Unitary Matrix preserves the norm Proof

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the norm is preserved under a unitary matrix transformation, specifically showing that = where |w> = A|v> and A is an nxn unitary matrix. The participants are exploring the properties of complex inner products in the context of unitary matrices.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to clarify the definitions of the inner product involving unitary matrices, specifically questioning whether to use A*A or A†A in their reasoning. There is confusion regarding the notation and properties of the inner product, particularly in relation to the Hermitian conjugate.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided links to external resources to aid understanding, and there is an acknowledgment of the relationship between the Hermitian conjugate and the unitary property of matrices. However, there remains uncertainty about the implications of these definitions and how they apply to the proof.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a language barrier affecting comprehension of some resources, and participants are grappling with the notation and definitions used in the context of complex inner products and unitary matrices.

RJLiberator
Gold Member
Messages
1,094
Reaction score
63

Homework Statement


Let |v> ∈ ℂ^2 and |w> = A|v> where A is an nxn unitary matrix. Show that <v|v> = <w|w>.

Homework Equations


* = complex conjugate
† = hermitian conjugate

The Attempt at a Solution



Start: <v|v> = <w|w>
Use definition of w
<v|v>=<A|v>A|v>>

Here's the interesting part
Using properties of a complex inner product, we can take out the unitary matrix A on the right hand side. When we do so, what do we get?

Is it A*A or is it A†A ?

If it is A†A this proof is complete, as sine A is unitary, this means A†A = the identity matrix and we get equality.

If the definition is A*A then we have to do more work.

I am getting mixed up, as I'm seeing both definitions floating around and with the abusive notation everywhere it is making me second guess which definition is right.

Is there any clarity on this issue here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks for the links. I was aware of the Unitary link, but the other non-English wiki link is of interest.

Although, the language barrier makes it difficult to follow.

They show that
<Ax, Ay> = <x,A^HAy> = <x,A^-1Ay> = <x, Iy> = <x,y>

Kind of similar to what I am doing, I guess, but I'm not sure what "H" is, I am guessing Hermitian conjugate.
So they take the Hermitian conjugate, but then get an inverse somehow, and A^-1*A is clearly the identity.

Still kind of unclear :/
 
RJLiberator said:
Thanks for the links. I was aware of the Unitary link, but the other non-English wiki link is of interest.

Although, the language barrier makes it difficult to follow.

They show that
<Ax, Ay> = <x,A^HAy> = <x,A^-1Ay> = <x, Iy> = <x,y>

Kind of similar to what I am doing, I guess, but I'm not sure what "H" is, I am guessing Hermitian conjugate.
So they take the Hermitian conjugate, but then get an inverse somehow, and A^-1*A is clearly the identity.

Still kind of unclear :/
In the German Wikipedia, ##A^H## is indeed the Hermitian conjugate of ##A##, and then they use the fact that A is a Unitary matrix.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: RJLiberator
So this is a definition of complex inner product =

<Ax,Ay> = <x,A^HAy>

If so, then this is rather easy as A^HA = Identity matrix by definition of Unitary.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K