I Struggling with one step to show quantum operator equality

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a user's difficulty in demonstrating quantum operator equality, specifically at a step involving infinite sums. The user notes that their calculation involves one infinite sum and one finite sum, but a second infinite sum appears unexpectedly. They suspect that an index shift in the solution may be the cause of this additional infinite sum. Other participants highlight the need for visual aids, as the user initially forgot to include a photo of their work. Clarification on the origin of the second infinite sum is sought to resolve the confusion.
troglodyte
Gold Member
Messages
31
Reaction score
22
Hello guys,

I struggle with one step in a calculation to show a quantum operator equality .It would be nice to get some help from you.The problematic step is red marked.I make a photo of my whiteboard activities.The main problem is the step where two infinite sums pops although I work permanently with one Infinite sum and one finite sum.In the solution there is a index shift before the last step.Maybe this is the reason why suddenly one more infinite sum pops out.It would be nice if you can explain to me from where this second infinite sum comes from .
Thank you
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You forgot the picture...
 
  • Like
Likes troglodyte
DrClaude said:
You forgot the picture...
Thank you for your reply.
I thought I wouldn't get any reply so I have deleted them to reduce server costs.
 

Thread 'The Power of QM and QFT'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Importance of Hanbury Brown and Twiss experiment'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Elementary question about comparing notations of inner product'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Quantum Computing "Not" Operation - Mathematics Steps For Deriving It
Replies
2
Views
2K
I Dot product of two vector operators in unusual coordinates
Replies
14
Views
2K
I Understanding Operators in Matrix Mechanics
Replies
1
Views
1K
I Understanding the scalar field quantization
Replies
5
Views
3K
Finding Eigenvalues of an Operator with Infinite Basis
Replies
1
Views
2K
I How does Classical Physics explain Quantum Entanglement?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Time evolution in quantum field theories
2
Replies
79
Views
18K
Using a Taylor expansion to prove equality
Replies
1
Views
2K
Rigorous Quantum Field Theory.
5
Replies
246
Views
45K
What Is the Expansion Postulate in Quantum Mechanics?
Replies
1
Views
9K