Open study

is now brainly

With Brainly you can:

  • Get homework help from millions of students and moderators
  • Learn how to solve problems with step-by-step explanations
  • Share your knowledge and earn points by helping other students
  • Learn anywhere, anytime with the Brainly app!

A community for students.

How can you multiply a ket by a bra in that order? (no this is not a stupid joke)

Mathematics
See more answers at brainly.com
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

Get this expert

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your free account and access expert answers to this and thousands of other questions

I have an expression for a way to write a matrix in the for\[A=\sum_{i,j=1}^ma_{ij}|e_i \rangle\langle e_j|\]and I don't understand how to multiply the ket by the bra. @Luis_Rivera no, it comes from a quantum physics thing
according to my understanding, a ket can be thought of as a vertical vector, and a bra a horizontal one. Matrix multiplication is not commutative, and #rows /=#colums for each, so... how does that work?
somehow\[|e_i\rangle\langle e_j|\otimes|f_k\rangle\langle f_l|=(|e_i\rangle\otimes|f_k\rangle)(|e_j\rangle\otimes|f_l\rangle)\]where \(\otimes\) is the tensor product. I don't know if anyone here can help me with that.

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question

Other answers:

@Jemurray3 tensors?
reading this: https://www.edx.org/c4x/BerkeleyX/CS191x/asset/chap3.pdf
What are you trying to do? In \[ A = \sum a_{ij} \mid e_i \rangle \langle e_j \mid \] the e_i and e_j vectors are the basis vectors.
I'm trying to understand what \(|e_i\rangle\langle e_j|\) are doing next to each other I understand that \(\langle e_j|\) is the Hermitian conjugate of \(|e_j\rangle\), and so the inner product is \(\langle e_i|e_j\rangle\) which makes sense because e_i is a row vector and e_j is a column vector, but the other way around it would be a column vector times a row vector, which is undefined, right? Or am I just hopelessly confused?
No, a column vector times a row vector is a matrix.
for instance, \[\left(\begin{matrix}1 \\ 0\end{matrix}\right) (1 \space 0) = \left(\begin{matrix}1 &0\\ 0 & 0\end{matrix}\right)\]
oh crap, that is embarrassing... I was thinking too hard
right, of course, I need to review my linear algebra for this stuff I suppose
while we're on the subject, can you help me visualize the implementation of a quantum gate on a system, like a photon or hydrogen atom? I'm having trouble understanding what a unitary transformation actually does, is it just a change in basis of sorts?
I understand it mathematically, but what is the physical implication?
like a NOT gate, if a photon is in the |1> state, what does it mean, or how does it pass through this gate? and this gate will then return the photon in a |0> state? could you clarify? I don't know about you, but I find QM a bit counter-intuitive ;P
I know this should be in physics now, but I've got you here, so...
It is indeed. I'm not tremendously familiar with quantum computation but generally speaking the easiest thing for me to visualize is a spin-1/2 system. An electron may be either spin up or down which you can denote |0> and |1> respectively. A "not" transformation just flips the spin, i.e. takes |0> to |1> and |1> to |0>.
right, but *how* do we flip it? quantum gates seem to be no more than mathematical constructs. Is it similar to the measuring affect where we are collapsing the wave function? I figure not, since it always flips the outcome, as opposed to just changing the probability of measuring that state.
To the best of my understanding the primary mechanism for flipping spins and such is magnetic fields.
So as far as you know quantum gates are implemented physically, and are not just like a change of basis which we arbitrarily construct mathematically??
I don't suppose you'd be able to give an example of how we might implement the Hadamard gate then?
http://library.thinkquest.org/07aug/01632/qubitcontrol.html This may or may not be of help.
^ I realize that "may or may not" is a meaningless phrase. *This may be of help.*

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question