Hi I am interested in the validity of the following proof. I am interested in the validity of this particular proof as I am aware of how to prove this result in a different way.
Theorem: If two observables are compatible, their corresponding self-adjoint operators possess a set of common (or simultaneous) eigenstates (this theorem holds for both degenerate and nondegenerate eigenstates).
Proof: If $|\psi_n \rangle$ is a nondegenerate eigenstate of $\hat{A}$, $\hat{A}|\psi_n \rangle = a_{n}| \psi_n \rangle$, we have
$$\langle \psi_m | [\hat{A},\hat{B}]| \psi_n \rangle = (a_m - a_n)\langle \psi_m | \hat{B} | \psi_n \rangle = 0$$ since $\hat{A}$ and $\hat{B}$ commute. So $\langle \psi_m | \hat{B} | \psi_n \rangle$ must vanish unless $a_n = a_m$. That is, $$\langle \psi_m | \hat{B} | \psi_n \rangle = \langle \psi_n | \hat{B} | \psi_n \rangle ~\propto~ \delta_{nm}.$$
Hence the $|\psi_n \rangle$ are joint or simultaneous eigenstates of $\hat{A}$ and $\hat{B}$.
I don't see why it can't be that $\langle \psi_m | \hat{B} | \psi_n \rangle = 0$ even if $a_n = a_m$.
Also why does $\langle \psi_m | \hat{B} | \psi_n \rangle \propto \delta_{nm}$ imply that $|\psi_n\rangle$ is an eigenstate of $\hat{B}$? The following implication only goes in one direction $\hat{B}|\psi_n \rangle = b_n |\psi_n \rangle \implies \langle \psi_n| \hat{B} | \psi_n \rangle = b_n$, hence we don't necessarily have that $| \psi_n \rangle$ is an eigenstate of $\hat{B}$.