Blackbody radiation in quantum mechanics

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the effects of blackbody radiation on the internal states of particles in thermal baths. It concludes that interactions with blackbody radiation typically lead to incoherent states, where the density matrix's off-diagonal elements approach zero, indicating decoherence. The conversation highlights the significant impact of blackbody radiation on atomic clocks, particularly in terms of dephasing observed in Rabi and Ramsey sequences. The participants agree that while coherent superpositions are theoretically possible, they are statistically unlikely due to the scrambling effects of broadband, incoherent light.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics and thermal states
  • Familiarity with density matrices and decoherence
  • Knowledge of atomic clock operations and their stability issues
  • Basic principles of blackbody radiation and its implications in spectroscopy
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the mathematical derivation of decoherence in quantum systems
  • Research the role of blackbody shielding in precision spectroscopy experiments
  • Study the effects of blackbody radiation on atomic states in Penning traps
  • Investigate the implications of Rabi and Ramsey sequences in quantum measurements
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, atomic clock engineers, and researchers in precision spectroscopy will benefit from this discussion, particularly those interested in the effects of thermal radiation on quantum states.

Malamala
Messages
348
Reaction score
28
Hello! If I place a particle with more energy levels (of the order of kT) in a well defined state, in a thermal bath at temperature T, how will the blackbody radiation affect the internal state of the particle i.e. will the distribution be classical or QM? Basically, if I prepare that particle in that state, let it there a long enough time and measure it and I repeat this many times, I expect the populated energy levels to be given by a Boltzmann distribution. In the end, did each particle have a well defined energy, but different particles had different energies. Or all the particles ended up in the same superposition of different energies with weights given by the Boltzmann distribution, and when I measure them I make the energy collapse according to that weight? So, is the particle after that interaction with the thermal bath in a well defined state or in a superposition? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Malamala said:
So, is the particle after that interaction with the thermal bath in a well defined state or in a superposition?
As a (very very good) rule of thumb, the final state will be an incoherent state (a mixed state where the off-diagonals of the density matrix, i.e. the coherences, tend to zero). However, if you do this with atoms in cavities, things get a little weird. I'm not an expert, but there are more complications to consider in that case.

In general, interactions with random, macroscopic noise sources tends to destroy coherence.

To put your question in a practical context, blackbody radiation is a major source of instability in atomic clocks. The interaction of the blackbody photons with the atoms results in dephasing, which shows up in Rabi or Ramsey sequences as decoherence (loss of contrast). This is why blackbody shielding is a key ingredient in any precision spectroscopy experiment.
 
Twigg said:
As a (very very good) rule of thumb, the final state will be an incoherent state (a mixed state where the off-diagonals of the density matrix, i.e. the coherences, tend to zero). However, if you do this with atoms in cavities, things get a little weird. I'm not an expert, but there are more complications to consider in that case.

In general, interactions with random, macroscopic noise sources tends to destroy coherence.

To put your question in a practical context, blackbody radiation is a major source of instability in atomic clocks. The interaction of the blackbody photons with the atoms results in dephasing, which shows up in Rabi or Ramsey sequences as decoherence (loss of contrast). This is why blackbody shielding is a key ingredient in any precision spectroscopy experiment.
To give an actual example, say I place a molecule in a Penning trap, in the ground vibrational state (by vibrational I mean CM vibrations), and in the ground internal vibrational and electronic state and J = 5. If the walls of the trap have a temperature T and I somehow check the J state after a time long enough for BB radiation to matter but shorter than the decay lifetime of the state, and say I find J=4, is the molecule fully in that state, as it was in J=5 initially (e.g. by stimulated emission due to the BB photons), or it is somehow a linear combination of J=4, J=5 and eventually other J values, and I just happened to make the wavefunction collapse in J=4?
 
Malamala said:
it is somehow a linear combination of J=4, J=5 and eventually other J values, and I just happened to make the wavefunction collapse in J=4?
It is theoretically possible but extremely statistically unlikely for blackbody radiation to cause a coherent superposition after a long interaction time. You will most likely find your single molecule classically in one J state or the other. The reason for this is that broadband, incoherent light tends to scramble superpositions (or any coherent information, for that matter). There is a way to prove this, but I'm a bit fuzzy on the details. Let me know if you're interested in a mathematical argument and I'll try to dig it up.
 
Twigg said:
It is theoretically possible but extremely statistically unlikely for blackbody radiation to cause a coherent superposition after a long interaction time. You will most likely find your single molecule classically in one J state or the other. The reason for this is that broadband, incoherent light tends to scramble superpositions (or any coherent information, for that matter). There is a way to prove this, but I'm a bit fuzzy on the details. Let me know if you're interested in a mathematical argument and I'll try to dig it up.
Thanks a lot, that makes sense. And sure, if you can I would like to see a derivation of that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
734
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
830
Replies
7
Views
2K