Quick question about Hermitian operators

dEdt
Messages
286
Reaction score
2
If H is a Hermitian operator, then its eigenvalues are real. Is the converse true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No. Take as counterexample the matrix \left(\begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1\\ 0 & 0 \end{array}\right).
However, if you know that the operator is normal (that is: if AA^*=A^*A), then it is true that it is Hermitian iff the eigenvalues are real.
 
micromass said:
No. Take as counterexample the matrix \left(\begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1\\ 0 & 0 \end{array}\right).
However, if you know that the operator is normal (that is: if AA^*=A^*A), then it is true that it is Hermitian iff the eigenvalues are real.

Good counterexample!

A few more useful rules: a matrix ##M## has "good" eigenvectors if and only if it is normal. "Good" eigenvectors means it is possible to choose eigenvectors such that they form an orthonormal basis for whatever vector space ##M## acts on.

Equivalently, a matrix is normal if and only if it can be diagonalized by a unitary transformation:
##
M = U D U^{-1}
##
for some unitary matrix ##U## and diagonal matrix ##D## whose diagonal elements are eigenvalues of ##M##.

Hermitian matrices are always normal, and their eigenvalues are always real. But if ##M## is abnormal, it might have real eigenvalues and "bad" eigenvectors which are not orthogonal. Here's an example:

##
\left[\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 1 \\
0 & 2 \\
\end{array}\right]
##

This thing has eigenvalues 1 and 2, but its eigenvectors

##
\left[\begin{array}{c}
1 \\ 0 \\
\end{array}\right]
\quad
\left[\begin{array}{c}
1 \\ 1 \\
\end{array}\right]
##

are not orthogonal to each other.

The example micromass gave is even more badly-behaved: it is defective, which means it doesn't have enough linearly-independent eigenvectors to span the vector space. So we can't even form a "bad" basis using its eigenvectors.
 
Last edited:
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top