Firstly, I wasn't sure exactly where to put this. It's a typesetting query but the scope...

60.1K

Verified Solution

Question

Physics

Firstly, I wasn't sure exactly where to put this. It's atypesetting query but the scope is greater than TEX; however it'sspecific also to physics and even more specific to this site.
I've recently been reading a style guide for scientificpublications (based on ISO 31-11), however there was no mention ofquantum mechanical operators. I've seen them written a few ways andwas wondering if there was a decision handed down from \"up above\"that any particular way is best.
H -- I see this most commonly but I suspect it's mostly due to(mild) laziness to not distinguish it from a variable.
H^ -- This is nicer to me because it makes the distinction betweenoperator and variable. From what I understand of the ISO the italicmeans it's subject to change, which is true of the form of anoperator, but not really its meaning? So I'm not totally sure ifthat's appropriate here.
H -- Roman lettering is used for functions e.g. sinx, erf(x), andeven the differential operator (as in ddx) so this seems to me likethe most suitable category to put operators in.
H^ -- Probably the least ambiguous but may also be redundant.
Which would be the best to use? Am I being too pedantic?

Answer & Explanation Solved by verified expert

3.7 Ratings (344 Votes)

My taste never overload your notation unless its necessary Many people in quantum information try to avoid hats or further ornaments for operators that are just linear maps Simple capital letters are See Answer

Get Answers to Unlimited Questions

Join us to gain access to millions of questions and expert answers. Enjoy exclusive benefits tailored just for you!

Membership Benefits:

Unlimited Question Access with detailed Answers
Zin AI - 3 Million Words
10 Dall-E 3 Images
20 Plot Generations
Conversation with Dialogue Memory
No Ads, Ever!
Access to Our Best AI Platform: Flex AI - Your personal assistant for all your inquiries!

Become a Member