Using completeness relation to find <Omega>=0

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChemicalTom
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relation
ChemicalTom
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
I am stuck on this Self-test 1.6 in molecular quantum mechanics by atkins and friedman.
Probably making use of the completeness relation the question is the following: Show that if <Ωf>*=-Ωf*, then <Ω>=0 for any real function f.
Anyone got a clue?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi ChemicalTom
The self test 1.6 in the book you mentioned, is different from the problem you've posted. I'm using fourth edition... correct me if I'm wrong...

Regards
 
In the 4th edition it's the self-test 1.9 on page 33.
 
  • Like
Likes phoenix95
Hi Phoenix95 I am using the fifth editon.
 
  • Like
Likes phoenix95
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
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...
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

Similar threads

Back
Top