Where Does the Equation for Normalization and Expectation Come From?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation and understanding of the equation for normalization and expectation in quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on the expression involving the inner product of states and operators. Participants explore the definitions and implications of bra-ket notation, as well as the mathematical representation of states in finite and infinite dimensions.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about the equation $$ = (\sum_{n}a_{n}^{*} |\psi_{n}>)(\sum_{m}a_{m} \hat{Q} | \psi_{m}>)$$ and seek clarification on its derivation.
  • One participant suggests that if a complete set of orthonormal basis states is used, an arbitrary state can be expressed as a linear combination of these basis states, leading to the formulation of the expectation value.
  • Another participant acknowledges their misunderstanding of the bra-ket notation, particularly the relationship between the ket and its corresponding bra, and expresses a lack of intuition regarding the concept of the hermitian conjugate.
  • Participants discuss the representation of states using matrices in a finite-dimensional system, providing examples with spin states and demonstrating how to compute inner products through matrix multiplication.
  • There is mention of generalizing the inner product to infinite and continuous state spaces, indicating the mathematical complexity involved in these concepts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definitions and mathematical representations discussed, but there remains uncertainty and confusion regarding the implications and intuitive understanding of bra-ket notation and the concept of the hermitian conjugate.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express limitations in their understanding of the bra-ket notation and the mathematical operations involved, indicating a need for further clarification on these foundational concepts.

gfd43tg
Gold Member
Messages
949
Reaction score
48
Hello,

I am very confused how this is true? Where does this come from??
$$<f| \hat{Q}f> = (\sum_{n}a_{n}^{*} |\psi_{n}>)(\sum_{m}a_{m} \hat{Q} | \psi_{m}>)$$

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maylis said:
Hello,

I am very confused how this is true? Where does this come from??
$$<f| \hat{Q}f> = (\sum_{n}a_{n}^{*} |\psi_{n}>)(\sum_{m}a_{m} \hat{Q} | \psi_{m}>)$$

thanks
I think your formula is slightly wrong. If you have a complete set of orthonormal basis states [itex]|\psi_m\rangle[/itex], then you can write an arbitrary state [itex]|f\rangle[/itex] as a linear combination of basis states:

[itex]|f\rangle = \sum_m a_m |\psi_m\rangle[/itex]

That being the case, you take the adjoint of both sides:

[itex]|f\rangle^\dagger = \langle f | = \sum_m a_m^* \langle \psi_m|[/itex]

So as to not mix up the indices, let's relabel [itex]m[/itex] by [itex]n[/itex] in this expression:

[itex]|f\rangle^\dagger = \langle f | = \sum_n a_n^* \langle \psi_n|[/itex]

Then it follows automatically that

[itex]\langle f|\hat{O}|f\rangle = (\sum_n a_n^* \langle \psi_n|)\ \hat{O}\ ( \sum_m a_m |\psi_m\rangle)[/itex]

which can also be written as:
[itex]\langle f|\hat{O}|f\rangle = (\sum_n a_n |\psi\rangle)^\dagger\ \hat{O}\ ( \sum_m a_m |\psi_m\rangle)[/itex]

Maybe you don't know what [itex]\langle f|[/itex] means? Well, you know that for ordinary wave functions, you define [itex]\langle f|g\rangle[/itex] to be the integral:

[itex]\langle f|g\rangle = \int dx f^*(x) g(x)[/itex]

Then you can define [itex]\langle f|[/itex] as that operator that acts on [itex]|g\rangle[/itex] to produce [itex]\langle f|g\rangle[/itex]
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gfd43tg
Ok, I was definitely unaware that ##|f \rangle^{ \dagger} = \langle f|##. No wonder I was so confused over the definition of a hermition conjugate, how somehow moving the operator to the bra somehow made it a complex conjugate.You are right, I am very shaky about ##\langle f|##. I understand the ket is a vector, but what is the bra? I know you say its an operator that acts on the vector g to produce the inner product, but that leaves me feeling icky inside. As in no intuition at all.
 
Maylis said:
Ok, I was definitely unaware that ##|f \rangle^{ \dagger} = \langle f|##. No wonder I was so confused over the definition of a hermition conjugate, how somehow moving the operator to the bra somehow made it a complex conjugate.You are right, I am very shaky about ##\langle f|##. I understand the ket is a vector, but what is the bra? I know you say its an operator that acts on the vector g to produce the inner product, but that leaves me feeling icky inside. As in no intuition at all.

Well, the simplest case is when there are only a finite number of states. For example, an electron's state, if you ignore the spatial part, is a two-state system: It can be spin-up or spin-down. So if we use matrices to represent the states, then we can have:

[itex]|\psi_1\rangle = \left( \begin{array}\\ 1 \\ 0 \end{array} \right)[/itex] which represents spin-up

[itex]|\psi_2\rangle = \left( \begin{array}\\ 0 \\ 1 \end{array} \right)[/itex] which represents spin-down

An arbitrary state [itex]|f\rangle[/itex] is a combination:

[itex]|f\rangle = a_1 |\psi_1\rangle + a_2 |\psi_2\rangle = \left( \begin{array}\\ a_1 \\ a_2 \end{array} \right)[/itex]

Then [itex]|f\rangle^\dagger[/itex] is just [itex]\left( \begin{array}\\ a_1^* & a_2^* \end{array} \right)[/itex]. You compute [itex]|g\rangle^\dagger |f\rangle[/itex] by matrix multiplication: If [itex]|g\rangle[/itex] is [itex]\left( \begin{array}\\ b_1 \\ b_2 \end{array} \right)[/itex], then

[itex]|g\rangle^\dagger |f\rangle = \left( \begin{array}\\ b_1^* & b_2^* \end{array} \right)\ \left( \begin{array}\\ a_1 \\ a_2 \end{array} \right) = b_1^* a_1 + b_2^* a_2[/itex]

To generalize to an infinite, but countable, number of states,
[itex]|g\rangle^\dagger |f\rangle = \sum_i b_i^* a_i[/itex]

To generalize to a continuous number of states,

[itex]|g\rangle^\dagger |f\rangle = \int dx\ g(x)^* f(x)[/itex]
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gfd43tg
Thanks, that clears things up a lot.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K