Rigorous transition from discrete to continuous basis

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the rigorous transition from discrete to continuous bases in quantum mechanics, specifically utilizing the concept of Rigged Hilbert Spaces. The user seeks a mathematical demonstration linking the transition from a complete set of states to an integral representation of quantum states. Key recommendations include studying distribution theory and functional analysis to grasp the underlying principles. Essential resources provided include texts on distribution theory and functional analysis, which are critical for understanding the mathematical framework involved.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Rigged Hilbert Spaces
  • Familiarity with distribution theory
  • Knowledge of functional analysis
  • Basic concepts of quantum mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study "The Distribution Theory" available at this link
  • Read "Mathematical Analysis of Quantum Mechanics" at this link
  • Explore "Functional Analysis, Vol. 1" at this link
  • Research contributions by mathematicians Gelfand, Grothendieck, and Schwartz on Rigged Hilbert Spaces
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for graduate students in mathematics and physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics, functional analysis, and mathematical physics.

Alex Cros
Messages
28
Reaction score
1
Hi all,

I'm trying to find a mathematical way of showing that given a complete set $$\left |a_i\right \rangle_{i=1}^{i=dim(H)}∈H$$ together with the usual property of $$\left |\psi\right \rangle = ∑_i \left \langle a_i\right|\left |\psi\right \rangle\left |a_i\right \rangle ∀ \left |\psi\right \rangle∈H$$. Now, by letting the set $$\left | a_i \right \rangle_{i=1}^{i=dim(H)} → \left |a_i\right \rangle_{i=1}^{i=∞}$$ and $$\left |a_{i+1}\right \rangle = \left |a_i\right \rangle+\left |δ\right \rangle$$ as $$ δ→0$$ (in the sense of $$\left |a_{i+1}\right \rangle∈Neighborhood(\left |a_i\right \rangle)$$) we should obtain the familiar expression $$\left |\psi\right \rangle = ∫ da \left \langle a\right|\left |\psi\right \rangle\left |a\right \rangle ∀ \left |\psi\right \rangle∈H$$.
How could this be linked in a rigorous way without the usual "for the continuous case replace sum by integral".
Thanks in advance!

PD: Sorry for the latex form, writing in physics forums can be daunting without any packages...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What you need to study is called Rigged Hilbert Spaces - which is graduate level math. It has been discussed here a few times eg:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/rigged-hilbert-spaces-in-quantum-mechanics.917768/

The above gives a non-rigorous presentation of what you want as well as a link to a very rigorous PhD thesis on it - not to be touched until you are advanced in the area of math known as functional analysis.

First though you need to understand distribution theory - for that I recommend:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521558905/?tag=pfamazon01-20

PLEASE PLEASE - I do not know how strongly I can recommend it - get a copy and study it. It will help you in many areas of physics and applied math in general. It makes Fourier transforms a snap, for instance, otherwise you become bogged down in issues of convergence - the Distribution Theory approach bypasses it entirely.

Once you have done that go through the following:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0821846302/?tag=pfamazon01-20

That will explain it all in terms that is mathematically exact.

Then, do some functional analysis. I suggest the following:
http://matrixeditions.com/FunctionalAnalysisVol1.html

Unfortunately these days only available as an ebook - but still my favorite.

Sorry this question has no easy answer. You are to be congratulated for attempting it. The solution defeated the great Von-Neumann and Hilbert - it took the combined efforts of other great 20th century mathematicaians to crack it - namely - Gelfland, Grothendieck, and Schwartz (probably others as well - it was a toughy) to crack it.

Thanks
Bill
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Alex Cros
bhobba said:
What you need to study is called Rigged Hilbert Spaces - which is graduate level math. It has been discussed here a few times eg:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/rigged-hilbert-spaces-in-quantum-mechanics.917768/

The above gives a non-rigorous presentation of what you want as well as a link to a very rigorous PhD thesis on it - not to be touched until you are advanced in the area of math known as functional analysis.

First though you need to understand distribution theory - for that I recommend:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521558905/?tag=pfamazon01-20

PLEASE PLEASE - I do not know how strongly I can recommend it - get a copy and study it. It will help you in many areas of physics and applied math in general. It makes Fourier transforms a snap, for instance, otherwise you become bogged down in issues of convergence - the Distribution Theory approach bypasses it entirely.

Once you have done that go through the following:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0821846302/?tag=pfamazon01-20

That will explain it all in terms that is mathematically exact.

Then, do some functional analysis. I suggest the following:
http://matrixeditions.com/FunctionalAnalysisVol1.html

Unfortunately these days only available as an ebook - but still my favorite.

Sorry this question has no easy answer. You are to be congratulated for attempting it. The solution defeated the great Von-Neumann and Hilbert - it took the combined efforts of other great 20th century mathematicaians to crack it - namely - Gelfland, Grothendieck, and Schwartz (probably others as well - it was a toughy) to crack it.

Thanks
Bill
Thank you so much man, that really helps and now my summer is going to be way more interesting!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K