What are local and non-local operators in QM?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of local and non-local operators in quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of the Hartree-Fock method. Participants explore definitions, implications, and examples of these operators, as well as their singularities and the role of the exchange operator.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants define a general one-particle operator and explain that local operators have a kernel represented by a Dirac delta function, while non-local operators do not.
  • One participant questions the result of applying the position operator to a wavefunction, seeking clarification on the outcome.
  • Another participant explains that the exchange operator in the Hartree-Fock method is non-local due to its dependence on the Pauli exclusion principle and the antisymmetry of fermionic wavefunctions.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of the exchange term favoring electrons of the same spin being separated, highlighting the non-local nature of fermions.
  • Participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions and implications of local versus non-local operators, particularly in relation to singularities.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the definitions and implications of local and non-local operators. Multiple competing views and uncertainties remain regarding the nature of these operators and their mathematical representations.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express confusion about the application of operators and the resulting mathematical expressions, indicating potential limitations in understanding the underlying concepts.

cristianbahena
Messages
16
Reaction score
1
In Hartree-Fock method, I saw the Fock operator has two integrals: Coulomb integral and exchange integral. One can define two operator. "The exchange operator is no local operator" why? Whats de diference: local and no local operator?

And why do the operators have singularities?

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A general one-particle operator ##A## can be defined via it's action on a wavefunction in position representation
##\{A\psi\}(r)=\int d^3r' \alpha(r,r') \psi(r')##.
The function ##\alpha(r,r')## is called the kernel of the operator.
When ##\alpha(r,r')=f(r)\delta^3(r-r')##, with Dirac's delta function, we say that the operator is local.
Obviously, the position operator is local with f(r)=r, while for example, the momentum operator is not local as
##\alpha(r,r') =-i\hbar \partial_r \delta(r-r')##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba, Tio Barnabe, dextercioby and 1 other person
DrDu said:
A general one-particle operator ##A## can be defined via it's action on a wavefunction in position representation
##\{A\psi\}(r)=\int d^3r' \alpha(r,r') \psi(r')##.
The function ##\alpha(r,r')## is called the kernel of the operator.
When ##\alpha(r,r')=f(r)\delta^3(r-r')##, with Dirac's delta function, we say that the operator is local.
Obviously, the position operator is local with f(r)=r, while for example, the momentum operator is not local as
##\alpha(r,r') =-i\hbar \partial_r \delta(r-r')##.
Sorry my ignorance, but what should result application of the position operator into the wavefunction as given above?
 
Tio Barnabe said:
Sorry my ignorance, but what should result application of the position operator into the wavefunction as given above?
The wavefunction gets multiplied at each point with the respective value of r.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Tio Barnabe
cristianbahena said:
In Hartree-Fock method, I saw the Fock operator has two integrals: Coulomb integral and exchange integral. One can define two operator. "The exchange operator is no local operator" why? Whats de diference: local and no local operator?

And why do the operators have singularities?

thanks

When F(r)= r
One get:

$${A \phi}(r)= r \phi{r}(r)$$ its a eigenvalue equation
when $$f(r)= -i \hbar \partial_r$$

One get:

$${A \phi}(r)= -i \hbar \partial_r \phi{r}(r)$$ it has no sense.
is the why is local or no local
am i right?

Note: i´m using $$A\phi (r)= \int dr´\phi(r) \alpha(r-r´) \phi(r´)$$
 
The exchange term favors electrons of the same spin to be separated and comes directly from the Pauli exclusion principle. This comes from the anticommutation of fermions (i.e. the antisymmetry of the wavefunction). The exchange process is inherently non local since exchanging any two electrons changes the sign of the entire many body wavefunction.

More generally, you can say that fermions in general are non local because they anticommutate. In a sense they carry a string of minus signs. Another thing is that Fermion parity (even or odd) is always conserved which comes from this. There are a lot very deep consequences of this beyond this discussion.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K