DOCSLIB.ORG

Lectures #12 and #13 First & Second Quantization

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lectures #12 and #13 First & Second Quantization October 17 Lectures #12 and #13 October 21 Second quantization Evaluation of one and two -particle matrix elements Coulomb matrix elements: example of two -particle operator (second quantization form) Helium atom: LS coupled states Chapter 4, pages 95 -99, 102 -106, Lectures on Atomic Physics Chapter 11, pages 241 -246, Atomic many -body theory I. Lindgren and J. Morrison First & second quantization First quantization Second quantization Classical particles are assigned wave amplitudes Wave fields are “quantized” to describe the problem in terms of “quanta” or particles. 1 2 1 Second quantization: atomic electrons (fermions) One-electron state |k> Ψ Described by the wave function k(ri) = † k a k 0 Creation operator Vacuum state (no electrons) 0 0= 1 Second quantization: atomic electrons (fermions) One-electron state |k> Vacuum state Ψ Described by the wave function k(q i) (no electrons) = † 0 0= 1 k a k 0 Creation operator = k0 a k Annihilation operator = “there are no electrons to annihilate in a vacuum” ak 0 0 : † = 0ak 0 2 Anticommutation relations ††= †† + †† = {aaij,} aa ij aa ji 0 = + = {}aaij, aa ij aa ji 0 †= † + † = δ {}aai, j aa ij aa ji ij = ak 0 0 † = Orthonormality of one-electron states: 0ak 0 =† =−δ † = δ ij000 aaij ij aa ji 0 ij Two -electron states First quantizaiton : Second quantizaiton Slater determinant ψ ψ 1 j()q1 k () q 2 Ψ(q , q ) = jk 1 2 ψ ψ = † † 2 j()q2 k () q 2 jk aaj k 0 Orthonormality of two-electron states: Ψ( ) Ψ( ) =−δδ δδ = † † ijqq12, kl qq 12 , ik jl il jk ijkl0 aaaaj i k l 0 NOTE: reversed order Need to evaluate 3 Orthonormality of two-electron states =† † = ijkl0 aaaaj i k l 0 ? † † Lets transform a j aa i k a l to “normal form ”: Move: Creation operators Annihilation operators left right Use anticommutation relations to move ai to the right †††=δ − †† =− δδ † δδ − ††† + aaaajikl aa jlik aaaa jkil ikjl aa ljik jkil aa aaaa kjil =−δδ† δδδδ −+ †††† + δ − = ikjlaa l jik jkil jkli aaaa kjil aaaa kjli =−δδ† δδδδ −+ †† + δδ − ††† + ikjlaa l jik jkil jkli aaaa kjil jlki aaaaaa kl ji Orthonormality of two-electron states =† † = ijkl0 aaaaj i k l 0 ? † † Lets transform a j aa i k a l to “normal order ”: Normal order with Creation operators Annihilaiton operators respect to left right vacuum Use anticommutation relations to move ai and aj to the right †††=δ − †† =− δδ † δδ − ††† + aaaajikl aa jlik aaaa jkil ikjl aa ljik jkil aa aaaa kjil =−δδ† δδδδ −+ †††† + δ − = ikjlaa l jik jkil jkli aaaa kjil aaaa kjli =−δδ† δδδδ −+ †† + δδ − ††† + ikjlaa l jik jkil jkli aaaa kjil jlki aaaaaa kl ji 4 = † † ijkl0 aaaaj i k l 0 Normal order of operators Why do we want to transform to normal order? To calculate expectation values: expectation value of normal ordered operators is zero. ††=−δδ † δδδδ −+ †† + δδ − ††† + aaaajikl ikjl aa ljik jkil jkli aaaa kjil jlki aaaaaa klji 0 0 †††=−δδ δδδδ −+ † 0aaaajikl 0 ikjl 00 aa lj ik jkil jk 00 aa li 0 0 0 +†δ − δ † + †† 0aakj 0 il jl 0 aa ki 0 0 aaaa klji 0 =δδ − δδ ik jl jk il Exactly the result we had in first quantization Many -particle operators in second quantization † ai 0 one-particle state † † States ai a j 0 two-particle state described by Slater determinants † †> † N-particle state in first quantization ai a j a n 0 Operators First quantizaiton Second quantizaiton N One-particle = = † F f (ri ) F faaij i j operator i=1 i, j 1 Two-particle G= g( r ) = 1 † † ij G gijkl aaaa i j l k operator 2 ≠ i j 2 i, j = gijkl g jilk 5 Many -particle operators in second quantization First and second quantization description must produce identical results; however, is it more convenient to use second quantizati on for calculation of properties of many -electro systems as the antisymmetrization properties are carried by the operators rather than the wave functions as in the case of Slater determinants. = † = 1 † † F faaij i j G gijkl aaaa i j l k i, j 2 i, j = = 3ψ † ψ fab af b — d r a()r f (r ) b ()r = = 3 3†ψψ † ψψ gabcd abg cd— d r1212 — d r ab()rr () g (r 12 ) cd( rr 1 ) (2 ) The rules for calculating matrix elements are equivalent, for example: =1 †† †† = − abG abƒ gijkl0 aaaaaaaa b a i j l k a b 0 g abab g abba 2 ijkl Examples of one and two -particle operators First quantizaiton Second quantizaiton N N = = ε † 1 H0 ƒ h i H0 ƒ i a i a i i=1 i=1 =−1 ∇2 − Z hi i 2 ri eigenvalue of hi 2 Coulomb (1/r 12 ) interaction: two-particle operator 1 1 H'= g aaaa† † H ' = ƒ ijkl i j l k 2 ijkl r12 two-electron matrix element of the Coulomb potential 1/r 12 = 3 3†ψψ † 1 ψψ gabcd— drdr1212 — a()()rr b c()() rr 12 d r12 6 He -like systems revisited N Two-electron state ab = a † a † 0 is an eigenfunction of = ε † a b H0 i a i a i (0) H0 with an eigenvalueE =ε + ε : i=1 ab a b =(ε + ε ) H0 aba b ab However, it is not necessarily an angular momentum eigenstate. L2 S2 Lets construct eigenstates of { H, , Lz, ,S z } from | ab > states. = + L la l b First, we couple la and lb to construct eigenstates L2 = + of , Lz with eigenvalues L(L+1) and M L S sa s b Second, we couple s and s to construct eigenstates S=0: singlet state a b of S2, S with eigenvalues S(S+1) and M S=1: triplet states z S sa=sb=1/2 S=0,1 He -like systems: construction of coupled states = † † ab aa a b 0 Therefore, the coupled states are given by the sum over magnetic moments which contains two Clebsch-Gordon coefficients: µ lama ½ a =η † † ab, LMLS , SM − − aa a b 0 LM SM ma m bµ ab µ L S l m ½ µ Normalization factor b b b ab, LM , SM ab , LM , SM =η2 ( 1(1) + − L+ S δ δ ) LS LS nnllab ab ≠ ≠ À 1na nl ba , l b η = Œ à 1 = = Œ Identical orbitals na n ba, l l b Õ 2 7 He -like systems: First -order energy µ lama ½ a =η † † ab, LMLS , SM − − aa a b 0 LM SM ma m bµ ab µ L S µ lbmb ½ b The first-order energy is given by (1) = E ab,, LMLS SM H ',, ab LM LS SM = 1 † † H' gijkl aaaa i j l k 2 ijkl = 3 3†ψψ † 1 ψψ gabcd— drdr1212 — a()()rr b c()() rr 12 d r12 Coulomb matrix element First, lets consider Coulomb matrix element = 3 3†ψψ † 1 ψψ gabcd— drdr1212 — a()()rr b c()() rr 12 d r12 ψ ψ= θ φ The functions are given by nlm()r R nl () r Y lm (,) The 1/r 12 can be expanded as 1∞ 4 π r k k = < Y* (θφ , ) Y ( θφ , ) ƒ+ k +1 ƒ kq11 kq 22 r12 k=0 2 k 1 r > q =− k This expression may be re-written using C-tensors defined by 4π Ck () rˆ = Y (,)θ φ q(2k + 1) kq 1 1 ∞ r k k = =< ( − 1)q C k( rCˆ ) k ( r ˆ ) − ƒk +1 ƒ q1− q 2 r12r 1 r 2 k=0 r > q =− k 8 Coulomb matrix element ψ We now substitute the expressions for and 1/r 12 back into our matrix element and separate dr and dΩ integrals 1 ∞ r k k = < − q kˆ k ˆ ψ (r) = R( r )Y (θ, φ ) ƒ k +1 ƒ ( 1) Cq ( r1) C −q (r 2 ) nlm nl lm r12 k =0 r> q=− k = 3 3ψψ † † 1 ψψ R( abcd ) gabcd— drd1212 — r a()()rr b c()() rr 12 d k r12 ∞ ∞ ∞ r k radial = drr 2 drrR 2 () rR () r< R () r R ()r integral ƒ —1122 — nlaa 1 nl bb 2k +1 nl cc 1 nld d 2 k=0 0 0 r> k q k k × (− 1) dΩ Y(θφ , ) C ( θφ , ) Y ( θ ,φ ) ƒ — 1lma a 11 q11 lm c c 11 lmaa C qcc lm q=− k k k dΩ Y(θ ,φ ) C − ( θφ , ) Y ( θφ , ) — 2lmb b 22 q22 lm d d 22 lmbb C − qdd lm Coulomb matrix element ∞ k = − q k k gabcdƒ Rabcd k( ) ƒ ( 1) lmClm a a q c c lmC b b − q lm d d k=0 q =− k Next, we use Wigner-Eckart theorem for both of the matrix elements: lama lbmb ∞ k = − q k k gabcdƒ Rabcd k ( ) ƒ ( 1) − − lCllCla cb d k=0 q =− k k q k -q lcmc ldmd lbmb lbmb k− q We use − = (− 1) − Note: k and q are integers k -q k q ldmd ldmd 9 Coulomb matrix element lbmb lama ∞ k g= Rabcd( ) ( − 1)k − lCllClk k abcd k − k q a cb d k=0 q =− k k q ldmd lcmc lama lbmb ∞ = − k k k ( 1)Rk ( abcd ) l a C l cb l C l d − + k =0 k lcmc ldmd Xk ( abcd ) lama lbmb ∞ g= − + X( abcd ) abcd k k k =0 lcmc ldmd Summary: Coulomb matrix element (non -relativistic case) lama lbmb ∞ g= − + X( abcd ) abcd k k k =0 lcmc ldmd = − k k k Xk( abcd )(1) R k ( abcd ) l acbd C l l C l ∞ ∞ r k Rabcd( )= drr 2 drrR 2 ()() rR r< R ()() rR r k —1122 — nlaa 1 nl bb 2k +1 nl cc 1 nl dd 2 0 0 r> ≈l k l ’ k =−l1 + + 1 2 lCl12( 1) (2 l 12 1)(2 l 1) ∆ ÷ «0 0 0 ◊ 10 Back to He -like systems µ lama ½ a =η † † ab, LMLS , SM − − aa a b 0 LM L SM S ma m bµ ab µ µ Assume lbmb ½ b la=la’ l =l (1) = b b’ E ab,, LMLS SM H ',, ab LM LS SM µ µ lama ½ a lama’ ½ a’ =η 2 − − − − LM L SM S LM L SM S mmababµµ mm ab' ' µµ ab '' µ µ lbmb ½ b lbmb’ ½ b’ ×()gδδ − g δδ abab''µµµµaabb'' abba '' µµµµ abba '' =1 † † = − H' gaaaaijklijlk ; abGab g abab g abba 2 ijkl Sum over µ’s: Term 1 µ µ ½ a ½ a’ Term 1: δ δ µµaa' µµ bb ' µµab µ a' µ b ' − − SM S SM S µ µ ½ ½ b ½ b’ SM S SM =(2S + 1) S = 1 + - ½ We used orthogonality relation to evaluate this diagram j1 j ‘ m ‘ 3 3 + j3m3 = 1 δ δ + j33' j mm 3 ' 3 − 2j3 1 j2 11 Sum over µ’s: Term 2 µ b µ µ ½ a ½ a’ δ δ Term 2 : µµ µµ − − ab' ba ' SM SM µµab µ a' µ b ' S S µ µ ½ b ½ b’ ½ µ a SM S SM =+−(2S 1)( 1)S +1 S =−−( 1) S + - ½ Extra phase factor First -order energy: He -like systems lama lama’ Assume E(1)=η 2 − − la=la’ mma' b ' mm ab k LM L LM L lb=lb’ lbmb lbmb’ lama’ lbmb’ lama’ lbmb’ ×+ − S − + ( − Xk ( abab ) + ( 1) Xk ( abba ) ) k k lbmb lama lama lbmb where we substituted Coulomb matrix elements g into our formula lama lbmb ∞ g= − + X( abcd ) abcd k k k =0 lcmc ldmd 12 Sum over m ’s: Term 1 lama lama’ lama’ lbmb’ = − − − + LM LM ma' m b ' mm ab L L k l m l m lbmb lbmb’ a a b b rotate lama − lama’ to the right lama lama’ + =(2L+1) − 1) Remove triangle (get 6-j symbol) k LM L LM L 2) Use orthogonality relation lbmb’ (get factor 1/(2L+1) lbmb + lbmb lbmb’ + + + Àl l L ¤ =( − 1) Lkla l b Ãa b ‹ Õlb l a k › Sum over m ’s: Term 2 lama lama’ lama’ lbmb’ = ƒ ƒ − − − + LM LM ma' m b ' mm ab L L k l m l m lbmb lbmb’ b b a a + + Àl l L ¤ =( − 1) k la l b Ãa b ‹ Õla l b k › The calculation is very similar to Term1, only need to switch a and b lines in the first angular diagram.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Second Quantized Approach to the Study of Model Hamiltonians in Quantum Hall Regime
    Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations Arts & Sciences Winter 12-15-2016 The Second Quantized Approach to the Study of Model Hamiltonians in Quantum Hall Regime Li Chen Washington University in St. Louis Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/art_sci_etds Recommended Citation Chen, Li, "The Second Quantized Approach to the Study of Model Hamiltonians in Quantum Hall Regime" (2016). Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 985. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/art_sci_etds/985 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Arts & Sciences at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST. LOUIS Department of Physics Dissertation Examination Committee: Alexander Seidel, Chair Zohar Nussinov Michael Ogilvie Xiang Tang Li Yang The Second Quantized Approach to the Study of Model Hamiltonians in Quantum Hall Regime by Li Chen A dissertation presented to The Graduate School of Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2016 Saint Louis, Missouri c 2016, Li Chen ii Contents List of Figures v Acknowledgements vii Abstract viii 1 Introduction to Quantum Hall Effect 1 1.1 The classical Hall effect . .1 1.2 The integer quantum Hall effect . .3 1.3 The fractional quantum Hall effect . .7 1.4 Theoretical explanations of the fractional quantum Hall effect . .9 1.5 Laughlin's gedanken experiment .
    [Show full text]
  • Canonical Quantization of Two-Dimensional Gravity S
    Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics, Vol. 90, No. 1, 2000, pp. 1–16. Translated from Zhurnal Éksperimental’noœ i Teoreticheskoœ Fiziki, Vol. 117, No. 1, 2000, pp. 5–21. Original Russian Text Copyright © 2000 by Vergeles. GRAVITATION, ASTROPHYSICS Canonical Quantization of Two-Dimensional Gravity S. N. Vergeles Landau Institute of Theoretical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Chernogolovka, Moscow oblast, 142432 Russia; e-mail: [email protected] Received March 23, 1999 Abstract—A canonical quantization of two-dimensional gravity minimally coupled to real scalar and spinor Majorana fields is presented. The physical state space of the theory is completely described and calculations are also made of the average values of the metric tensor relative to states close to the ground state. © 2000 MAIK “Nauka/Interperiodica”. 1. INTRODUCTION quantization) for observables in the highest orders, will The quantum theory of gravity in four-dimensional serve as a criterion for the correctness of the selected space–time encounters fundamental difficulties which quantization route. have not yet been surmounted. These difficulties can be The progress achieved in the construction of a two- arbitrarily divided into conceptual and computational. dimensional quantum theory of gravity is associated The main conceptual problem is that the Hamiltonian is with two ideas. These ideas will be formulated below a linear combination of first-class constraints. This fact after the necessary notation has been introduced. makes the role of time in gravity unclear. The main computational problem is the nonrenormalizability of We shall postulate that space–time is topologically gravity theory. These difficulties are closely inter- equivalent to a two-dimensional cylinder.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Quantum Field Theory
    Utrecht Lecture Notes Masters Program Theoretical Physics September 2006 INTRODUCTION TO QUANTUM FIELD THEORY by B. de Wit Institute for Theoretical Physics Utrecht University Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 Path integrals and quantum mechanics 5 3 The classical limit 10 4 Continuous systems 18 5 Field theory 23 6 Correlation functions 36 6.1 Harmonic oscillator correlation functions; operators . 37 6.2 Harmonic oscillator correlation functions; path integrals . 39 6.2.1 Evaluating G0 ............................... 41 6.2.2 The integral over qn ............................ 42 6.2.3 The integrals over q1 and q2 ....................... 43 6.3 Conclusion . 44 7 Euclidean Theory 46 8 Tunneling and instantons 55 8.1 The double-well potential . 57 8.2 The periodic potential . 66 9 Perturbation theory 71 10 More on Feynman diagrams 80 11 Fermionic harmonic oscillator states 87 12 Anticommuting c-numbers 90 13 Phase space with commuting and anticommuting coordinates and quanti- zation 96 14 Path integrals for fermions 108 15 Feynman diagrams for fermions 114 2 16 Regularization and renormalization 117 17 Further reading 127 3 1 Introduction Physical systems that involve an infinite number of degrees of freedom are usually described by some sort of field theory. Almost all systems in nature involve an extremely large number of degrees of freedom. A droplet of water contains of the order of 1026 molecules and while each water molecule can in many applications be described as a point particle, each molecule has itself a complicated structure which reveals itself at molecular length scales. To deal with this large number of degrees of freedom, which for all practical purposes is infinite, we often regard a system as continuous, in spite of the fact that, at certain distance scales, it is discrete.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Droplets in Dipolar Ring-Shaped Bose-Einstein Condensates
    UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE FACULTY OF PHYSICS MASTER THESIS Quantum Droplets in Dipolar Ring-shaped Bose-Einstein Condensates Author: Supervisor: Marija Šindik Dr. Antun Balaž September, 2020 UNIVERZITET U BEOGRADU FIZICKIˇ FAKULTET MASTER TEZA Kvantne kapljice u dipolnim prstenastim Boze-Ajnštajn kondenzatima Autor: Mentor: Marija Šindik Dr Antun Balaž Septembar, 2020. Acknowledgments I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my advisor Dr. Antun Balaž, for his guidance, patience, useful suggestions and for the time and effort he invested in the making of this thesis. I would also like to thank my family and friends for the emotional support and encouragement. This thesis is written in the Scientific Computing Laboratory, Center for the Study of Complex Systems of the Institute of Physics Belgrade. Numerical simulations were run on the PARADOX supercomputing facility at the Scientific Computing Laboratory of the Institute of Physics Belgrade. iii Contents Chapter 1 – Introduction 1 Chapter 2 – Theoretical description of ultracold Bose gases 3 2.1 Contact interaction..............................4 2.2 The Gross-Pitaevskii equation........................5 2.3 Dipole-dipole interaction...........................8 2.4 Beyond-mean-field approximation......................9 2.5 Quantum droplets............................... 13 Chapter 3 – Numerical methods 15 3.1 Rescaling of the effective GP equation................... 15 3.2 Split-step Crank-Nicolson method...................... 17 3.3 Calculation of the ground state....................... 20 3.4 Calculation of relevant physical quantities................. 21 Chapter 4 – Results 24 4.1 System parameters.............................. 24 4.2 Ground state................................. 25 4.3 Droplet formation............................... 26 4.4 Critical strength of the contact interaction................. 28 4.5 The number of droplets...........................
    [Show full text]
  • Density Functional Theory
    Density Functional Theory Fundamentals Video V.i Density Functional Theory: New Developments Donald G. Truhlar Department of Chemistry, University of Minnesota Support: AFOSR, NSF, EMSL Why is electronic structure theory important? Most of the information we want to know about chemistry is in the electron density and electronic energy. dipole moment, Born-Oppenheimer charge distribution, approximation 1927 ... potential energy surface molecular geometry barrier heights bond energies spectra How do we calculate the electronic structure? Example: electronic structure of benzene (42 electrons) Erwin Schrödinger 1925 — wave function theory All the information is contained in the wave function, an antisymmetric function of 126 coordinates and 42 electronic spin components. Theoretical Musings! ● Ψ is complicated. ● Difficult to interpret. ● Can we simplify things? 1/2 ● Ψ has strange units: (prob. density) , ● Can we not use a physical observable? ● What particular physical observable is useful? ● Physical observable that allows us to construct the Hamiltonian a priori. How do we calculate the electronic structure? Example: electronic structure of benzene (42 electrons) Erwin Schrödinger 1925 — wave function theory All the information is contained in the wave function, an antisymmetric function of 126 coordinates and 42 electronic spin components. Pierre Hohenberg and Walter Kohn 1964 — density functional theory All the information is contained in the density, a simple function of 3 coordinates. Electronic structure (continued) Erwin Schrödinger
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 18 the Single Slater Determinant Wavefunction (Properly Spin and Symmetry Adapted) Is the Starting Point of the Most Common Mean Field Potential
    Chapter 18 The single Slater determinant wavefunction (properly spin and symmetry adapted) is the starting point of the most common mean field potential. It is also the origin of the molecular orbital concept. I. Optimization of the Energy for a Multiconfiguration Wavefunction A. The Energy Expression The most straightforward way to introduce the concept of optimal molecular orbitals is to consider a trial wavefunction of the form which was introduced earlier in Chapter 9.II. The expectation value of the Hamiltonian for a wavefunction of the multiconfigurational form Y = S I CIF I , where F I is a space- and spin-adapted CSF which consists of determinental wavefunctions |f I1f I2f I3...fIN| , can be written as: E =S I,J = 1, M CICJ < F I | H | F J > . The spin- and space-symmetry of the F I determine the symmetry of the state Y whose energy is to be optimized. In this form, it is clear that E is a quadratic function of the CI amplitudes CJ ; it is a quartic functional of the spin-orbitals because the Slater-Condon rules express each < F I | H | F J > CI matrix element in terms of one- and two-electron integrals < f i | f | f j > and < f if j | g | f kf l > over these spin-orbitals. B. Application of the Variational Method The variational method can be used to optimize the above expectation value expression for the electronic energy (i.e., to make the functional stationary) as a function of the CI coefficients CJ and the LCAO-MO coefficients {Cn,i} that characterize the spin- orbitals.
    [Show full text]
  • Solitons and Quantum Behavior Abstract
    Solitons and Quantum Behavior Richard A. Pakula email: [email protected] April 9, 2017 Abstract In applied physics and in engineering intuitive understanding is a boost for creativity and almost a necessity for efficient product improvement. The existence of soliton solutions to the quantum equations in the presence of self-interactions allows us to draw an intuitive picture of quantum mechanics. The purpose of this work is to compile a collection of models, some of which are simple, some are obvious, some have already appeared in papers and even in textbooks, and some are new. However this is the first time they are presented (to our knowledge) in a common place attempting to provide an intuitive physical description for one of the basic particles in nature: the electron. The soliton model applied to the electrons can be extended to the electromagnetic field providing an unambiguous description for the photon. In so doing a clear image of quantum mechanics emerges, including quantum optics, QED and field quantization. To our belief this description is of highly pedagogical value. We start with a traditional description of the old quantum mechanics, first quantization and second quantization, showing the tendency to renounce to 'visualizability', as proposed by Heisenberg for the quantum theory. We describe an intuitive description of first and second quantization based on the concept of solitons, pioneered by the 'double solution' of de Broglie in 1927. Many aspects of first and second quantization are clarified and visualized intuitively, including the possible achievement of ergodicity by the so called ‘vacuum fluctuations’. PACS: 01.70.+w, +w, 03.65.Ge , 03.65.Pm, 03.65.Ta, 11.15.-q, 12.20.*, 14.60.Cd, 14.70.-e, 14.70.Bh, 14.70.Fm, 14.70.Hp, 14.80.Bn, 32.80.y, 42.50.Lc 1 Table of Contents Solitons and Quantum Behavior ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1902.07690V2 [Cond-Mat.Str-El] 12 Apr 2019
    Symmetry Projected Jastrow Mean-field Wavefunction in Variational Monte Carlo Ankit Mahajan1, ∗ and Sandeep Sharma1, y 1Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80302, USA We extend our low-scaling variational Monte Carlo (VMC) algorithm to optimize the symmetry projected Jastrow mean field (SJMF) wavefunctions. These wavefunctions consist of a symmetry- projected product of a Jastrow and a general broken-symmetry mean field reference. Examples include Jastrow antisymmetrized geminal power (JAGP), Jastrow-Pfaffians, and resonating valence bond (RVB) states among others, all of which can be treated with our algorithm. We will demon- strate using benchmark systems including the nitrogen molecule, a chain of hydrogen atoms, and 2-D Hubbard model that a significant amount of correlation can be obtained by optimizing the energy of the SJMF wavefunction. This can be achieved at a relatively small cost when multiple symmetries including spin, particle number, and complex conjugation are simultaneously broken and projected. We also show that reduced density matrices can be calculated using the optimized wavefunctions, which allows us to calculate other observables such as correlation functions and will enable us to embed the VMC algorithm in a complete active space self-consistent field (CASSCF) calculation. 1. INTRODUCTION Recently, we have demonstrated that this cost discrep- ancy can be removed by introducing three algorithmic 16 Variational Monte Carlo (VMC) is one of the most ver- improvements . The most significant of these allowed us satile methods available for obtaining the wavefunction to efficiently screen the two-electron integrals which are and energy of a system.1{7 Compared to deterministic obtained by projecting the ab-initio Hamiltonian onto variational methods, VMC allows much greater flexibil- a finite orbital basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Second Quantization∗
    Second Quantization∗ Jörg Schmalian May 19, 2016 1 The harmonic oscillator: raising and lowering operators Lets first reanalyze the harmonic oscillator with potential m!2 V (x) = x2 (1) 2 where ! is the frequency of the oscillator. One of the numerous approaches we use to solve this problem is based on the following representation of the momentum and position operators: r x = ~ ay + a b 2m! b b r m ! p = i ~ ay − a : (2) b 2 b b From the canonical commutation relation [x;b pb] = i~ (3) follows y ba; ba = 1 y y [ba; ba] = ba ; ba = 0: (4) Inverting the above expression yields rm! i ba = xb + pb 2~ m! r y m! i ba = xb − pb (5) 2~ m! ∗Copyright Jörg Schmalian, 2016 1 y demonstrating that ba is indeed the operator adjoined to ba. We also defined the operator y Nb = ba ba (6) which is Hermitian and thus represents a physical observable. It holds m! i i Nb = xb − pb xb + pb 2~ m! m! m! 2 1 2 i = xb + pb − [p;b xb] 2~ 2m~! 2~ 2 2 1 pb m! 2 1 = + xb − : (7) ~! 2m 2 2 We therefore obtain 1 Hb = ! Nb + : (8) ~ 2 1 Since the eigenvalues of Hb are given as En = ~! n + 2 we conclude that the eigenvalues of the operator Nb are the integers n that determine the eigenstates of the harmonic oscillator. Nb jni = n jni : (9) y Using the above commutation relation ba; ba = 1 we were able to show that p a jni = n jn − 1i b p y ba jni = n + 1 jn + 1i (10) y The operator ba and ba raise and lower the quantum number (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • QUANTUM THEORY of SOLIDS Here A+ Is Simply the Hermitian Conjugate of A
    1 QUANTUM THEORY OF SOLIDS Here a+ is simply the Hermitian conjugate of a. Using these de¯nitions we can rewrite the Hamiltonian as: Version (02/12/07) ~! H = (aa+ + a+a): (6) 2 SECOND QUANTIZATION We now calculate (aa+ ¡ a+a)f(x) = [a; a+]f(x), f any function In this section we introduce the concept of second quantization. Historically, the ¯rst quantization is the = 1 ¢ f(x) , since p = ¡i~@x: (7) quantization of particles due to the commutation rela- Hence tion between position and momentum, i.e., [a; a+] = 1; (8) [x; p] = i~: (1) which is the Boson commutation relation. In addition, Second quantization was introduced to describe cases, [a; a] = [a+; a+] = 0. Using this commutation relation we where the number of particles can vary. A quantum ¯eld can rewrite the Hamiltonian in second quantized form as such as the electromagnetic ¯eld is such an example, since the number of photons can vary. Here it is necessary H = ~!(a+a + 1=2): (9) to quantize a ¯eld ª(r), which can also be expressed in terms of commutation relations In order to solve the Hamiltonian in this form we can write the wave function as [ª(r); ª+(r0)] = ±(r ¡ r0): (2) (a+)n Ãn = p j0i; (10) However, there is only one quantum theory, hence n! nowadays ¯rst quantization refers to using eigenval- and aj0i = 0, where j0i is the vacuum level of the system. ues and eigenfunctions to solve SchrÄodingerequation, We now show that Ãn de¯ned in this way is indeed the whereas in second quantization one uses creation and an- solution to SchrÄodinger'sequation HÃn = EnÃn.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 11 the Relativistic Quantum Point Particle
    Chapter 11 The Relativistic Quantum Point Particle To prepare ourselves for quantizing the string, we study the light-cone gauge quantization of the relativistic point particle. We set up the quantum theory by requiring that the Heisenberg operators satisfy the classical equations of motion. We show that the quantum states of the relativistic point particle coincide with the one-particle states of the quantum scalar field. Moreover, the Schr¨odinger equation for the particle wavefunctions coincides with the classical scalar field equations. Finally, we set up light-cone gauge Lorentz generators. 11.1 Light-cone point particle In this section we study the classical relativistic point particle using the light-cone gauge. This is, in fact, a much easier task than the one we faced in Chapter 9, where we examined the classical relativistic string in the light- cone gauge. Our present discussion will allow us to face the complications of quantization in the simpler context of the particle. Many of the ideas needed to quantize the string are also needed to quantize the point particle. The action for the relativistic point particle was studied in Chapter 5. Let’s begin our analysis with the expression given in equation (5.2.4), where an arbitrary parameter τ is used to parameterize the motion of the particle: τf dxµ dxν S = −m −ηµν dτ . (11.1.1) τi dτ dτ 249 250 CHAPTER 11. RELATIVISTIC QUANTUM PARTICLE In writing the above action, we have set c =1.Wewill also set =1when appropriate. Finally, the time parameter τ will be dimensionless, just as it was for the relativistic string.
    [Show full text]
  • Iia. Systems of Many Electrons
    EE5 in 2008 Lecture notes Univ. of Iceland Hannes J´onsson IIa. Systems of many electrons Exchange of particle labels Consider a system of n identical particles. By identical particles we mean that all intrinsic properties of the particles are the same, such as mass, spin, charge, etc. Figure II.1 A pairwise permutation of the labels on identical particles. In classical mechanics we can in principle follow the trajectory of each individual particle. They are, therefore, distinguishable even though they are identical. In quantum mechanics the particles are not distinguishable if they are close enough or if they interact strongly enough. The quantum mechanical wave function must reflect this fact. When the particles are indistinguishable, the act of labeling the particles is an arbi- trary operation without physical significance. Therefore, all observables must be unaffected by interchange of particle labels. The operators are said to be symmetric under interchange of labels. The Hamiltonian, for example, is symmetric, since the intrinsic properties of all the particles are the same. Let ψ(1, 2,...,n) be a solution to the Schr¨odinger equation, (Here n represents all the coordinates, both spatial and spin, of the particle labeled with n). Let Pij be an operator that permutes (or ‘exchanges’) the labels i and j: Pijψ(1, 2,...,i,...,j,...,n) = ψ(1, 2,...,j,...,i,...,n). This means that the function Pij ψ depends on the coordinates of particle j in the same way that ψ depends on the coordinates of particle i. Since H is symmetric under interchange of labels: H(Pijψ) = Pij Hψ, i.e., [Pij,H]=0.
    [Show full text]