Fourier transform of scattering hamiltonian

dkin
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hey,

I am looking at the coupling hamiltonian for electrons in an EM field. In particular I'm interested in the inelastic scattering (this isn't the dominant part for inelastic scattering but it's confusing me).

The part of the hamiltonian in the time/space domain that I'm interested in is

H_A = (\frac{e^2}{2mc^2})\sum_j A(r_j,t) \cdot A(r_j,t)

Where j sum across all the electrons in this many particle problem. A is the vector potential of EM field.

Now I have another paper which Fourier transforms this part of the Hamiltonian as

H_A = (\frac{e^2}{2mc^2})\sum_{k_1,\omega_1} \sum_{k_2,\omega_2} N(-k_1 + k_2) A(k_1,\omega_1) \cdot A^*(k_2,\omega_2)

where

N(-k_1 + k_2) = \Sigma_j e^{i(k_1 - k_2)} \cdot r_j

which is the Fourier transform of the many particle number operator for the electrons.

The question

How exactly is the hamilton Fourier transformed in this way?

It seems to imply that

A(k_1,w_1) = \Sigma_{k_2,\omega_2} N(-k_1 + k_2) A^*(k_2,\omega_2)

assuming that the Fourier transformed hamiltonian can be written as

H_A = (\frac{e^2}{2mc^2})\sum_{k_1,\omega_1} A(k_1,\omega_1) \cdot (k_1,\omega_1)

which I am not certain of..
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi dkin,

I'm not familiar with that usage but to be able to evaluate the Fourier transform you need to express the Hamiltonian in such a way that every derivative (with respect to time or space) is explicitly shown. The potentials you write are apparently dependent on some other expression of what they consist of and which presumably contain derivative operators. If the potentials are defined using the Dirac delta function that needs to be explicitly shown also because it will have a term in the Fourier transform.
 
Last edited:
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