Show that the dot product is linear: Bra-ket notation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the linearity of the dot product in two-dimensional space using bra-ket notation. Participants emphasize the importance of demonstrating the proof step-by-step rather than simply distributing the inner product. They clarify that the conjugate transpose is essential when dealing with complex numbers, as it relates to projections and ensures the result is real. An example is provided to illustrate how the inner product of a vector with itself yields the magnitude squared, reinforcing the necessity of the conjugate. Overall, the conversation highlights the mathematical rigor required in proving properties of the dot product.
lausco
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show that the dot product in two-dimensional space is linear:
<u|(|v> + |w>) = <u|v> + <u|w>

The Attempt at a Solution


I feel like I'm missing some grasp of the concept here ...
I would think to just distribute the <u| and be done in that one step,
but I'm being asked to prove this.
Is there a reason the <u| can't simply be distributed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lausco said:

Homework Statement


Show that the dot product in two-dimensional space is linear:
<u|(|v> + |w>) = <u|v> + <u|w>

The Attempt at a Solution


I feel like I'm missing some grasp of the concept here ...
I would think to just distribute the <u| and be done in that one step,
but I'm being asked to prove this.
Is there a reason the <u| can't simply be distributed?

I think you're being asked to demonstrate this longhand, in order to prove it.

In other words, recall (for two dimensional space),

| v \rangle = <br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> v_1 \\<br /> v_2 <br /> \end{pmatrix}, \ \<br /> | w \rangle = <br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> w_1 \\<br /> w_2 <br /> \end{pmatrix}, \ \<br /> \langle u | = (u_1^*, u_2^*)
and then work things out longhand, using more conventional methods, to eventually show that it does distribute.
 
I know that <u|v> = the length of |u> times the projection of |v> along |u> . . . Are the conjugates related the the projection?
 
lausco said:
I know that <u|v> = the length of |u> times the projection of |v> along |u> . . . Are the conjugates related the the projection?

I think so, yes. I'm not the best person to be explaining math, so don't rely on me for a graceful explanation of this. :redface: But yes, I think the conjugates ultimately comes down to some sort of generalization of projections.

| A \rangle and \langle A | represent conjugate transposes of one another. Of course if you deal only with real numbers, you don't need to worry about the conjugate. :smile: But in general, when dealing the complex numbers, the conjugate is necessary.

Perhaps it's easiest to demonstrate the motivation of this with a special case of taking the inner product of a vector with itself. In other words, let's examine \langle A | A \rangle.

Let's further simplify this to 1 dimension for now. Suppose we have a simple, one-dimensional vector | A \rangle = \left( 3 + i4 \right). Suppose our goal is to find the magnitude squared of this complex, one dimensional vector. In complete agreement with the length of A times the projection of A onto itself, we can find the length squared of A by finding \langle A | A \rangle. In this example, the answer is (3 - i4)(3 + i4) = 25. Notice I found |A|2 by multiplying the complex conjugate of A by A. In other words, |A|2 = A*A for this one dimensional case. Notice that since we were trying to find the magnitude squared of a vector, the answer will always be real, even if A is complex. We couldn't do that without the complex conjugate.

We can move on to larger dimensional spaces by saying that in general, \langle A | is the conjugate transpose of | A \rangle.
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top