Multivariate polynomial where each term has degree 2, e.g.:is a quadratic form because each term has degree 2:but e.g.:is not because the term has degree 3.
More generally for any number of variables it can be written as:
There is a 1-to-1 relationship between quadratic forms and symmetric bilinear forms. In matrix representation, this can be written as:where contains each of the variabes of the form, e.g. for 2 variables:
Strictly speaking, the associated bilinear form would not need to be a symmetric bilinear form, at least for the real numbers or complex numbers which are commutative. E.g.:But that same matrix could also be written in symmetric form as:so why not I guess, its simpler/more restricted.
Kind of extends the complex numbers.
Some facts that make them stand out:
- one of the only three real associative division algebras in addition to the real numbers and complex numbers, according to the classification of associative real division algebras
- the simplest non-commutative division algebra. Contrast for example with complex numbers where multiplication is commutative
A Ring can be seen as a generalization of a field where:
- multiplication is not necessarily commutative. If this is satisfied, we can call it a commutative ring.
- multiplication may not have inverse elements. If this is satisfied, we can call it a division ring.
Addition however has to be commutative and have inverses, i.e. it is an Abelian group.
The simplest example of a ring which is not a full fledged field and with commutative multiplication are the integers. Notably, no inverses exist except for the identity itself and -1. E.g. the inverse of 2 would be 1/2 which is not in the set. More specifically, the integers are a commutative ring.
A polynomial ring is another example with the same properties as the integers.
The simplest non-commutative, non-division is is the set of all 2x2 matrices of real numbers:Note that is not a ring because you can by addition reach the zero matrix.
- we know that 2x2 matrix multiplication is non-commutative in general
- some 2x2 matrices have a multiplicative inverse, but others don't
A member of the underlying field of a vector space. E.g. in , the underlying field is , and a scalar is a member of , i.e. a real number.
The wave equation contains the entire state of a particle.
From mathematical formulation of quantum mechanics remember that the wave equation is a vector in Hilbert space.
And a single vector can be represented in many different ways in different basis, and two of those ways happen to be the position and the momentum representations.
More importantly, position and momentum are first and foremost operators associated with observables: the position operator and the momentum operator. And both of their eigenvalue sets form a basis of the Hilbert space according to the spectral theorem.
When you represent a wave equation as a function, you have to say what the variable of the function means. And depending on weather you say "it means position" or "it means momentum", the position and momentum operators will be written differently.
This is well shown at: Video "Visualization of Quantum Physics (Quantum Mechanics) by udiprod (2017)".
Furthermore, the position and momentum representations are equivalent: one is the Fourier transform of the other: position and momentum space. Remember that notably we can always take the Fourier transform of a function in due to Carleson's theorem.
Then the uncertainty principle follows immediately from a general property of the Fourier transform: en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fourier_transform&oldid=961707157#Uncertainty_principle
In precise terms, the uncertainty principle talks about the standard deviation of two measures.
We can visualize the uncertainty principle more intuitively by thinking of a wave function that is a real flat top bump function with a flat top in 1D. We can then change the width of the support, but when we do that, the top goes higher to keep probability equal to 1. The momentum is 0 everywhere, except in the edges of the support. Then:
- to localize the wave in space at position 0 to reduce the space uncertainty, we have to reduce the support. However, doing so makes the momentum variation on the edges more and more important, as the slope will go up and down faster (higher top, and less x space for descent), leading to a larger variance (note that average momentum is still 0, due to to symmetry of the bump function)
- to localize the momentum as much as possible at 0, we can make the support wider and wider. This makes the bumps at the edges smaller and smaller. However, this also obviously delocalises the wave function more and more, increasing the variance of x
Bibliography:
- www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIIjIZBKgtI&list=PL54DF0652B30D99A4&index=59 "K2. Heisenberg Uncertainty Relation" by doctorphys (2011)
- physics.stackexchange.com/questions/132111/uncertainty-principle-intuition Uncertainty Principle Intuition on Physics Stack Exchange
Every vector space is defined over a field.
E.g. in , the underlying field is , the real numbers. And in the underlying field is , the complex numbers.
Any field can be used, including finite field. But the underlying thing has to be a field, because the definitions of a vector need all field properties to hold to make sense.
Elements of the underlying field of a vector space are known as scalar.