Should I always be careful about dimensional consistency?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Haorong Wu
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of dimensional consistency in quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of momentum space wave functions and their normalization. Participants explore the implications of dimensional analysis in equations involving state vectors and their inner products.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an equation involving a momentum space wave function and questions the dimensional consistency, noting that if certain states are dimensionless, it leads to an inconsistency in the overall dimensions.
  • Another participant asserts that if the momentum space wave function is dimensionless, it must have the same dimensions as the state vector it is associated with, suggesting a resolution to the dimensional inconsistency.
  • A later reply indicates that the confusion arises from the paper's presentation of the wave function and concludes that the wave function should indeed have dimensions that align with the overall equation.
  • Participants discuss the normalization of states in quantum field theory, referencing conventions used in the community and the implications for the dimensions of state vectors.
  • There is a question about whether the dimensions of a state vector and its conjugate state are the same, with a participant explaining that they typically are, relating this to matrix representations of states.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the dimensionality of the wave function and its implications for the equation presented. While some participants propose resolutions to the dimensional inconsistency, others raise questions that indicate ongoing uncertainty and debate regarding normalization conventions and dimensional analysis.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific conventions in quantum field theory and natural units, which may affect the interpretation of dimensions. The discussion highlights the importance of normalization in determining the dimensions of state vectors and their inner products.

Haorong Wu
Messages
419
Reaction score
90
TL;DR
Will a dimensional inconsistency cause a problem?
I read an equation in a paper, $$\left | m \right >=\int G(\mathbf k) \left | \mathbf k \right > \frac {d^2 k}{4 \pi^2}$$ where ##G(\mathbf k)= \left < \mathbf k \right | \left . m \right >## is the momentum space wave function, ##k## is the two-dimensional frequency.

In this paper, ##\left | m \right >## is the transverse LG modes of a Gaussian beam, and it is dimensionless. Suppose ## \left | \mathbf k \right >## has a dimension of ##[m^l]##. Then from the definition of ##G(\mathbf k)##, it will have a dimension of ##[m^{-l}]##. But then the dimension of the equation will become ##[m^0]=[m^{-l+l-2}] ##, and that cause an inconsistency. Would it cause problems?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If ##G(\mathbf{k}) = \langle \mathbf{k}|m\rangle## and ##|m\rangle## is dimensionless, then ##G(\mathbf{k})## has the same dimensions as ##|\mathbf{k}\rangle##
 
stevendaryl said:
If ##G(\mathbf{k}) = \langle \mathbf{k}|m\rangle## and ##|m\rangle## is dimensionless, then ##G(\mathbf{k})## has the same dimensions as ##|\mathbf{k}\rangle##
Thanks. I got confused because ##G(\mathbf{k})## given by the paper is clearly dimensionless, so I am trying to find a balance in that equation. However, I just find that ##G(\mathbf{k})## should have the dimension of ##[m^2]## and everything works out.

Thanks!
 
Hi, @stevendaryl , do ##\left | k \right > ## has the same dimension as ##\left < k \right |##?
 
It depends on how you normalize your states. Obviously in this case you have the HEP/QFT convention, i.e.,
$$\langle \vec{k}|\vec{k}' \rangle=(2 \pi)^2 \delta^{(2)}(\vec{k}-\vec{k}')$$
since you seem to work in 2D. That's because in this community you usually use natural units with ##\hbar=c=1## and in Fourier transforms you want for each energy or momentum integral a factor ##1/(2 \pi)##.

This implies that ##|\vec{k} \rangle## as well as ##\langle \vec{k}|## have dimension ##1/\text{momentum}##, and the completeness relation reads
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 k}{(2 \pi)^3} |\vec{k} \rangle \langle \vec{k}|=\hat{1}.$$
So you can expand all Hilbert space vectors in terms of these generalized momentum eigenvectors
$$|m \rangle=\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \mathrm{d}^2 k \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^3} |\vec{k} \rangle \langle \vec{k}|m \rangle.$$
 
Haorong Wu said:
Hi, @stevendaryl , do ##\left | k \right > ## has the same dimension as ##\left < k \right |##?
It's usually the case that for any state ##|\psi\rangle##, the conjugate state ##\langle \psi |## has the same dimensions. You can think of ##|\psi\rangle## as a kind of column matrix (with maybe an infinite number of rows), and ##\langle \psi |## is the result of turning the column into a row (taking the transpose) and taking the complex-conjugate: ##\langle \psi| = (|\psi\rangle^T)^*##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Haorong Wu and vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K