Tensor product and representations

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the tensor product and matrix representations in quantum mechanics, specifically how to calculate expressions involving matrix elements and operators. The user is trying to grasp the meaning of the notation |I>M_{I}^{J}
JonnyMaddox
Messages
74
Reaction score
1
Hi, I that <I|M|J>=M_{I}^{J} is just a way to define the elements of a matrix. But what is |I>M_{I}^{J}<J|=M ? I don't know how to calculate that because the normal multiplication for matrices don't seem to work. I'm reading a book where I think this is used to get a coordinate representation of a group with a matrix representation as:
\hat{G_{i}}=q^{I}(G_{i})_{I}^{J}p_{j} where q and p are the coordinates and the conjugate momenta.

Can someone give me an easy example? :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
JonnyMaddox said:
I'm reading a book
Which book?
 
Nugatory said:
Which book?
The bible...no jk I'm reading "Fields" from Warren Siegel. It's free on arxiv.
 
Last edited:
JonnyMaddox said:
Hi, I that <I|M|J>=M_{I}^{J} is just a way to define the elements of a matrix. But what is |I>M_{I}^{J}<J|=M ? I don't know how to calculate that because the normal multiplication for matrices don't seem to work. I'm reading a book where I think this is used to get a coordinate representation of a group with a matrix representation as:
\hat{G_{i}}=q^{I}(G_{i})_{I}^{J}p_{j} where q and p are the coordinates and the conjugate momenta.

Can someone give me an easy example? :)

Consider an abstract, n-dimensional linear vector space spanned by complete and ortho-normal basis vectors, i.e. \langle I | J \rangle = \delta_{I}^{J} , \ \ \ \ \ (1) \sum_{K}^{n} | K \rangle \langle K | = \mathbb{I}_{n} . \ \ \ \ (2) In this n-dimensional (index) space, a n \times n matrix M acts as operator: M | J \rangle = | M J \rangle = \sum_{K}^{n} M^{J}_{K} \ | K \rangle , \ \ \ (3) where the numbers M^{J}_{I} , i.e. the expansion coefficients, are determined from the orthonomality condition (1): \langle I | M | J \rangle = \sum_{K} M^{J}_{K} \ \delta^{K}_{I} = M^{J}_{I} . To construct a matrix representation of operator M, we use the completeness relation (2) and the expansion (3): M \sum_{J} | J \rangle \langle J | = M_{n \times n} = \sum_{I , J} M^{J}_{I} \ | I \rangle \langle J | . \ \ \ (4) As an example, consider 2-dimensional index space with basis vectors | 1 \rangle = \langle 1 |^{ \dagger } = ( 1 \ , \ 0 )^{T} , | 2 \rangle = \langle 2 |^{ \dagger } = ( 0 \ , \ 1 )^{T} . In this case, equation (4) should give a 2 \times 2 matrix representation for the operator M: M_{ 2 \times 2 } = \sum_{I , J}^{2} M^{J}_{I} \ | I \rangle \langle J | . \ \ \ (5) Indeed, since | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | = \left( \begin {array} {c c} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end {array} \right) , \ \ | 1 \rangle \langle 2 | = \left( \begin{array} {c c} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \end{array} \right) , | 2 \rangle \langle 1 | = \left( \begin{array} {c c} 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 \end{array} \right) , \ \ | 2 \rangle \langle 2 | = \left( \begin{array} {c c} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{array} \right) , equation (5) gives M_{2 \times 2} = \left( \begin{array} {c c} M^{1}_{1} & M^{2}_{1} \\ M^{1}_{2} & M^{2}_{2} \end{array} \right) .

Sam
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby
Ok thanks Sam. Could you also help me with coordinate representations? How do I apply this formula
\hat{G_{i}}=q^{I}(G_{i})_{I}^{J}p_{j}
Is this like an inner product of the coordinates and the conjugate momentum?
Like this
\hat{G_{1}}=q^{1}(G_{1})_{1}^{1}p_{1}+q^{2}(G_{1})_{2}^{2}p_{2}+...
 
JonnyMaddox said:
Ok thanks Sam. Could you also help me with coordinate representations? How do I apply this formula
\hat{G_{i}}=q^{I}(G_{i})_{I}^{J}p_{j}
Is this like an inner product of the coordinates and the conjugate momentum?
Like this
\hat{G_{1}}=q^{1}(G_{1})_{1}^{1}p_{1}+q^{2}(G_{1})_{2}^{2}p_{2}+...

First, you need to understand the connection between this and equation (4) in my previous post. In here, ( q^{I} , p_{I} ) are continuous coordinate numbers, i.e. they don’t (directly) span the index space of matrices. However, if we write |Q \rangle = \sum_{I}^{n} q_{I} \ | I \rangle , \ \ \Rightarrow \ q^{I} = ( q_{I} )^{T} = \langle Q | I \rangle , | P \rangle = \sum_{J}^{n} p_{J} \ | J \rangle , \ \ \Rightarrow \ p_{J} = \langle J | P \rangle , then we can transform equation (4) into equation similar to the one you wrote: M ( p , q ) \equiv \langle Q | M | P \rangle = \sum_{I , J} M^{J}_{I} \ \langle Q | I \rangle \langle J | P \rangle = \sum_{I , J} M^{J}_{I} \ q^{I} \ p_{J} . In fact (see the exercise below) G^{I}_{J} \equiv i | I \rangle \langle J | and J^{I}_{J} \equiv q^{I} \ p_{J} generate “isomorphic” Lie algebras.
Now, let us talk about coordinate representation. Let G_{a} , a = 1 , 2 , \cdots , m be basis in an m-dimensional Lie algebra \mathcal{L}^{m} with the following Lie bracket relations [ G_{a} , G_{b} ] = C_{a b}{}^{c} \ G_{c} . \ \ \ \ \ (1) Since every Lie algebra has a faithful matrix representation, we may the G_{a}’s to be a set of (m) matrices (n \times n) and, therefore, realizing the Lie brackets by commutation relations [ G_{a} , G_{b} ]^{J}_{I} = C_{a b}{}^{c} \ ( G_{c} )^{J}_{I} , \ \ I , J = 1 , 2 , \cdots , n . \ \ \ (2) Now, we take n-pairs of real munbers ( q^{I} , p_{I} ) and define m numbers (functionals) J_{a} ( q , p ) by J_{a} = ( G_{a} )^{J}_{I} \ q^{I} \ p_{J} , \ \ \ a = 1 , 2 , \cdots , m . \ \ \ \ (3) Clearly, the set of numbers J_{a} forms a representation of \mathcal{L}^{m} , i.e. they satisfy a Lie bracket relation. To see this, take ( q^{I} , p_{I} ) to be local coordinates on Poisson manifold \mathcal{P}^{2 n} and evaluate the Poisson bracket \{ J_{a} , J_{b} \} = \sum_{K}^{n} \left( \frac{ \delta J_{a} }{ \delta q^{K} } \frac{ \delta J_{b} }{ \delta p_{K} } - \frac{ \delta J_{a} }{ \delta p_{K} } \frac{ \delta J_{b} }{ \delta q^{K} } \right) . Using (2) and (3), we find \{ J_{a} , J_{b} \} = C_{a b}{}^{c} \ J_{c} . \ \ \ \ \ (4) Since the structure constants of \mathcal{L}^{m} appear on the RHS of (4), then \{ J_{a} , J_{b} \} is a Lie bracket on \mathcal{L}^{m}. Mathematically speaking, to every (associative) Lie algebra there corresponds a Poisson structure, i.e., the universal enveloping algebra of \mathcal{L}^{m} is a Poisson-Lie algebra.

Okay, now I leave you with the following exercise. Define M^{I}_{J} = i \ | I \rangle \langle J | , \ \ \mbox{and} \ \ G^{I}_{J} = q^{I} \ p_{J} , then prove the following Lie brackets [ M^{I}_{J} , M^{L}_{K} ] = \delta^{I}_{K} \ M^{L}_{J} - \delta^{L}_{J} \ M^{I}_{K} , \{ G^{I}_{J} , G^{L}_{K} \} = \delta^{I}_{K} \ G^{L}_{J} - \delta^{L}_{J} \ G^{I}_{K} . What is the corresponding Lie group?


Sam
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Ok I see. Now I understood this:
A_{ij}|e_{i}><e_{j}|= A_{11}|e_{1}><e_{1}|+A_{21}|e_{2}><e_{1}|+A_{12}|e_{1}><e_{2}|+A_{22}|e_{2}><e_{2}|=A_{11}\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}+A_{21}\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}+A_{12}\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}+A_{22}\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix} A_{11} & A_{12} \\ A_{12} & A_{22} \end{pmatrix}
I think I have to wrap my head a little around how he (in his book) uses this in all the different ways it can be used. So when he uses |^{I}> in the context of a vector V it just means |^{I}>=|e_{i}>. Then in the context of matrices or generators he uses it as |^{I}>=|e_{i}><e_{j}|? Same with the conjugate representations and so on.
And I'm right that this equation I asked you about is analogous to this equation with which you can define a regular representation of a finite group:
[D(g)]_{ij}=<e_{i}|D(g)|e_{j}>?
Ok I think I have to play a little around with all this and then I will try to solve your exercise. Thank you Sam !
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Ok I think I'm confused about what q^{I} and p_{J} are. Coordinates and conjugate momentum ok. But are they the basis of the space or what? If not how does this make sense \hat{G_{i}}= q^{1}(G_{1})_{1}^{1}p_{1}+...? So it's just a number or what?
 
Last edited:
  • #12
JonnyMaddox said:
Ok I think I'm confused about what q^{I} and p_{J} are. Coordinates and conjugate momentum ok. But are they the basis of the space or what?
Did you read the first two lines in post #9 ?
If not how does this make sense \hat{G_{i}}= q^{1}(G_{1})_{1}^{1}p_{1}+...? So it's just a number or what?
Did you read the line just before equation (3) in post #9 ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K