Changing Hamiltonian with some eigenvalues constant

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of a time-dependent Hamiltonian in quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on scenarios where some eigenvalues remain constant despite changes in the Hamiltonian. Participants explore the concept of adiabatic passage and the conditions under which it can be applied, particularly when the potential energy changes slowly or when attempting to simulate faster adiabatic transitions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if the lowest three instantaneous eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian remain constant, an initial state superposed from the corresponding eigenstates can evolve adiabatically even if the Hamiltonian changes rapidly.
  • Others argue that the adiabatic theorem requires sufficiently slow changes for the initial state to evolve correctly, and question how to ensure this when conditions are not met.
  • A later reply suggests that an alternative Hamiltonian can be constructed to achieve the desired state evolution even when the original Hamiltonian does not satisfy adiabatic conditions.
  • Participants discuss the challenges of experimentally realizing a time-variant potential that maintains constant eigenvalues, suggesting numerical methods to achieve this through perturbation theory.
  • Some contributions highlight the shortcut to adiabaticity (STA) approach, which allows for intermediate changes in energy levels while aiming for a final state close to that achieved through traditional adiabatic processes.
  • One participant provides a hypothetical example involving the Stark effect and the influence of electric and magnetic fields on a hydrogen atom as a potential case of STA.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of adiabatic passage under varying conditions, with no consensus reached on whether rapid changes can still be considered adiabatic if some eigenvalues remain constant. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the practical implementation of these theoretical concepts.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific conditions for the adiabatic theorem, the challenges in experimental realization of the proposed scenarios, and the need for careful consideration of perturbation effects when maintaining constant eigenvalues.

hilbert2
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,600
Reaction score
607
TL;DR
A system where the adiabatic theorem holds in some cases even for a fast change in the potential energy function.
Suppose some quantum system has a Hamiltonian with explicit time dependence ##\hat{H} := \hat{H}(t)## that comes from a changing potential energy ##V(\mathbf{x},t)##. If the potential energy is changing slowly, i.e. ##\frac{\partial V}{\partial t}## is small for all ##\mathbf{x}## and ##t##, then the adiabatic theorem says that an initial state ##\left|\psi\right.\rangle## at time ##t_1## will be the equivalent state in the basis of new instantaneous eigenstates of ##\hat{H}## at a later time ##t_2##. This is what is called adiabatic passage.

Now, if for example the lowest three instantaneous eigenvalues of ##\hat{H}(t)##, denoted ##E_1 (t)##, ##E_2 (t)## and ##E_3 (t)##, stay constant in time despite the Hamiltonian changing, I would suppose that an initial state superposed from ##\left|\psi_1 \right.\rangle##, ##\left|\psi_2 \right.\rangle## and ##\left|\psi_3 \right.\rangle## at time ##t_1## will be the equivalent state in the new instantaneous eigenbasis at time ##t_2## even if the "passage" is made arbitrarily much faster with scaling ##V(\mathbf{x},t) \rightarrow V(\mathbf{x},\lambda t)## where ##\lambda > 1##.

There seem to be some ways to simulate a faster than normal adiabatic passage even for all eigenvalues non-constant, such as in these references:

https://inspirehep.net/literature/1975583
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27900-6

and this has some applications in quantum control theory.

But am I right or missing something here when I assume that an initial state, made of eigenstates of ##\hat{H}## that correspond to time-constant eigenvalues, can change "adiabatically" no matter how fast the change is?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's start from the beginning.

Let's say we have a time-dependent Hamiltonian ##\hat{H}(t)## with a discrete spectrum, and there is no level crossing for the time considered. The adiabatic theorem states that if we have an initial state ##\left|\psi_{n0}\right\rangle## such that ##\hat{H}(t=0)\left|\psi_{0}\right\rangle =E_{n}(t=0)\left|\psi_{n0}\right\rangle## then, if the time evolution is sufficiently “slow”, the initial state will evolve such that ##\left|\psi_{n}(t)\right\rangle## obeys the equation ##\hat{H}(t)\left|\psi_{n}(t)\right\rangle =E_{n}(t)\left|\psi_{n}(t)\right\rangle .##

Now, what if the conditions of the adiabatic evolution are not met but we still want that our initial state ##\left|\psi_{n0}\right\rangle## evolve such that ##\hat{H}(t)\left|\psi_{n}(t)\right\rangle =E_{n}(t)\left|\psi_{n}(t)\right\rangle## is still true for all times? in that case, we can proceed as follows:

Instead of considering our original Hamiltonian ##\hat{H}(t)## we look for an alternative Hamiltonian ##\hat{\widetilde{H}}(t)## such that the non-adiabatic time evolution generated by ##\hat{\widetilde{H}}(t)## is

$$\hat{U}(t,t_{0})\left|\psi_{n0}\right\rangle =\left|\psi_{n}(t)\right\rangle $$

where ##\hat{U}(t,t_{0})## is solution to the Schrödinger equation $$\frac{d}{dt}\hat{U}(t,t_{0})=\hat{\widetilde{H}}(t)\hat{U}(t,t_{0}).$$

Notice that the time evolution is not generated by the original Hamiltonian. We have to find a new and different Hamiltonian that generates the desired path in the state space.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hilbert2
That's what they seem to do in those publications where they attempt to produce a pseudo-adiabatic change faster than how slow it usually has to be done. In the idea I wrote about, some part of the spectrum of ##\hat{H}## doesn't change in time. It seems to me that then you only have to consider the finite-dimensional subspace of the states with constant eigenvalue, if the initial state is a superposition of them. And then with regards to those states it's the same as if the Hamiltonian were time-independent in Schrödinger picture.

I'm not sure how one would experimentally put a particle in a time-variant potential that keeps some eigenvalues of ##\hat{H}(t)## constant, but that kind of ##V(x,t)## can be generated numerically by starting with some ##V(x,t_0 )## and step-by-step adding small perturbation terms (small enough for 1st order perturbation theory to be applicable) that keep some of the eigenvalues constant. That can be done by choosing a few perturbation potential functions ##\tilde{V}_1 , \dots \tilde{V}_n## and solving a linear system on each time step to find a linear combination of those ##\tilde{V}_k## that doesn't change the given eigenvalues in the 1st order approximation. It's a linear system because in 1st order the effect of several perturbation terms is additive.
 
Here is a good review of the STA (shortcut to adiabaticity) approach:
https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.91.045001

Note that the point of STA is not to find an alternative adiabatic route, but to allow intermediate changes of level so long as the final state is close enough to the one that would be arrived at by adiabatic transport.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hilbert2
I guess a possible example of a shortcut to adiabaticity would be if there's some way to adiabatically put a hydrogen atom in an electric field (Stark effect) with faster switching on of the ##\vec{E}##-field when there's also a magnetic field during the process but ##\vec{B} = \vec{0}## at the beginning and end point.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K