MHB Quantum Computing: Positive Operators are Hermitian

Ackbach
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,148
Reaction score
93
Exercise 2.24 on page 71 of Nielsen and Chuang's Quantum Computation and Quantum Information asks the reader to show that a positive operator is necessarily Hermitian. There is a hint given; namely, that you first show an arbitrary operator can be written $A=B+iC$, where $B$ and $C$ are Hermitian. N.B., Nielsen and Chuang are pretty much always working in finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces. Recall that a positive operator $A$ is one such that $\langle x|A|x\rangle\ge 0$ for all vectors $|x\rangle$. An Hermitian operator $A$ is one such that $A=A^{\dagger}$. Here is my solution to the problem:

I claim that $A=B+iC$, where
\begin{align*}
B&=\frac{A+A^{\dagger}}{2} \\
C&=\frac{A-A^{\dagger}}{2i}.
\end{align*}
We can easily verify that $A=B+iC$. Note that
\begin{align*}
B^{\dagger}&=\frac{A^{\dagger}+A}{2}=B \\
C^{\dagger}&=-\frac{A^{\dagger}}{2i}+\frac{A}{2i}=C.
\end{align*}
Hence, $B$ and $C$ are both Hermitian. Now we assume that $A$ is positive, and that $B$ and $C$ are defined as above. For a positive operator, we must have $\langle x|A|x\rangle\ge 0$ for all vectors $|x\rangle$. Since $C$ is Hermitian, it is normal, and hence is diagonalizable. That is, it has a representation
$$C=\sum_i \lambda_i|i\rangle\langle i|,$$
where the $\{|i\rangle\}$ is an orthonormal basis of the space $V$. If it is an orthonormal basis, then we can write
$$|x\rangle=\sum_jx_j|j\rangle.$$
Hence,
\begin{align*}
C|x\rangle&=\sum_i \lambda_i|i\rangle\langle i|\sum_jx_j|j\rangle \\
&=\sum_{i,j}\lambda_ix_j|i\rangle\langle i|j\rangle \\
&=\sum_i\lambda_i x_i|i\rangle.
\end{align*}
Since
$$\langle x|=\sum_j x_j^*\langle j|,$$
we have that
\begin{align*}
\langle x|C|x\rangle&=\sum_j x_j^*\langle j|\sum_i\lambda_i x_i|i\rangle \\
&=\sum_{j,i}\lambda_ix_j^*x_i\langle j|i\rangle \\
&=\sum_i\lambda_i|x_i|^2.
\end{align*}
Since $C$ is Hermitian, its eigenvalues are real. Hence, $\langle x|C|x\rangle$ is real. By the same token, $\langle x|B|x\rangle$ is real. In order to be able even to write
$$\langle x|A|x\rangle=\langle x|(B+iC)|x\rangle=\langle x|B|x\rangle+i\langle x|C|x\rangle\ge 0,$$
the portion $\langle x|C|x\rangle$ must be either pure imaginary or zero. It is not pure imaginary. Hence, it must be zero. Therefore, $A$ is Hermitian.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't need to introduce a basis. Since ##\hat{C}=\hat{C}^{\dagger}## you have
$$\langle x|\hat{C} x \rangle=\langle \hat{C}^{\dagger} x| x\rangle = \langle \hat{C} x|x \rangle=\langle x|\hat{C} x \rangle^* \; \Rightarrow \; \langle x|\hat{C} x \rangle \in \mathbb{R}.$$
Since by assumption ##\hat{A}## is positive semidefinite, from that you must have ##\langle x|\hat{C} x \rangle=0## for all ##|x \rangle \in \mathcal{H}##, and thus ##\hat{C}=0##.
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK and Ackbach
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Back
Top