BCH Formula Example: Solving with [b,b^{\dagger}]=I

  • Thread starter Thread starter LagrangeEuler
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Example Formula
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the expression D(β)bD(-β) involving ladder operators in the context of quantum mechanics, specifically using the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff (BCH) formula and properties of commutators.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the commutation relation [b, b†] = I and how it relates to the expression D(β)bD(-β). There are attempts to clarify the notation and the meaning of the adjoint representation. Some participants suggest direct calculations without using the BCH formula, while others express uncertainty about the adjoint representation and its necessity in the calculations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing corrections and alternative approaches. Some have offered insights into the adjoint representation and its role, while others are questioning the need for it in their calculations. There is no explicit consensus on the best approach yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the notation and the potential for confusion regarding the distinction between operators and their adjoint representations. The original poster has stated the problem clearly, but there are varying levels of familiarity with the concepts involved.

LagrangeEuler
Messages
711
Reaction score
22
Homework Statement
I want to calculate [tex]D(\beta)bD(-\beta)[/tex]
where b is ladder operator in problem of LHO and ##\beta## is complex number.
[tex]D(\beta)=exp(\beta b^{\dagger}-\beta^*b)[/tex]
Relevant Equations
Commutator [tex][b,b^{\dagger}]=I[/tex]
BCH formula:
[tex]e^Ae^B=exp(A+B+\frac{1}{2}[A,B]+\frac{1}{12}[A,[A,B]]+\frac{1}{12}[B,[A,B]]+...)[/tex]
From
[tex][b,b^{\dagger}]=I[/tex] it is easy to see that
[tex][b,[b,b^{\dagger}]]=[b^{\dagger},[b,b^{\dagger}]]=0.[/tex]
And from that
[tex]e^be^{b^{\dagger}}=e^{b+b^{\dagger}}e^{\frac{1}{2}I}[/tex]
Using that I get
[tex]exp(\beta b^{\dagger}-\beta^*b)=e^{\beta b^{\dagger}}e^{-\beta^*b}e^{-\frac{1}{2}|\beta|^2I}[/tex].
So
[tex]D(\beta)bD(-\beta)=e^{\beta b^{\dagger}}e^{-\beta^*b}e^{-\frac{1}{2}|\beta|^2I}be^{-\beta b^{\dagger}}e^{\beta^*b}e^{-\frac{1}{2}|\beta|^2I}[/tex]
and I do not see what to do from here.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For my taste these notations are far too sloppy, esp. the fact that you do not distinguish ##b## and ##\mathfrak{ad}b##. So assuming you made no mistake, you have
Correction:
\begin{align*}
D(\beta)bD(-\beta) &= (\exp(\beta b^\dagger)(\exp(-\beta^*b)b(\exp(\beta b)(\exp(-\beta b^\dagger)\cdot e^{-|\beta|^2}\\ &= e^{-|\beta|^2} \cdot \operatorname{Ad}(\exp(\beta b^\dagger)\cdot (\exp(-\beta^*b) ) (b)
\end{align*}
since ##e^I## commutes with everything and the rest is the conjugation by ##\exp( \beta b^\dagger) ## and ## \exp (- \beta^* b) ##.
 
Last edited:
What is ##Ad()##?
 
LagrangeEuler said:
What is ##Ad()##?
The adjoint representation of the Lie group on its tangent space. It is a conjugation: ##\exp(-\beta b^*) \stackrel{ \operatorname{Ad}}{\longmapsto} \left( b \longmapsto \exp(-\beta b^*)b\exp(\beta b^*)\right)##
 
Last edited:
Correct result should be
[tex]D(\beta)bD(-\beta)=b-\beta I[/tex]. And I am still not sure how to get this.
 
LagrangeEuler said:
Correct result should be
[tex]D(\beta)bD(-\beta)=b-\beta I[/tex]. And I am still not sure how to get this.
Why not calculate it directly without BCH?
\begin{align*}
D(\beta)bD(-\beta)&= \exp(\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b)b \exp(-(\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b)) \\
&= \operatorname{Ad}(\exp(\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b))(b) \\
&= \exp(\operatorname{ad}(\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b))(b) \\
&= \left( 1 + \operatorname{ad}(\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b) + \dfrac{1}{2!} \operatorname{ad}^2(\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b)+\ldots \right)(b)\\
&= b+ [\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b,b] + \dfrac{1}{2} [\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b,[\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b,b]] + \dfrac{1}{3!} [\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* bv,[\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b,[\beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b,b]]]+\ldots
\end{align*}
 
Thanks. You will obviously get good result in this way. However I am not familiar with adjoint representation. Is it possible to solve it without it?
 
LagrangeEuler said:
Thanks. You will obviously get good result in this way. However I am not familiar with adjoint representation. Is it possible to solve it without it?
Without it in physics means nothing else than drop the notation. Physicists tend to use the same words regardless whether it takes places on the manifold (Lie group) or its tangent spaces (Lie algebra). If you're lucky they call the tangents generators. So without it means nothing else as to jump from line 1 directly to line 5.

Here is what formally happens (at the example of ##SU(2)##):
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/representations-precision-important/
Btw. you can still use BCH. Just use it for the last line.
 
LagrangeEuler said:
Problem Statement: I want to calculate [tex]D(\beta)bD(-\beta)[/tex]
where b is ladder operator in problem of LHO and ##\beta## is complex number.
[tex]D(\beta)=exp(\beta b^{\dagger}-\beta^*b)[/tex]
Relevant Equations: Commutator [tex][b,b^{\dagger}]=I[/tex]

Writing ##A = \beta b^\dagger - \beta^* b## gives
$$\begin{align}
D\left(\beta\right)bD\left(-\beta\right) &= e^A b e^{-A} \nonumber \\
&= \left( \left[ e^A , b \right] + b e^A \right) e^{-A} \nonumber
\end{align} $$
Now, Calculate ##\left[ e^A , b \right]## using
$$\begin{align}
\left[ A^n , b \right] &= \left[ A A^{n-1} , b \right] \nonumber \\
&= A \left[ A^{n-1} , b \right] + \left[ A , b \right] A^{n-1} \nonumber
\end{align} $$
and mathematical induction.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K