Phenomenological Distinction between Unitary and Antiunitary Symmetry

Operators
Eugene P. Wigner

Citation: J. Math. Phys. 1, 414 (1960); doi: 10.1063/1.1703673

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.1703673
View Table of Contents: http://jmp.aip.org/resource/1/JMAPAQ/v1/i5
Published by the American Institute of Physics.

Additional information on J. Math. Phys.

Journal Homepage: http://jmp.aip.org/
Journal Information: http://jmp.aip.org/about/about_the_journal
Top downloads: http://jmp.aip.org/features/most_downloaded
Information for Authors: http://jmp.aip.org/authors

Downloaded 30 Dec 2012 to 128.148.252.35. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jmp.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL PHYSICS VOLUME 1, NUMBER 5 SEPTEMBER-QCTOBER, 1960

Phenomenological Distinction between Unitary and Antiunitary

Symmetry Operators
EUGENE P. WIGNER
Palmer Physical LaboraJory, Princettm University, Princettm, New Jersey
(Received April 25, 1960)

It is well known that one always can find as many orthogonal states (i.e., states between which the
transition probability is zero) as the·Hilbert space has dimensions which are invariant under a given unitary
transformation. The corresponding vectors are characteristic vectors of the unitary operator. In contrast,
most antiunitary operators leave not more than one state invariant. However, if there are two orthogonal
invariant states, a consideration of the states for which the transition probability is j into both invariant
states surely provides a distinction. In the antiunitary case, one of these states is also invariant, another
one is transformed into an orthogonal state, the rest are in between. In the unitary case, the transition
probability between original state and transformed state is the same for all states for which the transition
probability is i into two orthogonal states. This provides a "directly observable" distinction between
unitary and antiunitary transformations.

1. (unitary case), or in such a way that

T HE invariance transformations of quantum

mechanics are transformations in a complex
Hilbert space which leave the absolute value of the
In the latter {'ase T (and also the ray correspondence
scalar product of any two vectors cp, I/; invariant:
from which it derives) is called antiunitary.
(1) It is easy to show, by abstract reasoning, that no
transformation can fall into both classes, i.e., that if
The reason for the invariance of (1) is that this absolute the choice of Tcp from its ray can be made in such a
value (or, rather, its square) is, according to the usual way that (3a) becomes valid, it cannot be made in such
physical interpretation of quantum mechanics, opera- a way that (3b) becomes valid, and conversely.
tionally meaningful: It is the transition probability It follows that it must be possible to ascertain the
between the two states characterized by the two unitary or antiunitary nature of a transformation by
vectors cp and 1/;. It is well known that the transforma- considering only transition probabilities, i.e., absolute
tions T which satisfy (1) fall into one of two categories: values of scalar products. However, it may be of some
They can be unitary or antiunitary.
interest to spell this out in detail, and it is the aim of
The last statement should be formulated more
precisely. The physical state does not determine the the present article to do this. Use will be made, for
state vector cp completely, all multiples of cp (the this purpose, of the normal form of antiunitary
whole "ray of cp") describe the same state. It is operators obtained in the preceding article. l Similarly,
customary and useful to normalize the state vectors, the unitary operators will be described by their
i.e., to choose a vector from the ray of cp which is characteristic values and the corresponding character-
normalized, istic vectors.
(2) We note for further reference that if cp and I/; are
normalized state vectors, they represent the same
Even then, a phase factor (i.e., a factor of modulus 1)
state if cp=WI/I with an arbitrary", of modulus 1. In
remains free in cpo The same applies to the transformed
state, the ray of Tcp. Note that (1) remains valid if this case ! (cp,I/;) I = 1. On the other hand, if
cp, 1/;, Tcp, and TI/; are multiplied by arbitrary phase
(4)
factors. The precise formulation of the statement at
the end of the preceding paragraph stipulates the cp and I/; represent states whi'~h have, at least in some
possibility of a certain choice of the state vector from
respect, opposite properties. If (4) holds for two states,
the ray of the transformed state, which corresponds
to any choice of a state vector cp from the ray of the we call them orthogonal: The transition probability
original state. The choice referred to therefore replaces between them is zero. Orthogonality is, therefore, an
the physically given ray correspondence by a vector operationally verifiable relation between two states. The
correspondence. The theorem states that the choice number of the mutually orthogonal states is equal to
can be made either in such a way that for any two the dimension of the underlying Hilbert space. We shall
state vectors cp, I/; and any two numbers a and h, assume henceforth that this is larger than 1.
T(acp+lJ../t) = aTcp+hTI/; and (cp,1/;) = (Tcp,TI/;) (3a) 1 E. p, Wign~r, J. Math. Phys. 1,409 (1960). preceding article.
414

Downloaded 30 Dec 2012 to 128.148.252.35. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jmp.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
 UNITARY AND ANTIUNITARY OPERATORS 415
2. It follows that the structure of the set of invariant
Let us consider, first, the states which are left states is, in general, very different for unitary and
unchanged by the transformation. For these, antiunitary operators. An antiunitary operator may
have no invariant state, or it may have only one.
Tq;=wq;, (5) However, no matter how many invariant states it has,
they form a continuous manifold each member of
and we shall call them invariant states. If T is unitary, which can be changed continuously into any other.
q; is one of its characteristic vectors. It follows that If the antiunitary operator has n orthogonal invariant
there is at least one set of mutually orthogonal states
vectors the manifold of invariant states is an n-1
which contains as many members as any set of mutually dimensional continuous manifold. Its state vector can
orthogonal states contains. In particular, unless there be described by n real coefficients the sum of the
are at least two orthogonal invariant states, the squares of which is 1. There is no arbitrar~ phase
symmetry operator cannot be unitary and must be, factor in this case because (8) already determllles the
therefore, antiunitary. phase factor.
If the spectrum of the unitary operator is simple,
the invariant states are isolated, but if it has a char- 3.
acteristic value of multiplicity 1, the corresponding The number and topological properties of the
invariant states form a continuous manifold with 21- 2 invariant states actually permit a phenomenological
parameters. The characteristic functions have 1 com-
distinction between unitary and antiunitary trans-
plex or 21 real parameters but the normalization formations. The following distinction is, however, more
condition subjects these to one real equation and o~e direct.
real parameter, characterizing the phase factor, IS Consider two orthogonal invariant states, q;l and q;2.
physically meaningless. . If there are no such, the transformation is. surely
Let us consider now an antiunitary transformatIOn. antiunitary. Next, consider the states for whIch the
We decompose the state vector into the invariant and transition probability is t into both q;l and q;2. The
characteristic vectors of the operator T state vectors of these states are
q;= L: ak'Vlk+ L: b.,k'V.,k. (6)
(14)
k .,k

If T q;=w' q; (i.e., q; is an invariant state), we can Consider finally the transition probability of these
consider q;'=w'lq; and have states into the states Tif;a,

Tq;'= (w'l)*Tq;= (w'l)*wq;= (w'l)*q;= q;'. (7) (15)

Since q; and w'lq; represent the same state, it suffices, If T is unitary,
in the antiunitary case, to find those state vectors for
(16)
which
Tq;= q;. (8)
and the transition probability,becomes
Since, for the q; of (6)
Tq;=L: ak*'Vlk+L: b.,k*(Wt)*'V"",k Pea) =t 1 (q;I+e ia q;2, Wlq;l+ eiaw 2q(2) 12= t 1WI+W21 2

(9) =H1+RewIW2*)' (17)

q; will satisfy (8) if It is independent of a, Le., the same for all the states
(10) if;a with transition probabilities t into q;1 and q;2.
and Let us assume next that Tis antiunitary. In this case
(11)
(18)
Since (11) must hold for all wand all k, w can be replaced
therein by w* to give and the transition probability becomes
(w*)ib.,k*=b.,.k or b.,.k* = wib.,k. (12) P(a)=tl (q;I+e ia q;2, q;1+e- ia q(2) 1 2=tll+e-2ia I 2
Insertion of the latter expression into (11) gives =Hl+cos2a). (19)
(13)
It varies, for the states in question, between 0 and 1.
. ..J'1 It follows that if the symmetry operator The preceding argument can yet be greatly
Slllce Wr- • d 'b d generalized. In the unitary case, i.f th~ transition
is antiunitary, the invariant states. can be ~scn. e
by invariant vectors, i.e., by real llllear conblllatIOns probabilities into n orthogonal Invanant states
2
(/!l, (/!2, " ' , (/!n are prescribed to be r12, r2 , ••• , rn2 so
of the 'Vlk.

Downloaded 30 Dec 2012 to 128.148.252.35. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jmp.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
416 EUGENE P. WIGNER

that In the antiunitary case, on the other hand,

L Tk
2
=1, (20) TY;al' . 'an = L Tke-iakipk, (23)
the general form of the state vector is and the transition probability becomes
(21) [ (Y;al" 'an,TY;al" 'an) [2= [L Tk2e-2iak [2. (24)
with arbitrary ai, .. " an. Nevertheless, the transition Unless one of the Tk is larger than t, this still will
2

probability from any of these Y;al" 'an into the cor- assume every value between o and 1 for suitably
responding TY;al" 'an is the same, namely, chosen a.
The striking difference in the relation of the original
) (Y;al" 'an,TY;al" 'an) )2
and transformed states to each other shows particularly
= I (L Tke iak ipk,L Tke iak ())k ipk) [2 clearly how definite the relations in question are in
= IL Tk2())k[2. (22) either case.

Downloaded 30 Dec 2012 to 128.148.252.35. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jmp.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions