5
$\begingroup$

If $A$ and $B$ are Hermitian operators, show that $$C~:=~i[A,B]$$ is Hermitian too.

My work: $$\begin{gather} C=i(AB-BA) \\ \langle\psi\rvert C\lvert\phi\rangle = i\langle\psi\rvert AB\lvert\phi\rangle-i\langle\psi\rvert BA\lvert\phi\rangle \end{gather}$$ $A$ and $B$ are Hermitian such that: $$\begin{align} \langle\psi\rvert A\lvert\phi\rangle &= \langle\phi\rvert A\lvert\psi\rangle^* \\ \langle\psi\rvert B\lvert\phi\rangle &= \langle\phi\rvert B\lvert\psi\rangle^* \end{align}$$ I know a little about the identy operator, which I've seen used to do a similar trick, but I'm not that clear on its exact meaning hmm... $$1=\sum_n\lvert n\rangle\langle n\rvert$$ The definition of Hermiticity I learnt from lectures is the one I stated above for A, can you prove it in this way for C? ie can you use bra-ket notation.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

The bra-ket notation is very formal, but well, let's go through it.

We must prove that $\langle \psi | C | \phi \rangle = \langle \phi | C | \psi \rangle ^*$, where the $^*$ is complex conjugation.

First we prove that the adjoint of the composite operator $AB$ is $BA$, that is, that $\langle \psi | AB | \phi \rangle = \langle \phi | BA | \psi \rangle^*$.

For that, notice that $\langle \psi | AB | \phi \rangle = \langle \psi | A \, 1 \, B | \phi \rangle = \sum_n \langle \psi | A | n \rangle\langle n | B | \phi \rangle = \sum_n \langle n | A | \psi \rangle^* \langle \phi | B | n \rangle^* = (\sum_n \langle \phi | B | n \rangle \langle n | A | \psi \rangle ) ^* = (\langle \phi | B \, 1 \, A | \psi \rangle ) ^* = \langle \phi | BA | \psi \rangle^*$.

By the linearity of the inner product, one has then $\langle \psi | (iAB) | \phi \rangle = i(\langle \psi | AB | \phi \rangle) = (-i)^* (\langle \phi | BA | \psi \rangle)^* = (\langle \phi | (-iBA) | \psi \rangle)^*$.

Switching $AB$ to $BA$ then gives you:

  1. $\langle \psi | (iAB) | \phi \rangle = (\langle \phi | (-iBA) | \psi \rangle)^*$.
  2. $\langle \psi | (iBA) | \phi \rangle = (\langle \phi | (-iAB) | \psi \rangle)^*$.

Now one has

$\langle \psi | C | \phi \rangle = \langle \psi | (iAB) | \phi \rangle - \langle \psi | (iBA) | \phi \rangle = (\langle \phi | (-iAB) | \psi \rangle)^* - (\langle \phi | (-iBA) | \psi \rangle)^* = (\langle \phi | C | \psi \rangle)^*$.

That concludes the proof.

--

If you want to know what is going on, I recommend you find the definition of the adjoint of an operator. Mathematicians use the star $A^*$, and physicists use the dagger $A^\dagger$. If you know that $A\mapsto A^\dagger$ is antilinear and satisfies the rule $(AB)^\dagger = B^\dagger A^\dagger$, then your exercise can be solved by checking $C^\dagger = (iAB - iBA)^\dagger = -i BA + i AB = C$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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