What happens to the eigenvalue if an operator acts on a bra?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter shedrick94
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Eigenvalue Operator
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
7 replies · 2K views
shedrick94
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
I'm going through a derivation and it shows: (dirac notation)

<una|VA-AV|unb>=(anb-ana)<una|V|unb>

V and A are operators that are hermition and commute with each other and ana and anb are the eigenvalues of the operator A. I imagine it is trivial and possibly doesn't even matter but why does the sign flip when the operator acts on the eigenfunctions.

i.e why is it not <una|VA-AV|unb>=(ana-anb)<una|V|unb>
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
shedrick94 said:
V and A are operators that are hermition and commute with each other
If V and A commute, then ##\langle u_{na}|VA-AV|u_{nb}\rangle=0##.
 
blue_leaf77 said:
If V and A commute, then ##\langle u_{na}|VA-AV|u_{nb}\rangle=0##.
Yeh that's part of the proof but that's not what I don't understand. Why do the operations flip the sign of the eigenvalues. I'd have thought <una|VA-AV|unb>=(ana-anb)<una|V|unb>
 
shedrick94 said:
Why do the operations flip the sign of the eigenvalues.
No, the sign is not relevant. If you are referring to the minus sign in front of ##a_{nb}##, that's because of the minus sign in front of ##AV## in ##
\langle u_{na}|VA-AV|u_{nb}\rangle=0##.
 
blue_leaf77 said:
No, the sign is not relevant. If you are referring to the minus sign in front of ##a_{nb}##, that's because of the minus sign in front of ##AV## in ##
\langle u_{na}|VA-AV|u_{nb}\rangle=0##.
I don't understand why the signs change at all.
 
Ah I think I see what you mean, do you mean like this ##
\langle u_{na}|VA-AV|u_{nb}\rangle= \langle u_{na}|VA|u_{nb}\rangle -\langle u_{na}|AV|u_{nb}\rangle = (a_{nb}-a_{na})\langle u_{na}|V|u_{nb}\rangle##?
Well, I don't know where you get this equation but since V and A commute, you can write ##AV-VA## in place of ##VA-AV##, and you will get ##(a_{na}-a_{nb})##.
 
blue_leaf77 said:
Ah I think I see what you mean, do you mean like this ##
\langle u_{na}|VA-AV|u_{nb}\rangle= \langle u_{na}|VA|u_{nb}\rangle -\langle u_{na}|AV|u_{nb}\rangle = (a_{nb}-a_{na})\langle u_{na}|V|u_{nb}\rangle##?
Well, I don't know where you get this equation but since V and A commute, you can write ##AV-VA## in place of ##VA-AV##, and you will get ##(a_{na}-a_{nb})##.
That's exactly it, thank you :). I didn't realize that you could separate the operators out. It's part of the derivation for finding the energy changes in perturbation theory.
 
shedrick94 said:
I didn't realize that you could separate the operators out.
I could because an inner product, ##\langle u_1|O|u_2\rangle##, is a linear operation.