I Exact dynamics of spin in varying magnetic field

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the dynamics of a spin-1/2 particle in a magnetic field, specifically examining the transition probability of the particle's spin state under varying magnetic influences. The Hamiltonian is defined with a primary magnetic field and a weak perpendicular field, leading to a derived probability of spin flip after a certain time. The author explores the validity of using the Schrödinger picture propagator to evolve the state, questioning the continuity of the state during a sudden perturbation in the Hamiltonian. Ultimately, the analysis confirms that the state remains continuous across the perturbation, supporting the correctness of the derived probability expression. The findings illustrate the interplay between quantum mechanics and magnetic interactions in spin dynamics.
KDPhysics
Messages
73
Reaction score
24
TL;DR
Can one use the Schrodinger picture propagator for a sudden, constant perturbation?
Consider an uncharged particle with spin one-half moving with speed ##v## in a region with magnetic field ##\textbf{B}=B\textbf{e}_z##. In a certain length ##L## of the particle's path, there is an additional, weak magnetic field ##\textbf{B}_\perp=B_\perp \textbf{e}_x##. Assuming the electron has magnetic moment ##\mu## then
$$
H(t) = H_0 + V(t)
$$
where ##H_0=-\mu B \sigma_z## and
$$
V(t)=\begin{cases}
-\mu B_\perp \sigma_x, \ \text{ for } 0<t<l/v\\
0, \ \text { otherwise}
\end{cases}
$$
Assuming the particle starts out in the ##|+\rangle## state (spin-up along the ##z##-axis) then I found using perturbation theory that the probability that the spin flips to ##|-\rangle## after time ##t>L/v## is
$$
P(t>L/v) = \bigg[\frac{B_\perp}{B}\sin\bigg(\frac{\mu B L}{\hbar v}\bigg)\bigg]^2
$$
I am wondering how I could derive the result without assuming that ##B_\perp\ll B##?

My first instinct was to use the propagator to evolve the state from ##t=0## to ##t=L/v##:
\begin{align}
&e^{-iH(t)t/\hbar} = e^{i\mu\textbf{B}\cdot \boldsymbol{\sigma}t/\hbar} = \cos \bigg(\frac{\mu B't}{\hbar}\bigg)\mathbb{1}+i\sin \bigg(\frac{\mu B't}{\hbar}\bigg)\frac{B\sigma_z+B_\perp \sigma_z}{B'}\\
\implies & |+(t)\rangle = \cos \bigg(\frac{\mu B't}{\hbar}\bigg)|+\rangle+i\sin \bigg(\frac{\mu B't}{\hbar}\bigg)\frac{B|+\rangle+B_\perp |-\rangle}{B'}\\
\implies & |\langle-|+(t)\rangle|^2 = \bigg[\frac{B_\perp}{B'}\sin \bigg(\frac{\mu B't}{\hbar}\bigg)\bigg]^2
\end{align}
where ##B'=\sqrt{B^2+B_\perp^2}##. Taking the ##B_\perp/B<<1## limit (perturbative limit) then I recover
$$
P(t>L/v) = \bigg[\frac{B_\perp}{B}\sin\bigg(\frac{\mu B L}{\hbar v}\bigg)\bigg]^2
$$
as desired.

However, I'm not entirely sure if my approach of using the Schrödinger picture propagator ##U(t)=e^{-iHt/\hbar}## is correct. Indeed since ##H(t<0)## does not commute with ##H(t>0)##, there is no guarantee that the ##|+\rangle## state at time ##t=0^-## will not immediately jump and transition to some other state at ##t=0^+##, implying that assuming the state will be ##|+\rangle## at ##t=0^+## could be wrong. Why did my argument still yield the correct result?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It seems like I overlooked the simple fact that the state cannot change during a sudden, ##\textit{finite}## perturbation, so I was right in assuming that the spin would be ##|+\rangle## at ##t=0^+##.

To understand why the system's state must be continuous over the sudden perturbation in the Hamiltonian, we can write
\begin{cases}
i\hbar \frac{d}{dt}|\psi(t)\rangle = H_0 |\psi(t)\rangle, \ &t<0\\
i\hbar \frac{d}{dt}|\psi(t)\rangle = (H_0+V) |\psi(t)\rangle, \ &t>0
\end{cases}
Integrating from ##0^-=-\tau## to ##0^+=\tau## where ##\tau \rightarrow 0## then
$$
i\hbar(|\psi(\tau)\rangle-|\psi(-\tau)\rangle) = \int_{-\tau}^0 H_0 |\psi(t)\rangle \ dt + \int_0^\tau (H_0+V)|\psi(t)\rangle \ dt
$$
Since ##|\psi(t)\rangle## has to be continuous over ##(-\tau,0)## and ##(0,\tau)##, we can apply the Mean Value Theorem, which states that there must be some ##\tau_-\in(-\tau,0)## and some ##\tau_+\in(0,\tau)## such that
$$
\int_{-\tau}^0 H_0 |\psi(t)\rangle \ dt + \int_0^\tau (H_0+V)|\psi(t)\rangle \ dt = \tau (H_0|\psi(\tau_-)\rangle + (H_0+V)|\psi(\tau_+)\rangle)
$$
Taking the limit as ##\tau \rightarrow 0## we find that
$$
\lim_{\tau \rightarrow 0} (|\psi(\tau)\rangle-|\psi(-\tau)\rangle) = \frac{i}{\hbar}\lim_{\tau \rightarrow 0}\tau[H_0|\psi(\tau_-)\rangle + (H_0+V)|\psi(\tau_+)\rangle] = 0
$$
implying that ##|\psi(0^+)\rangle = |\psi(0^-)\rangle## (assuming ##V_0## is finite).
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
692
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
603
Replies
19
Views
4K