2
$\begingroup$

I know that the momentum operator $p$ defined on the Schwarz function $S(\mathbb{R})$ is essentially self-adjoint. However, what if I were to restrict $p$ to $C_c^\infty (0,1)\subseteq L^2(0,1)$. In this case, would $p$ still be essentially self-adjoint?

Without thinking too deeply, I think this is true since we could repeat the usual proof involve Fourier transforms, but I'm not completely sure, since I know that there isn't a self-adjoint extension on the half-line $\mathbb{R}_+$.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Roughly speaking, you can extend the operator with periodic boundary conditions. You can choose different phase shifts at the boundary, for which the operator has different eigenvalues. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 16, 2021 at 2:37
  • $\begingroup$ Are you specifically referring to the open interval $(0,1)$, and wondering if that has any technical implications (e.g. compactly supported functions on a non-compact interval)? $\endgroup$
    – J. Murray
    Commented Oct 16, 2021 at 2:38
  • $\begingroup$ @J.Murray Not really. I'm just curious about bounded sets. It could be open or closed. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 16, 2021 at 6:18

1 Answer 1

4
$\begingroup$

No, $\hat p$ is no longer essentially self-adjoint in this case. One problem is that essential self-adjointness is a property of symmetric/Hermitian operators, and the operator $\hat p_0: f \mapsto -if'$ with domain $C^\infty([0,1])$ is not Hermitian, which can be seen straightforwardly. The problem is that when we integrate by parts on a compact interval, we get boundary terms which don't generally vanish; in other words, the domain of $\hat p_0$ is too large.

In order to obtain a Hermitian operator, we need to restrict the domain by adding boundary conditions, e.g. the Dirichlet condition $f(0)=f(1)=0$. The operator $\hat p$ with domain $$\mathrm{dom}(\hat p):= \big\{f\in C^\infty([0,1]) \ : \ f(0)=f(1)=0\big\}$$ is Hermitian, and so we can now proceed to ask about essential self-adjointness. One way to proceed is by computing the so-called deficiency indices$^\ddagger$, defined as $$d_{\pm} = \mathrm{dim}\left(\mathrm{ker}\left(\hat p^\dagger \mp i\mathbb I\right)\right)$$ Once we have them, there are three possibilities:

  1. $d_+=d_- = 0 \implies \hat p $ is essentially self-adjoint
  2. $d_+=d_- =d\neq 0 \implies \hat p $ has an infinite number of self-adjoint extensions
  3. $d_+\neq d_- \implies \hat p$ has no self-adjoint extensions.

The first thing to do is to compute $\hat p^\dagger$. For any $f\in \mathrm{dom}(\hat p^\dagger)$ and $g\in\mathrm{dom}(\hat p)$, there exists some $\psi_f\in L^2([0,1])$ such that $$\langle f, \hat p g\rangle = \langle \psi_f, g\rangle $$ $$\iff \int_0^1 \overline{f(x)}\big(-ig'(x)\big) \mathrm dx = \int_0^1 \overline{\psi_f(x)} g(x) \mathrm dx$$ It's not hard to see that this implies that $\psi_f$ is the (weak) derivative of $-if$. As a result, $p^\dagger: f \mapsto -if'$ and $\mathrm{dom}(\hat p^\dagger)=H^1([0,1])$, essentially the space of weakly differentiable functions whose derivatives are in $L^2([0,1])$ (see Sobolev spaces).

From here, computing the deficiency indices is easy. $$\mathrm{ker}(\hat p^\dagger\mp i\mathbb I):= \big\{f \in H^1([0,1]) \ : \ -if' \mp i f = 0 \iff f' \pm f = 0\big\}$$ $$\implies \mathrm{ker}(\hat p \mp i\mathbb I) = \big\{a e^{\mp x} \ : \ a\in \mathbb C\big\}$$ It's easy to see that both of these spaces are one-dimensional, so $d_+=d_-=1$. As a result, $\hat p$ is not essentially self-adjoint, but rather has an entire family of self-adjoint extensions $\hat p_\theta$. One can further show that their domains are restricted to include the quasiperiodic boundary conditions $f(1)=f(0)e^{i\theta}$ for $\theta\in[0,2\pi)$.


$^\ddagger$To see how these quantities arise from the Cayley transform, see e.g. here.

$\endgroup$

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.