A Degenerate Perturbation Theory: Correction to the eigenstates

Kaguro
Messages
221
Reaction score
57
TL;DR Summary
Using the "good" states, which are eigenstates of H0 and V simultaneously, we can avoid the infinite coefficients and find the correct energy shifts. But how to find the correct state shifts? The coefficients now are in 0/0 form instead of infinity.
Given the unperturbed Hamiltonian ##H^0## and a small perturbating potential V. We have solved the original problem and have gotten a set of eigenvectors and eigenvalues of ##H^0##, and, say, two are degenerate:
$$ H^0 \ket a = E^0 \ket a$$
$$ H^0 \ket b = E^0 \ket b$$

Let's make them orthonormal. Here the first order state correction coefficients ## \sum_{m \neq n} \frac{\bra m V \ket n}{E_n - E_m} ## blow up when considering two kets from our degenerate eigenspace. To "solve" this problem, we want the numerator to be 0 as well. This is only possible if they are eigenkets of V as well. So, let's construct two new orthonormal vectors ##\ket c## and ##\ket d## from old ones. Still in the same eigenspace.

## H^0 \ket c = E^0 \ket c##
## H^0 \ket c = E^0 \ket c##

but now,
## V \ket c = c\ket c##
## V \ket d = d\ket d##

Now, ##\bra c V \ket d = \bra c d \ket d = d \bra c \ket d = 0## (since these are orthonormal.)

Now, using new vectors, we form another complete basis, and we can find the first order corrections to energy. But, we STILL can't find the first order corrections to the states, because these new vectors are STILL in that same stinking eigenspace and have the same energy. When we try to find the first order correction of the eigenstate ##\ket c## in the direction of ##\ket d## we're stuck. Maybe the other directions are fine, but not along ##\ket d##. Now we end up with 0/0 form instead of infinity...

How did this ordeal help us if we can't find the new eigenstates of the complete Hamiltonian?

Any help will be very much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top