I When is Â(r) Ψ(r) = ⟨r | Â | Ψ⟩?

LightPhoton
Messages
42
Reaction score
3
Wikipedia says that the equation in the title is defined to be true.


1748203018543.webp



But is it true always?

Working with the right-hand side,

$$\langle \mathbf r\vert\hat A\vert\Psi\rangle=\int\langle \mathbf r\vert\hat A\vert\mathbf r'\rangle\langle\mathbf r'\vert\Psi\rangle\ d\mathbf r'$$

If we assume that ##\langle \mathbf r\vert\hat A\vert\mathbf r'\rangle=\hat A(\mathbf r)\delta(\mathbf{r-r'})##, then above expression collapses to ## \hat A(\mathbf r)\Psi(\mathbf r)##. But how to show this in general?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Conventionally
\psi(r)=<r|\psi>
So
\phi(r)=<r|\phi>=<r|\hat{A}|\psi>
where
\hat{A}|\psi>=|\phi>
So I prefer the notation for the definition
[\hat{A}\psi](r)=\hat{A}\psi(r) \equiv <r|\hat{A}|\psi>
with no (r) for A. I have no idea what ##\hat{A}(r)## could mean.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Albertus Magnus, LightPhoton, Demystifier and 1 other person
LightPhoton said:
Wikipedia says that the equation in the title is defined to be true.


View attachment 361447


But is it true always?
It's worth noting the formalism here. We start with ##r## as the coordinate(s) of a point in space. I.e. ##r \in \mathbb R^3##. And we have ##|r\rangle## as the position eigenstate (or eigenket) associated with that point. We also have some state ##|\Psi \rangle##.

Now, we can define a complex-valued function (on ##\mathbb R^3##) by:
$$\Psi(r) \equiv \langle r|\Psi \rangle$$Where ##\langle r|## is the bra associated with the eigenket ##|r\rangle##.

Next, we have some operator, ##\hat A##, that acts on the Hilbert space of states/kets. From this we can define an operator, ##\hat A(r)## in this notation, on our function space of complex-valued functions, using:
$$[\hat A(r)\Psi](r) \equiv \langle r|\hat A|\Psi \rangle$$Note that this notation is slightly odd and it would be more usual to write something like ##\hat A'## or ##\hat A_f##, to indicate that this operator is technically not the same as ##\hat A##, but acts on the function space - rather than the space of states/kets. I.e. I would tend to write:
$$\hat A' \Psi(r) \equiv [\hat A'\Psi](r) \equiv \langle r|\hat A|\Psi \rangle$$In any case, note that this defines the action of the operator ##\hat A'## on any function ##\Psi##.
 
  • Like
Likes PeterDonis and LightPhoton
I am not sure if this falls under classical physics or quantum physics or somewhere else (so feel free to put it in the right section), but is there any micro state of the universe one can think of which if evolved under the current laws of nature, inevitably results in outcomes such as a table levitating? That example is just a random one I decided to choose but I'm really asking about any event that would seem like a "miracle" to the ordinary person (i.e. any event that doesn't seem to...
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Back
Top