Square of a hermitian operator in matrix form

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of hermitian operators in matrix form, specifically whether the square of a hermitian operator's matrix representation equals the square of the matrix representation itself. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and mathematical reasoning related to operator composition and matrix multiplication.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that for a hermitian operator Q, the relationship [Q²] = [Q]² holds, using the example of the momentum operator in a harmonic oscillator.
  • Another participant agrees that in general, for operators C = AB, the relationship [C] = [A][B] holds true, not limited to hermitian operators.
  • A different participant raises a concern that if an operator is not hermitian, it may not commute with its Hermitian transpose, questioning the validity of [C²] = [C][C]* or [C]*[C], and suggesting that commutator relationships may be involved.
  • Another participant clarifies that C² refers to the composition of C with itself (CC), rather than involving the Hermitian transpose, and asserts that the definition of matrix multiplication ensures the relationship [A°B] = [A][B] holds.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of the relationship [C²] = [C][C]* for non-hermitian operators, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of non-hermitian operators.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the properties of non-hermitian operators and their relationship with their Hermitian transposes, as well as potential commutation relationships that may affect the conclusions drawn.

Arijun
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
If we have a hermitian operator Q and we know it's matrix representation [Q], does that mean that [Q2] = [Q]2?
For example, I'm pretty sure that's the case for p2 for a harmonic oscillator. We have p=ic(a+-a-) and so
p2=c2(a+-a-)(-a++a-)*=c2(a+-a-)(a+-a-)=p p
Which tells us that [p2]=[p]2. But could we do that with any hermitian operator?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes. In general, if C = AB, then \left[ C \right] = \left[ AB \right] = \left[ A \right] \left[ B \right] for any A and B (not just for hermitian operators).
 
But if it's not hermitian, then the operator may not commute with its Hermitian transpose (right?), so how would we know whether [C2]=[C] [C]* or [C]* [C], and generally wouldn't there be some commutator relationship in there?
 
C2 means CC (the composition of C with C), not C*C or CC*.

The result [A°B]=[A] follows immediately from the definition of matrix multiplication. Actually, I think matrix multiplication is defined the way it is precisely to ensure that this result holds.

$$
\begin{align}
[A\circ B]_{ij} &=((A\circ B)e_j)_i=(A(Be_j))_i =(A(Be_j)_k e_k)_i =(A_{kj} e_k)_i\\
&=(Ae_k)_i _{kj}=[A]_{ij}_{kj} = ([A])_{ij}
\end{align}
$$

If you're having difficulties following this, read the post I linked to in the quote below. Ask if it's still not clear.

Fredrik said:
The relationship between linear operators and matrices is explained e.g. in post #3 in this thread. (Ignore the quote and the stuff below it).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
16K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K