Why do ket vectors not have magnitudes?

entropy1
Messages
1,232
Reaction score
72
Why does the magnitude of a ket vector not matter?

The motivation appears to be that a state vector only can decribe a particle, or no particle.

But why shouldn't the magnitude of ket vectors not be used to represent the density of the particles, the average number of particles?

I'm am fairly new on the mathematics, in fact just starting again. ;)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The ket is the state of the entire system - so it always represents all particles.

The state of the system is a ray in Hilbert space, so kets of different magnitudes represent the same state. The most usual convention is to take all kets to be unit vectors, basically so that the probabilities sum to one.
 
Thank you for your reply! :smile: I'm glad you understand my question. I'm not sure if I understand your answer, but I will dive into it! Thanks!

Oh, a question though: what do you mean with 'a ray'? :smile: Thanks again!
 
entropy1 said:
Oh, a question though: what do you mean with 'a ray'? :smile: Thanks again!

If one pictures each vector as an arrow of a certain length sticking out from the origin, then a ray is just that vector extended in both directions. It's just another way of saying that multiplying the vector by any complex number gives a different vector, but it is the same state.

http://www.theory.caltech.edu/people/preskill/ph229/notes/chap2.pdf (talks about rays)
 
Entropy: Have a look at Leonard Susskind's quantum mechanics lectures at http://theoreticalminimum.com/courses/quantum-mechanics/2012/winter. He doesn't assume much prior mathematical knowledge and spends a lot of time in the first few lectures explaining the linear algebra and interpretation of bra and ket vectors. I probably wouldn't have gotten past square one without his lectures.
 
  • Like
Likes atyy
Adrian B said:
Entropy: Have a look at Leonard Susskind's quantum mechanics lectures at http://theoreticalminimum.com/courses/quantum-mechanics/2012/winter. He doesn't assume much prior mathematical knowledge and spends a lot of time in the first few lectures explaining the linear algebra and interpretation of bra and ket vectors. I probably wouldn't have gotten past square one without his lectures.

What is the plural of "apparatus"? :smile: http://theoreticalminimum.com/courses/quantum-mechanics/2012/winter/lecture-2
 
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...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top