How does particle detection affect a coherent state?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of particle detection on coherent states in quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of quantum harmonic oscillators and photon emission. Participants explore the nature of coherent states, the effects of particle detection, and the associated probabilities and correlations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the claim that a coherent state remains unchanged by the detection of a particle, expressing confusion over how a system can lose energy and still be considered in the same state.
  • Another participant clarifies that the discussion is about subtracting a particle from an existing state rather than emitting one, emphasizing the role of conditional probabilities in defining what "unchanged" means.
  • The second participant introduces the concept of the equal time second order correlation function g² and explains its significance in determining the conditional probabilities of detecting photons after an initial detection.
  • Three scenarios are proposed regarding photon number distributions:
    • a) A noisy photon number distribution leads to a high probability of detecting additional photons after one has been detected.
    • b) A well-defined photon number state results in a decreased probability of detecting another photon after one has been detected.
    • c) A balance between noise and photon number reduction occurs in a Poissonian distribution, where the probability remains unchanged.
  • Another participant notes that coherent states are eigenstates of the particle annihilation operator, suggesting a connection to the discussion on detection and state changes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of how coherent states behave under particle detection, with no consensus reached on the implications of these interactions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion involves complex concepts such as conditional probabilities, photon number distributions, and the mathematical formulation of correlation functions, which may require further clarification or assumptions that are not fully addressed.

snoopies622
Messages
852
Reaction score
29
". . . a coherent state remains unchanged by the detection (or annihilation) of field excitation or, say, a particle."

— Wikipedia's entry on "Coherent States"


I do not understand this. Is it saying that if a system in a coherent state, like a quantum harmonic oscillator, emits a particle, like a photon, it remains in the same state? How can any system lose energy yet remain in the same state? I know that a coherent state is not a particle number (energy) eigenstate, but like any state it has an energy expection value. Shouldn't this value change when energy is emitted?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is not about emitting a particle, rather about subtracting a particle from what is already there. The question what unchanged means is not trivial. You can express that in terms of conditional probabilities. If I detect a photon now and the probability to detect a second photon afterwards does not change, the state remains unchanged.

This conditional probability is given by the equal time second order correlation function g^2 which is defined as:
g^{(2)}(0)=\frac{\langle: n^2 :\rangle}{\langle n \rangle^2},
where the double stops denote normal ordering.
This results in:
g^{(2)}(0)=\frac{\langle n (n-1) \rangle}{\langle n \rangle^2}.
The n-1 expresses that the detection of one photon destroys it and changes the light field.
Now you can express the instantaneous photon number n as composed of the mean photon number and the deviation from that. In that case you get:
g^{(2)}(0)=\frac{\langle n+\delta n (n+\delta n-1) \rangle}{\langle n \rangle^2}.
As the expectation value of the deviation is 0, just 3 terms survive:
g^{(2)}(0)=\frac{\langle n^2 +(\delta n)^2-n) \rangle}{\langle n \rangle^2},
or equivalently:
g^{(2)}(0)=1+\frac{\langle(\delta n)^2 \rangle}{\langle n \rangle^2}-\frac{1}{\langle n \rangle}.

Now you can imagine three cases:

a) The photon number distribution is very noisy. If that happens, the second term which gives the variance of the photon number distribution will be very large. In that case the conditional probability to detect another photon if you already detected one will be pretty large. The photons arrive in bursts. Many at a time and then few in between, so if you detect a photon at some time, the probability that there are more around is large. This increase takes place when the second term in the g2 dominates.

b) You have a well defined photon number state. In that case, the conditional probability to detect a second photon if you already detected one will go down. If you have a single photon state and detect a photon, the probability to detect another one will of course be zero. That decrease takes place when the third term in the g2 dominates.

c) The second and the third term have equal magnitude. The reduction in photon number is canceled by the noise in the photon number. This is achieved if:
\frac{(\langle \delta n)^2 \rangle}{\langle n \rangle^2}=\frac{1}{\langle n \rangle}.
That happens to be the case for a Poissonian photon number distribution. The intrinsic noise cancels the photon number reduction (on average) and the probability to detect another photon if you just detected one remains unchanged.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Cthugha, much to think about here.
 
You should also take in mind that coherent states are eigenstates of the particle anihilation operator.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K