Zero Point Energy of Coupled Dipoles

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the zero point energy of a system with two coupled dipoles, specifically examining the relationship between the symmetric and anti-symmetric states and their contributions to the zero point energy. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and mathematical formulations related to quantum harmonic oscillators.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the zero point energy is expressed as \(\frac{1}{2}\hbar (\omega_s + \omega_a)\) when considering the diagonalization of the coupled dipole system.
  • Another participant provides the Hamiltonian for the system, indicating the interaction between the dipoles.
  • There is a suggestion to compute the matrix element of the perturbation with respect to fundamental states, asserting that it is zero, which implies no first-order corrections to the vacuum energy.
  • Concerns are raised about the exclusion of the anti-symmetric mode, which is perceived to have higher energy than the symmetric mode.
  • Some participants discuss the definition of zero point energy and its implications for the coupled oscillators compared to uncoupled ones.
  • A clarification is made that the zero point energy of the system is the sum of the zero point energies of the non-interacting modes, emphasizing that none can be zero.
  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the definition of zero point energy and seeks references for further understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the treatment of the anti-symmetric mode and its contribution to the zero point energy. There is no consensus on whether it should be included or excluded, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the definitions and calculations presented.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the modes and their energies, as well as the dependence on the definitions of zero point energy. The mathematical steps involved in the perturbation calculations are not fully resolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of coupled systems and harmonic oscillators, as well as students in condensed matter physics courses.

secret2
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Imagine that a system with two coupled dipole is diagonalized, so that the symmetric and anti-symmetric states are chosen to be the bases. Why does the Zero point energy equal
[tex]\frac{1}{2}\hbar (\omega_s + \omega_a)[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex]H = H_0 - \frac {e^2 x_1 x_2}{2 \pi \epsilon_0 R^3}[/tex]

where Ho is the sum of of two unperturbed SHO, x1 and x2 are respectively the distance between positive and negative ends of the dipoles, and R is the inter-dipole distance
 
Compute the matrix element of the perturbation wrt fundamental states and show it is zero.Therefore,the vacuum (zero point energy) doesn't have 1-st order corrections.So the total energy is the one stated by you in the first post.

Daniel.
 
dextercioby said:
Compute the matrix element of the perturbation wrt fundamental states and show it is zero.Therefore,the vacuum (zero point energy) doesn't have 1-st order corrections.So the total energy is the one stated by you in the first post.

Daniel.


I can see why the vacuum (zero point energy) doesn't have 1-st order corrections, but shouldn't half h-bar (omega)_s alone has lower energy than the one in the first post?
 
Yes,of course,but why did u reject the contribution due to antisymmetric wave functions...?

Daniel.
 
But isn't zero point energy defined as the lowest possible energy?
I am a little confused. Or maybe there is some good reference regarding this specific example?
 
I wouldn't know,it's the first time i saw it.Where did u get it...?

Daniel.
 
It's from one of the problem sheet for the condensed matter course. I just wonder if the zero point energy is defined to be as mentioned.
 
  • #10
secret2 said:
Imagine that a system with two coupled dipole is diagonalized, so that the symmetric and anti-symmetric states are chosen to be the bases. Why does the Zero point energy equal
[tex]\frac{1}{2}\hbar (\omega_s + \omega_a)[/tex]

Zero point energy of a single dipole oscillator is defined (derived by Planck) to be
[tex]\frac{1}{2}\hbar (\omega)[/tex]

Creator :biggrin:
 
  • #11
Creator said:
Zero point energy of a single dipole oscillator is defined (derived by Planck) to be
[tex]\frac{1}{2}\hbar (\omega)[/tex]

Creator :biggrin:

Of course, of course.
And my question is why NOT exclude the anti-symmetric mode, which has higher energy than the symmetric mode alone?
 
  • #12
secret2 said:
Of course, of course.
And my question is why NOT exclude the anti-symmetric mode, which has higher energy than the symmetric mode alone?

I think you had it right the first time...
For a coupled harmonic oscillator the zero point energy is defined to be the sum of the lowest energy of each oscillator.

However, note:

[tex]\frac{1}{2}\hbar (\omega_s) \neq \frac{1}{2}\hbar(\omega_o)[/tex]

[tex]\frac{1}{2}\hbar (\omega_a) \neq \frac{1}{2}\hbar(\omega_o)[/tex]

...where [tex]\omega_o[/tex] is the frequency of the uncoupled oscillator. IOW, the lowest energy of each coupled oscillator is different from the lowest energy of each when uncoupled.

More specifically, [tex]\frac{1}{2}\hbar(\omega_s + \omega_a) \ll \frac{1}{2}\hbar(\omega_o) + \frac{1}{2}\hbar(\omega_o)[/tex]

IOW, for the coupled oscillators the total zero point energy is lower than the sum of two uncoupled oscillators. :cool:

Creator :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Please note I've made an addition to the previous post to Secret2 for clarity.
 
  • #14
Thank you!
 
  • #15
Now I think I understand. When diagonalizing the system, we turned the two INTERACTING SHO's into two non-physical NON-INTERACTING symmetric and anti-symmetric modes, and they just act like any other SHO's. The zero point energy of the system is the sum of the zero point energy of the two non-physical SHO's, and quantum mechanics dictates that none of the individual (ie [itex]\frac{1}{2} \hbar \omega_s[/itex] or [itex]\frac{1}{2} \hbar \omega_a[/itex]) could be zero, hence the answer :)
 
Last edited:
  • #16
secret2 said:
Imagine that a system with two coupled dipole is diagonalized, so that the symmetric and anti-symmetric states are chosen to be the bases. Why does the Zero point energy equal
[tex]\frac{1}{2}\hbar (\omega_s + \omega_a)[/tex]
A question: What was the proposed cause of the dipole in this question? Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K