Remind me where to find a proof of a spectral theorem for RHS

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fredrik
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof Theorem
Fredrik
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
10,876
Reaction score
423
I know I've seen a very short article (3-5 pages) with a proof of a spectral theorem for rigged Hilbert spaces, written for people who already know the usual spectral theorems, by some guy who I think had a muslim name. Anyone know what I'm talking about? It's been posted here before, almost certainly more than once, but I just spent 20 minutes trying to find it here and on my computer, so I think it's time to just ask.

No need to hurry to get me an answer right away. I'm not even going to read it right away. I'm just making a to-do list about things I'd like to understand better, and I want to put this article on the list.

(I think I may even have asked this question before, LOL).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can always try Gelfand-Vilenkin's Generalized functions, Volume 4. However, the proof there has a mistake, which is not easily solved (but can be solved).
My favorite book is "Methods of Hilbert spaces" by Maurin. It states the proof in a different form than Gelfand-Vilenkin, and a form that I think is more useful. Than again, he doesn't explicitely say anything about RHS (he obviously does use the concept though). Other than that, the book really covers a lot of nice things about Hilbert spaces. I don't understand why the book is not more popular.
 
Thanks micro. I'll make a note of those books before I forget them too. It's interesting to hear that you liked Maurin's book. One of the reasons why I haven't checked it out is that I found a negative review about it, that complained about the presentation, inconsistencies in notation, and even some incorrect statements. Link.

I still suspect that the short article I've seen is the best place to study the theorem and its proof. I just wish I could remember. I hope that Strangrep or dextercioby does.
 
I found the document I had in mind. It's a 5-page pdf document with the title "Generalized eigenfunctions" written by a guy named Mustafa Kesir. Some other guy named Christopher King has a copy on his web page: http://mathserver.neu.edu/~king_chris/GenEf.pdf.
 
I remember saying sometimes in the past that Kesir almost copy-pasted in his work one of the appendices of Berezin & Shubin's 'Schrödinger equation' which had been based on Berezanskii's work and book in the 1960's.
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...
Back
Top