A tractable Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula

  • Thread starter Thread starter arkobose
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on deriving the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff (BCH) formula using the function f(λ) = e^(λA)e^(λB) where A and B are matrices and λ is a continuous parameter. The differentiation of f(λ) with respect to λ leads to the expression df/dλ = {A + B + (λ/1!)[A, B] + (λ²/2!)[A, [A, B]] + ...}f. By setting λ = 1 and assuming [A, [A, B]] = [B, [A, B]] = 0, the BCH formula is established. The discussion also highlights the challenges faced in differentiating f(λ) and the importance of expanding exponentials and calculating commutators.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix algebra and properties of matrices
  • Familiarity with the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula
  • Knowledge of differentiation of matrix functions
  • Experience with commutators in linear algebra
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula in detail
  • Learn about the properties and applications of matrix exponentials
  • Explore commutation relations and their implications in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate advanced topics in Lie algebra and its applications in physics
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for mathematicians, physicists, and anyone involved in advanced linear algebra or quantum mechanics, particularly those working with matrix exponentials and the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula.

arkobose
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
1. Let A and B be two matrices, and \lambda be a continuous parameter.
2. Now, define a function f(\lambda) \equiv e^{\lambda A}e^{\lambda B}. We need to show that \frac{df}{d\lambda} = \left\{A + B + \frac{\lambda}{1!}[A, B] + \frac{\lambda^2}{2!}[A, [A, B]] + ... \right \}f

Once this is shown, setting \lambda = 1, and [A, [A, B]] = [B, [A, B]] = 0 gives us a Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula.


3. I had shown this result quite a while ago, but now I have forgotten completely what I had done. This time, I tried differentiating f(\lambda) w.r.t the argument, and then using the commutation was able to get the first two terms on the R.H.S., but thereafter I got stuck. The very minimal hint would be all that I need.

Thank you!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Without seeing your exact steps I can't say much, but you may need to expand out an exponential or two and work out some commutators term-by-term.
 
I solved it. Thanks anyway!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K