Writing a random 2N by 2N matrix in terms of Pauli Matrices

sokrates
Messages
481
Reaction score
2
Hi,

Wasn't sure if I should post this to Linear Algebra or here.

My question is really simple:

Can a 2N by 2N random, and Hermitian Matrix ( Hamiltonian ) be always written as:

H = A \otimes I_{2\times 2} + B \otimes \sigma_x + C \otimes \sigma_y + D \otimes \sigma_z

where A,B,C,D are all N by N matrices, while the sigma's are the Pauli spin matrices.

My question is, as long as A,B,C,D are random and complex Hermitian matrices of size N by N, do I cover the
whole 2N by 2N complex Hermitian space with this representation?

If yes, do you know a reference, a theorem, or a simple proof of this?A very simple case is when N = 1 , and I know that any 2 x 2 complex , Hermitian matrix can be written as a linear combination of Pauli Matrices.

Many thanks,
sokrates.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, it is. It's just a matter of counting degrees of freedom
 
sokrates said:
My question is really simple:

Can a 2N by 2N random, and Hermitian Matrix ( Hamiltonian ) be always written as:

H = A \otimes I_{2\times 2} + B \otimes \sigma_x + C \otimes \sigma_y + D \otimes \sigma_z

where A,B,C,D are all N by N matrices, while the sigma's are the Pauli spin matrices.

Yes, because the Pauli operators form a basis of the set of operators acting on qubit (two-dimensional Hilbert) spaces. If you're not convinced then note that you can always write your operator in the form

H = A_{00} \otimes \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert + A_{01} \otimes \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert + A_{10} \otimes \lvert 1 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert + A_{11} \otimes \lvert 1 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert​

just by writing it out explicitly in some basis and collecting the terms in \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert, \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert, etc., and then substituting

\begin{eqnarray}<br /> \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert &amp;=&amp; \tfrac{1}{2} ( \mathbb{I} + \sigma_{z} ) \,, \\<br /> \lvert 0 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert &amp;=&amp; \tfrac{1}{2} ( \sigma_{x} + i \sigma_{y} ) \,, \\<br /> \lvert 1 \rangle \langle 0 \rvert &amp;=&amp; \tfrac{1}{2} ( \sigma_{x} - i \sigma_{y} ) \,, \\<br /> \lvert 1 \rangle \langle 1 \rvert &amp;=&amp; \tfrac{1}{2} ( \mathbb{I} - \sigma_{z} ) \,.<br /> \end{eqnarray}​

This works for any operator. If H happens to be Hermitian then this imposes additional constraints. For instance, as you pointed out, the A, B, C, and D from your post must also be Hermitian in that case.
 
Hi , Thank you for the responses ... However, I still don't understand it from a matrix point of view.

Let's take N = 2 , and have a 4x4 H matrix ... can one prove that my representation will always cover the full space ?

I didn't follow it from the Dirac notation,

Many thanks for responses.
 
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