Squaring a Sum of Ket-Bra Operators

In summary, the conversation discusses a problem involving a system with a given Hamiltonian and operator. The solution given in the textbook includes a step that is unclear and the justification provided does not fully explain the conclusion. The conversation also mentions the difference between ##(A+B)^2## and ##A^2 + 2AB + B^2## and how adding a term to a sum does not change the sum if the vectors are orthogonal.
  • #1
jstrunk
55
2
I can't follow the solution given in my textbook to the following problem.
The solution goes right off the rails on the first step.

Consider a system whose Hamiltonian is given by
[itex]
\hat H = \alpha \left( {\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _2}} \right|} \right. + \left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _1}} \right|} \right.} \right)
[/itex],
where [itex]\alpha[/itex] is real and [itex]\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle ,\left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle[/itex] are normalized eigenstates of an operator [itex]{\hat A}[/itex] that has no degenerate eigenvalues.
Find [itex]{{\hat H}^2}[/itex].

My first step is [itex]{{\hat H}^2} = {\alpha ^2}\left( {\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _2}} \right|} \right. + \left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _1}} \right|} \right.} \right)\left( {\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _2}} \right|} \right. + \left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _1}} \right|} \right.} \right)[/itex].
The first step in the book is [itex]{{\hat H}^2} = {\alpha ^2}\left( {\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _2}} \right|} \right. + \left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _1}} \right|} \right.} \right)\left( {\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _1}} \right|} \right. + \left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _2}} \right|} \right.} \right)[/itex].
I have no idea how they got that second term. The solution gives the following justification. I understand each of the points given in the justification, but as far as I can see the do nothing to justify the conclusion.
Since [itex]\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle[/itex] and [itex]\left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle[/itex] are eigenstates of [itex]{\hat A}[/itex] and [itex]{\hat A}[/itex] is Hermitian,
they must be orthogonal. Since [itex]\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle[/itex] and [itex]\left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle[/itex] are both
normalized and since [itex]\left\langle {\left. {{\phi _1}} \right|} \right.\left. {{\phi _2}} \right\rangle = 0[/itex], we can reduce [itex] {{\hat H}^2}[/itex] to
[itex]{{\hat H}^2} = {\alpha ^2}\left( {\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _2}} \right|} \right. + \left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _1}} \right|} \right.} \right)\left( {\left. {\left| {{\phi _1}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _1}} \right|} \right. + \left. {\left| {{\phi _2}} \right.} \right\rangle \left\langle {\left. {{\phi _2}} \right|} \right.} \right)[/itex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Note that for operators, ##(A+B)^2 = A^2 + AB +BA +B^2## which is not necessarily the same as ##A^2 + 2AB + B^2## because ##A## and ##B## don't have to commute. Also, you can add a term like ##\left|\right.\phi_1 \left.\right>\left<\right.\phi_2 |\phi_1 \left.\right>\left<\right.\phi_2 \left.\right|## to any sum without changing the sum because the two vectors are orthogonal.
 

FAQ: Squaring a Sum of Ket-Bra Operators

1. What is the purpose of squaring a sum of ket-bra operators?

Squaring a sum of ket-bra operators is a mathematical operation used in quantum mechanics to calculate the probability of a particle being in a specific state. It helps to determine the likelihood of a particle transitioning from one state to another.

2. How is the squaring of ket-bra operators performed?

The squaring of ket-bra operators is performed by multiplying the operator by its conjugate transpose. This results in a new operator that represents the probability of the particle being in a specific state.

3. Can squaring a sum of ket-bra operators be applied to any quantum system?

Yes, squaring a sum of ket-bra operators can be applied to any quantum system. It is a fundamental operation in quantum mechanics that is used to calculate the probability of a particle being in a specific state.

4. What are the properties of squared ket-bra operators?

The properties of squared ket-bra operators include being Hermitian, meaning that the operator is equal to its conjugate transpose, and having eigenvalues that are non-negative real numbers. It also represents the projection operator for a specific state.

5. How does squaring a sum of ket-bra operators relate to the measurement of a quantum system?

Squaring a sum of ket-bra operators is related to the measurement of a quantum system because it helps to determine the probability of a particle being in a certain state, which is what is measured in quantum mechanics. It is an essential tool for predicting the outcomes of measurements in quantum systems.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
29
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Back
Top