Quantum mechanics- eigenvectots of a linear transformation

Syrus
Messages
213
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



My quantum mechanics text (in an appendix on linear algebra) states, "f the eigenvectors span the space... we are free to use them as a basis..." and then states:

T|f1> = λ1f1
.
.
.
T|fn> = λnfn


My question is: is it not true that fewer than n vectors might constitute this "new" basis? In other words, if the eigenvectors span the space, they may not (all together, at least) form a basis.




Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, this is a basic result from linear algebra for vector spaces of finite dimension. In an n-dimensional space, every basis has to have n vectors.
 
Yes, I see. But when, then, all the talk about "An eigenbasis for a linear operator that operates on a vector space is a basis for that consists entirely of eigenvectors of (possibly with different eigenvalues). Such a basis may not exist."

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigenvalues_and_eigenvectors under the heading 'eigenbasis'
 
It's possible that an operator will not have n linearly independent eigenvectors, so its eigenvectors can not span the vector space and therefore will not form a basis.

Your text, however, is saying if the eigenvectors span the space, they can be used as a basis. The assumption is that the linear operator has n linearly independent eigenvectors.
 
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