operator A and a generic wave function
Ψ. The operator A has an orthogonal eigenbasis, {ai}.

I have often read that the orthogonality of such eigenfunctions is an indication of the separateness or distinctiveness of the associated eigenvalues, i.e. that orthogonality in QM means separate and independent.

For Hermitian operators, eigenfunctions for distinct eigenvalues have to be orthogonal.

Easy proof:Suppose ##A|\psi_1\rangle = \lambda_1 |\psi_1\rangle## and ##A|\psi_2\rangle = \lambda_2|\psi_2\rangle##. Then on the one hand,

##\langle \psi_2|A|\psi_1 \rangle = \langle \psi_2|(A|\psi_1\rangle) = \lambda_1 \langle \psi_2|\psi_1 \rangle##

On the other hand,

##\langle \psi_2|A|\psi_1 \rangle = (\langle \psi_2|A)|\psi_1\rangle = (A |\psi_2\rangle)^\dagger |\psi_1\rangle = (\lambda_2 |\psi_2\rangle)^\dagger |\psi_1\rangle = \lambda_2 \langle \psi_2|\psi_1\rangle##

So those two have to be equal: ##\lambda_1 \langle \psi_2|\psi_1\rangle = \lambda_2 \langle \psi_2|\psi_1\rangle##. That's only possible if ##\lambda_1 = \lambda_2## or ##\langle \psi_2|\psi_1\rangle = 0##
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Peter Morgan
stevendaryl said:
Suppose A|ψ1⟩=λ1A|ψ1⟩=λ1A|\psi_1\rangle = \lambda_1 and A|ψ2⟩=λ2A|ψ2⟩=λ2A|\psi_2\rangle = \lambda_2.

I think this was meant to read ##A|\psi_1\rangle=\lambda_1 |\psi_1\rangle## and ##A|\psi_2\rangle=\lambda_2 |\psi_2\rangle## (may be a problem with my viewer).

Translating to plain English, I concur that orthogonality of states with different eigenvalues for the same Hermitian operators does mean "separate and distinctive"; if the state is ##|\psi_1\rangle##, then the state is not ##|\psi_2\rangle##; if the eigenvalue is ##\lambda_1##, then it is not ##\lambda_2##.

This crucially depends on the operator being Hermitian. A famous non-Hermitian operator is the annihilation operator a operating on a coherent state of the harmonic oscillator (or formally equivalent the field operator a operating on coherent states of the electromagnetic field). Coherent states are the closest approach to classical analog of these systems and satisfy the eigenvalue equation ##a|\alpha\rangle=\alpha|\alpha\rangle##. But a is not Hermitian, the eigenvalues ##\alpha## are complex rather than real, and the states ##|\alpha\rangle## are not orthogonal - rather they form an over-complete basis. A good article can be found here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherent_states.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Peter Morgan, LarryS and stevendaryl
PeterDonis said:
Can you give some specific references?

I listed 3 references in my reply to PeroK above.
 
referframe said:
I listed 3 references in my reply to PeroK below.

Yes, I see them, but I don't see how they support what you said in the OP. The references say that eigenvectors are mutually orthogonal. They don't say the eigenvalues are "separate and distinct" in the way you appear to be using that concept in the OP--for example, they don't say the eigenvalues have to have any minimum "spacing" (difference) between them. In fact, your third reference specifically talks about the case of degeneracy, where multiple orthogonal eigenvectors have the same eigenvalue.

So it looks to me like your OP is based on a misconception.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
  • #10
It is a misconception to assume that in general orthogonal eigenstates of an observable have distinct eigenvalues. Frequently they do but there may be degeneracies. Even the one-dimensional free particle has a degenerate energy spectrum, since eigenstates of momentum ##\hat p## with respective eigenvalues p and -p have the same energy p2/2m, but are nevertheless orthogonal eigenstates of the energy observable ##\hat p^2/2m##. Here, however, the spectrum of ##\hat p## is non-degenerate. Due to the density of the real number line, momentum eigenstates ##|p_1\rangle## and ##|p_2\rangle## can have eigenvalues p1 and p2 that are arbitrarily close together, but as long as p1p2, the eigenstates are orthogonal, i.e., ##\langle p_1|p_2\rangle = 0##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 176 ·
6
Replies
176
Views
14K
  • · Replies 96 ·
4
Replies
96
Views
9K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K