I Should I always be careful about dimensional consistency?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Haorong Wu
  • Start date Start date
Haorong Wu
Messages
417
Reaction score
90
TL;DR Summary
Will a dimensional inconsistency cause a problem?
I read an equation in a paper, $$\left | m \right >=\int G(\mathbf k) \left | \mathbf k \right > \frac {d^2 k}{4 \pi^2}$$ where ##G(\mathbf k)= \left < \mathbf k \right | \left . m \right >## is the momentum space wave function, ##k## is the two-dimensional frequency.

In this paper, ##\left | m \right >## is the transverse LG modes of a Gaussian beam, and it is dimensionless. Suppose ## \left | \mathbf k \right >## has a dimension of ##[m^l]##. Then from the definition of ##G(\mathbf k)##, it will have a dimension of ##[m^{-l}]##. But then the dimension of the equation will become ##[m^0]=[m^{-l+l-2}] ##, and that cause an inconsistency. Would it cause problems?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If ##G(\mathbf{k}) = \langle \mathbf{k}|m\rangle## and ##|m\rangle## is dimensionless, then ##G(\mathbf{k})## has the same dimensions as ##|\mathbf{k}\rangle##
 
stevendaryl said:
If ##G(\mathbf{k}) = \langle \mathbf{k}|m\rangle## and ##|m\rangle## is dimensionless, then ##G(\mathbf{k})## has the same dimensions as ##|\mathbf{k}\rangle##
Thanks. I got confused because ##G(\mathbf{k})## given by the paper is clearly dimensionless, so I am trying to find a balance in that equation. However, I just find that ##G(\mathbf{k})## should have the dimension of ##[m^2]## and everything works out.

Thanks!
 
Hi, @stevendaryl , do ##\left | k \right > ## has the same dimension as ##\left < k \right |##?
 
It depends on how you normalize your states. Obviously in this case you have the HEP/QFT convention, i.e.,
$$\langle \vec{k}|\vec{k}' \rangle=(2 \pi)^2 \delta^{(2)}(\vec{k}-\vec{k}')$$
since you seem to work in 2D. That's because in this community you usually use natural units with ##\hbar=c=1## and in Fourier transforms you want for each energy or momentum integral a factor ##1/(2 \pi)##.

This implies that ##|\vec{k} \rangle## as well as ##\langle \vec{k}|## have dimension ##1/\text{momentum}##, and the completeness relation reads
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 k}{(2 \pi)^3} |\vec{k} \rangle \langle \vec{k}|=\hat{1}.$$
So you can expand all Hilbert space vectors in terms of these generalized momentum eigenvectors
$$|m \rangle=\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \mathrm{d}^2 k \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^3} |\vec{k} \rangle \langle \vec{k}|m \rangle.$$
 
Haorong Wu said:
Hi, @stevendaryl , do ##\left | k \right > ## has the same dimension as ##\left < k \right |##?
It's usually the case that for any state ##|\psi\rangle##, the conjugate state ##\langle \psi |## has the same dimensions. You can think of ##|\psi\rangle## as a kind of column matrix (with maybe an infinite number of rows), and ##\langle \psi |## is the result of turning the column into a row (taking the transpose) and taking the complex-conjugate: ##\langle \psi| = (|\psi\rangle^T)^*##
 
  • Like
Likes Haorong Wu and vanhees71
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
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
Back
Top