# Start a new discussion

## Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

## Site Tag Cloud

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

• CommentRowNumber1.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeApr 26th 2010

I slightly expanded unitary morphism. In particular I added the example of unitary operators.

Then at unitary operator I in turn added the definition in terms of unitary morphisms. I also changed the former link to adjoint to a link to Hilbert space adjoint (since the former points to the categorical notion of adjoint). Also I changed the sentence saying that the unitary operators are the automorphisms in $Hilb$ to one saying that they are the isomorphisms.

• CommentRowNumber2.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeApr 26th 2010

also added to dagger-category in the section where the definition of unitary morphism had already been given, a link to the new dedicated entry unitary morphism.

• CommentRowNumber3.
• CommentAuthorUrs
• CommentTimeApr 26th 2010

Also I changed the sentence saying that the unitary operators are the automorphisms in Hilb to one saying that they are the isomorphisms.

But do we want to actually say that? Do we really generally take Hilb to have only isometries as morphisms? Isn’t rather the dagger-structure there to take care of that?