Question about the hermiticity of the momentum operator

  • Thread starter Thread starter neelakash
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Momentum Operator
neelakash
Messages
491
Reaction score
1
Is momentum operator \frac{\hbar}{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial\ x } is Hermitian only for a normalized wave function?What is the case for the box normalization as done for a free particle?

Actually when we prove the Hermiticity of the momentum operator, we do simple by parts integartion and use the scalar products.I never bothered about whether the wave function is normalized or not.

Can anyone suggest anything?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
So, hermiticity of the momentum operator is independent of whether the wave function is normalized or not----right?

I faced this question in university question book and got astonished.They asked to prove this and also asked what would it be if the wave function is box-normalized.
 
It should not matter.

Look at eq (13) and below, never is it stated that the wave function is normalized. Normalized means that <psi |psi > = 1, so it is just some multiplicatible constants that is added. And constants never affects what your operator does with the wave function.

A is an operator, b is constant:

[A,b] = 0, they commute. etc.
 
neelakash said:
Is momentum operator \frac{\hbar}{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial\ x } is Hermitian only for a normalized wave function?What is the case for the box normalization as done for a free particle?

Actually when we prove the Hermiticity of the momentum operator, we do simple by parts integartion and use the scalar products.I never bothered about whether the wave function is normalized or not.

Can anyone suggest anything?

Actually the analysis on P must be carry out in the differnet configurations scheme. I mean that its hermitianity depend upon its domain D(P).
In fact mathematically speaking what is really important is the couple (A,D(A))
to analize all the spectrum of an operator. In some circumstances can happen that P does posses residue spectrum.
Obviously they have no physical meaning.

Normalization on a function doesn't mean anything. f(x)=100g(x) its ok either.
regards
marco
 
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