Separability of Hilbert Spaces

Click For Summary
The separability of Hilbert spaces is crucial in Quantum Mechanics as it allows for the application of the Stone-von Neumann theorem, which ensures that any irreducible unitary representation of canonical commutation relations can be realized in a separable space. While actual observations occur in finite-dimensional spaces, Rigged Hilbert spaces, which are separable, are utilized to manage potentially infinite dimensions. These spaces converge under weak topology, facilitating the identification of necessary subsets for practical applications. The discussion highlights the mathematical foundation and implications of using separable spaces in both non-relativistic and relativistic quantum theories. Understanding these concepts is essential for advancing quantum mechanics and its applications.
Andre' Quanta
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Why we require the separability of Hilbert spaces in Quantum Mechanics?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Andre' Quanta said:
Why we require the separability of Hilbert spaces in Quantum Mechanics?

In reality any actual observation is from a finite dimensional space - but sometimes of a large but unknown dimension. To handle that a limit is taken and you end up with Rigged Hilbert spaces which are separable.

To be specific the space is of vectors of finite dimension but of any size. Mathematically we take the dual which is the Rigged Hilbert space of this space. It is separable - but convergent only under a very weak topology. Such a large space isn't actually required in practice and part of the art of using Rigged Hilbert spaces is figuring out exactly what subset is needed:
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0502053Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
Because of results like the Stone-von Neumann theorem. In non-relativistic QM, this theorem asserts that any irreducible unitary realization of the (integrated form of the) canonical commutation relations on a complex Hilbert space ##H## (in principle, not necessarily separable) is unitarily equivalent to the standard realization in the separable space ##L^{2}(R^{3})##, i.e., only in a separable space you can get one such irreducible unitary realizations. Similar results hold for the representation theory of the Poincaré group in relativistic QM.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
First, I need to check that I have the 3 notations correct for an inner product in finite vector spaces over a complex field; v* means: given the isomorphism V to V* then: (a) physicists and others: (u,v)=v*u ; linear in the second argument (b) some mathematicians: (u,v)=u*v; linear in the first argument. (c) bra-ket: <v|u>= (u,v) from (a), so v*u . <v|u> is linear in the second argument. If these are correct, then it would seem that <v|u> being linear in the second...