2
$\begingroup$

I have a question. It's very simple to understand, yet it doesn't make sense to me.

Say we have a system with a 2D orthonormal basis $|1⟩$, $|2⟩$. For this system, the energy operator (Hamiltonian) is:

$$ \hat{H} = E\left[|1⟩⟨1| − |2⟩⟨2| + |1⟩⟨2| + |2⟩⟨1|\right] $$

I want to find the matrix of $\hat{H}$, the eigenvalues of $\hat{H}$ and the normalised eigenvectors of $\hat{H}$.

I know that to find the elements of an operator in a matrix, firstly for a space with $m$ eigenvectors, the matrix is $m\times m$. So in this example, the matrix must be $2\times2$.

The way to find the ith and jth element of the matrix is by using this:

$$ \hat{H}_{i,j} = ⟨\psi_i|\hat{H}|\psi_j⟩ $$

My problem is that for my $\hat{H}$ in the question, doesn't it just go to 0? Because $|1⟩⟨2| = |2⟩⟨1| = 0$ due to orthonormality, and $|1⟩⟨1|=|2⟩⟨2|=1$, hence $\hat{H}$?

Or have I missed something completely here? Also what is $E$? Once I get the matrix, what steps shall I take to find the eigenvalues of $\hat{H}$? To find the eigenfunction, I presume I just apply $\hat{H}$ it to each vector.

I'm really struggling with this, any suggestions would be welcomed.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ $|i\rangle\langle j|$ is not the same as $\langle i|j\rangle$. The former is a linear map (it maps $|k\rangle$ to $\delta_{jk}|i\rangle$), the latter is a scalar. $\endgroup$
    – NDewolf
    Commented Feb 22, 2021 at 17:45
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand what you mean. I used above that |𝑖⟩⟨𝑗| is ⟨𝑗|𝑖⟩. $\endgroup$
    – user289904
    Commented Feb 22, 2021 at 18:03
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ But this is wrong, as I instructed you in the previous reposting of your question. The former is a tensor product dyadic, and the latter is a dot product scalar. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 22, 2021 at 22:04

2 Answers 2

3
$\begingroup$

Be careful with the notation $|x⟩⟨y|$ denotes the outer product while $\langle x | y \rangle$ denotes inner product

$$ H = E[|1⟩⟨1| − |2⟩⟨2| + |1⟩⟨2| + |2⟩⟨1|] $$

where $|1⟩ = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}$ and $|2⟩ = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}$

Thus the inner products

$$\langle x|y⟩ = \begin{cases} 1, & \text{if $x=y$}.\\ 0, & \text{otherwise}. \end{cases} $$

For instance matrix elements of $H_{11}$ is

$$\langle 1 |H| 1 \rangle = E\langle 1| \big(|1⟩⟨1| − |2⟩⟨2| + |1⟩⟨2| + |2⟩⟨1|\big)|1 \rangle = E(\langle 1 | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | 1 \rangle-\langle 1 | 2 \rangle\langle 2 | 1 \rangle+\langle 1 | 1 \rangle\langle 2 | 1 \rangle+\langle 1 | 2 \rangle\langle 1 | 1 \rangle)= E$$

to find the eigenvalues, construct the matrix $H$ this is just vector multiplication then apply

$$\det|H-\lambda I|=0$$

get the characteristic polynomial and eigenvalues will be $\lambda{...}$ with some multiplicity. Your eigenvectors $\textbf{x}$ will be found by substituting each eigenvalues separately into

$$(H-\lambda I)\cdot \textbf{x} =0$$

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ So |𝑖⟩⟨𝑗| is not the same as ⟨𝑗|𝑖⟩? I am a little confused about the difference between outer and inner product you talk about above? I thought you could just rearrange like I just did? Furthermore, how did you go from ⟨1|𝐻|1⟩ to the RHS? Could you split it up a little bit more? Thanks for the reply too! $\endgroup$
    – user289904
    Commented Feb 22, 2021 at 18:22
  • $\begingroup$ No they are not the same at all. For instance in your example inner product is a scalar $1\times1$ matrix yet the outer product is a $2\times2$ matrix. From the vectorial representation of $|1\rangle$ and $|2\rangle$, perform the multiplication you will see what I mean. $\endgroup$
    – Monopole
    Commented Feb 22, 2021 at 18:25
  • $\begingroup$ Ah ok that makes a lot more sense then. Could you break down the RHS of the ⟨1|𝐻|1⟩ calculation? I can't see how you have done this? $\endgroup$
    – user289904
    Commented Feb 22, 2021 at 18:40
  • $\begingroup$ You know the Hamiltionian, just multiply it with bra-$1$ from the left and ket-$1$ from the right. $\endgroup$
    – Monopole
    Commented Feb 22, 2021 at 18:47
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @user289904 I might help to think of bra $\langle 1|$ as a row vector, while ket $|1\rangle$ is a column vector. Then, in terms of matrix multiplication, row-times-column and column-times-row are clearly not the same thing. $\endgroup$
    – Roger V.
    Commented Feb 25, 2021 at 12:27
2
$\begingroup$

We can define $|1\rangle=\pmatrix{1\\0}$ and $|2\rangle=\pmatrix{0\\1}$. This is just a definition and we can always write states as unit vectors as long you specify in which basis column vectors like $\pmatrix{a\\b}$ are written. Using this definition bra's can be written as row vectors i.e. $\langle 1|=|1\rangle^\dagger=\pmatrix{1&0}^*=\pmatrix{1&0}$ and $\langle 2|=\pmatrix{0&1}$. Writing it this way makes it easier to see that $|i\rangle\langle j|$ is and operator: something which takes a ket as input and outputs another ket, while $\langle i|j\rangle$ is just a number. Visually you can see that the vertical bars in bra's and kets face towards spots where you would expect another bra/ket. As an example $|1\rangle\langle 2|$ is just $$|1\rangle\langle 2|=\pmatrix{1\\0}\pmatrix{0& 1}=\pmatrix{0&1\\0&0}.$$ A general $2\times 2$ matrix can be written as \begin{align}A&=a|1\rangle\langle 1|+b|1\rangle\langle 2|+c|2\rangle\langle 1|+d|2\rangle\langle 2|\\&=\pmatrix{a&b\\c&d}\end{align}

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.