Results 1 to 6 of 6

Math Help - Proof that unitary operator is inner product preserving.

  1. #1
    Member
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    95

    Proof that unitary operator is inner product preserving.

    Having read the proof for this from http://www-inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~c...s/lecture4.pdf, I am struggling to understand exactly where the first and second steps come from. From which property of the inner product does it follow that <A|B> = Adjoint(A)B ? Thanks in advance.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    From
    Australia
    Posts
    3,612
    Thanks
    591

    Re: Proof that unitary operator is inner product preserving.

    Hey StaryNight.

    I remember a while ago that it has to do with the commutative aspect of the inner product and then this makes the object Hermitian or at least having the transpose equal to the original.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Member
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    95

    Re: Proof that unitary operator is inner product preserving.

    Quote Originally Posted by chiro View Post
    Hey StaryNight.

    I remember a while ago that it has to do with the commutative aspect of the inner product and then this makes the object Hermitian or at least having the transpose equal to the original.
    Hi chiro, could you please elaborate? Thaks.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    From
    Australia
    Posts
    3,612
    Thanks
    591

    Re: Proof that unitary operator is inner product preserving.

    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Mar 2011
    From
    Tejas
    Posts
    3,370
    Thanks
    739

    Re: Proof that unitary operator is inner product preserving.

    i will use U* to denote the conjugate-transpose or adjoint of U.

    by definition, this is the linear transformation for which: <Uv,w> = <v,U*w> for any vectors (or "kets" as physicists like to call them) v,w.

    if U is unitary, which means U*U = UU* = I (the identity transformation), then using Uw in place of w gives:

    <Uv,Uw> = <v,U*(Uw)> = <v,(U*U)w> = <v,Iw> = <v,w>

    note that in a complex inner-product space, <v,_> is often defined as the linear functional v*(_), that is: <v|w> = (|v>)*|w> (a row consisting of the conjugates of the coordinates of v times a column consisting of the coordinates of w).

    this insures sesquilinearity (most mathematical treatments do the opposite and define <v,w> = (v*w)*, in other words we have linearity in the first argument, rather than the second. this is your typical "left-handed" versus "right-handed" choice...that is, in physics we have: <x|y> = <y,x> according to the "usual" mathematical definition).
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Member
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    95

    Re: Proof that unitary operator is inner product preserving.

    Brilliant, thanks, I didn't realise that this was the definition of the adjoint.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deveno View Post
    i will use U* to denote the conjugate-transpose or adjoint of U.

    by definition, this is the linear transformation for which: <Uv,w> = <v,U*w> for any vectors (or "kets" as physicists like to call them) v,w.

    if U is unitary, which means U*U = UU* = I (the identity transformation), then using Uw in place of w gives:

    <Uv,Uw> = <v,U*(Uw)> = <v,(U*U)w> = <v,Iw> = <v,w>

    note that in a complex inner-product space, <v,_> is often defined as the linear functional v*(_), that is: <v|w> = (|v>)*|w> (a row consisting of the conjugates of the coordinates of v times a column consisting of the coordinates of w).

    this insures sesquilinearity (most mathematical treatments do the opposite and define <v,w> = (v*w)*, in other words we have linearity in the first argument, rather than the second. this is your typical "left-handed" versus "right-handed" choice...that is, in physics we have: <x|y> = <y,x> according to the "usual" mathematical definition).
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 17th 2011, 05:11 AM
  2. Eigenvalues of Unitary Matrix proof
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 19th 2010, 06:38 PM
  3. Kronecker product and vec operator
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 26th 2009, 10:42 AM
  4. Proving the existence of a unitary operator...
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 11th 2009, 05:15 PM
  5. Unitary operator
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 10th 2009, 09:26 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum