Statement in Cohen-Tanoudji I don't understand

  • Thread starter quasar987
  • Start date
In summary, the ket space X of a physical system is not isomorphic to the state space X, only if X is finite dimensional. The reason for this is that the cardinality of X^{*} is greater than the cardinality of X. If X is not finite dimensional, then the dual space X^* and the state space X are isomorphic.
  • #1
quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
4,807
32
He writes, talking about the ket space X of a physical system,

In general, the dual space [itex]X^*[/itex] and the state space [itex]X[/itex] are not isomorphic, except of course, if [itex]X[/itex] is finite dimensional.

Can someone explain why they are isom. in the event of finite dimensionality?

For instance, say X is finite. To every |x> in X is associated the linear functional [itex]<x|[/itex] (the "inner product functional"). But also, given any (non-identity) linear operator A on X, <x|A is a new linear functionnal on X, is it not*? So that makes the cardinality of [itex]X^*[/itex] greater than the cardinality of X, so there can be no bijection between them.

What's wrong?*I should say potentially new, because if A maps every |x1> towards |x2>'s such that, by miracle, <x|x1>=<x|x2>, then <x| and <x|A really are the same functional...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I don't get it. That dual is the algebraic dual or the topological dual ? (In the case of finite dim. LTS they coincide, so it doesn't matter.)

How can you infer that " the cardinality of X^{*} is greater than the cardinality of X" based on what you've written ?

Daniel.
 
  • #3
Ok, my counter-exemple's not good. But my main question remains. Why are X and it's dual isomorphic in the even that X is finite dimensional?

(The dual X^* is the set of all linear functionals on X.. I guess that's the algebraic dual?)
 
  • #4
In a Hilbert space you can show every linear functional arises as the inner product with some element in the space. There's your bijection. Of course, having the same cardinality does not entail having the same dimension, but you can show the image of a basis in the space under this bijection is a basis in the dual space.
 
  • #5
quasar987 said:
Ok, my counter-exemple's not good. But my main question remains. Why are X and it's dual isomorphic in the even that X is finite dimensional?

(The dual X^* is the set of all linear functionals on X.. I guess that's the algebraic dual?)

For complex Hilbert spaces, X and X' ( with X' the topological dual) are isometrically complex conjugate isomorphic, by the Riesz representation theorem.

If the Hilbert space is finite dimensional, then the topological dual and the algebraic dual coincide and the isometric complex conjugate isomorphism is obviously still valid.

If your initial space X was not a linear topological space, but merely a finite dimensional linear space, then you'd have to go back to the linear algebra course and search for a method to prove the complex conjugate isomorphism.

Daniel.
 

FAQ: Statement in Cohen-Tanoudji I don't understand

What is the statement in Cohen-Tanoudji that is commonly misunderstood?

The statement in Cohen-Tanoudji that is commonly misunderstood is the concept of wave-particle duality. This refers to the fact that particles, such as electrons, can exhibit both wave-like and particle-like behaviors depending on the situation.

Why is understanding this statement important in the field of science?

Understanding the concept of wave-particle duality is important in science because it helps us make sense of seemingly contradictory phenomena, such as the behavior of subatomic particles. It also plays a crucial role in the development of quantum mechanics and our understanding of the fundamental laws of nature.

Can you provide an example of wave-particle duality in action?

One famous example of wave-particle duality is the double-slit experiment, where a single particle can exhibit wave-like interference patterns when passing through two slits, but also behave as a single point particle when observed at the slits. This experiment highlights the dual nature of particles and the role of observation in their behavior.

How does the statement in Cohen-Tanoudji relate to the concept of uncertainty in quantum mechanics?

The statement in Cohen-Tanoudji about wave-particle duality is closely related to the concept of uncertainty in quantum mechanics. This is because the uncertainty principle states that it is impossible to simultaneously know both the position and momentum of a particle with absolute precision. This is due to the wave-like nature of particles, which makes it impossible to know their exact location and velocity at the same time.

Are there any practical applications of understanding this statement in Cohen-Tanoudji?

Yes, there are many practical applications of understanding the concept of wave-particle duality. For example, it is crucial in the development of technologies such as transistors, lasers, and computer memory. It also has implications in fields such as medicine, where the wave-like behavior of particles is utilized in imaging techniques like MRI scans.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
32
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
9
Views
2K
2
Replies
42
Views
8K
Back
Top