The expectation value in quantum theory

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the expectation value in quantum theory, specifically how to express the mean value of an observable using the position basis. The formula = <ψ|x|ψ> is expanded using completeness, represented by the identity operator in the form of integrals involving wave functions. The necessity of using different indices (primes) for the identity operators is emphasized to avoid confusion and ensure orthonormality, particularly when dealing with multiple operators. The conversation highlights the importance of distinguishing between operators and their representations in quantum mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, specifically expectation values.
  • Familiarity with the position basis and wave functions.
  • Knowledge of linear operators and their properties in quantum theory.
  • Concept of completeness and orthonormality in Hilbert spaces.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of expectation values in quantum mechanics using various bases.
  • Explore the concept of completeness in quantum mechanics and its implications.
  • Learn about the properties of linear operators in quantum theory, focusing on self-adjoint operators.
  • Investigate the differences between continuous and discrete bases in quantum mechanics.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those specializing in quantum mechanics, as well as educators teaching quantum theory concepts.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
Going from the abstract state vector lψ> and the mean-value of an observable x (operator) given by:

<x> = <ψlxlψ>

I want to show how that is done in the position basis:

So I take:

<x> = <ψlxlψ>

And insert completeness in front of the state vector to get the expansion involving the wave function:

1 = ∫lx><xl (1)

But when my teacher did this he insisted on using lx'> and furthermore that you actually inserted two different operators ∫lx'><x'l and ∫lx''><x''l
both of course represent the unit operator. But I am curious as to why you need to make this primes. Why isn't (1) sufficient? Where does confusion arise and why do you need two "different" unit operators?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It may help to do this. Rather than using a continuous basis, use a discrete basis so the integral is a sum.

Then write out the product of two identity operators I*I where I = (sum)|n><n| (do it in a small case, such as 3 terms). Write it both ways. Using a different index, and the same index. You'll see you lose cross terms (if the basis is not orthonormal) by only using one index.

I hope I understood the question properly and that helps.
 
We usually denote the general (abstract, assumed linear and self-adjoint) operators by capitals, A, B, C as to distinguish them from the operators for position xi and momentum pi. And then yes, using primes to distinguish between different (but unitarily equivalent) sets of x's and p's expecially when using more then one generalized completion identities.

[tex]\langle \psi |A|\psi\rangle = \iint dx dx' \langle \psi|x\rangle \langle x|A|x' \rangle \langle x'|\psi \rangle[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K