Solution to Density Matrix Pure State Problem

LagrangeEuler
Messages
711
Reaction score
22

Homework Statement


Find condition for which ##\hat{\rho}## will be pure state density operator?
##\hat{\rho} = \begin{bmatrix}
1+a_1 & a_2 \\[0.3em]
a_2^* & 1-a_1
\end{bmatrix}##


Homework Equations


In case of pure state ##Tr(\hat{\rho}^2)=Tr(\hat{\rho})=1##.



The Attempt at a Solution


Using that condition I got
##\hat{\rho}^2 = \begin{bmatrix}
(1+a_1)^2+|a_2|^2 & (1+a_1)a_2+a_2(1-a_1) \\[0.3em]
(1+a_1)a_2^*+a_2^*(1-a_1) & (1-a_1)^2+|a_2|^2
\end{bmatrix}##
and from that
## 2|a|^2+2a_1^2=-1## which can not be true. Because ##a_1## must be real, condition to ##\hat{\rho}## is hermitian.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't quite understand. That density operator you stated, it's not a pure state density operator, and that's why The trace of the square of rho will not be 1. It's correct. I afraid I did not understand your question.
 
Question is find condition put on ##a_1## and ##a_2## for which ##\hat{\rho}## is pure state density operator.
 
The problem occurs because you have not normalized the original density operator yet.
 
Tnx a lot Fightfish. I did not see that trace of given matrix is not ##1##. Density matrix must be
##\hat{\rho} =\frac{1}{2} \begin{bmatrix}
1+a_1 & a_2 \\[0.3em]
a_2^* & 1-a_1
\end{bmatrix}##
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top