How Does Perturbation Theory Apply to Quantum Mechanics Eigenvalue Problems?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of perturbation theory to a quantum mechanics eigenvalue problem, specifically involving a Hamiltonian matrix with a small perturbation parameter, epsilon. Participants are tasked with finding eigenvalues and eigenvectors of both the unperturbed and perturbed Hamiltonians, as well as exploring non-degenerate and degenerate perturbation theory.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the process of finding eigenvalues and eigenvectors for the unperturbed Hamiltonian and the implications of perturbation theory. There are attempts to diagonalize the perturbing Hamiltonian and questions about the size of the matrix needed for degenerate perturbation theory. Some participants express confusion about how to relate the eigenvalues obtained from perturbation theory back to the original eigenvalues.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing guidance on the diagonalization process and the formation of matrices for degenerate states. There is recognition of the need to clarify the relationship between the eigenvalues from perturbation theory and those from the unperturbed Hamiltonian. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being explored, particularly regarding the physical meaning of eigenstates and operators in quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the topic of perturbation theory was not fully covered in class, leading to uncertainties in applying the concepts correctly. There is an emphasis on the need for a proper understanding of the mathematical setup for degenerate perturbation theory.

E92M3
Messages
64
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Given:
\mathbf{H}=V_0\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 1-\epsilon &amp; 0 &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp; 1&amp; \epsilon\\ <br /> 0 &amp; \epsilon &amp; 2<br /> \end{bmatrix}

\epsilon&lt;&lt;1

a) Find eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the unperturbed Hamiltonian (\epsilon=0)

b) Solve for eigenvalues of the Perturbed Hamiltonian then expand them up to the second order in epsilon.

c) Use 1st and 2nd order non-degenerate perturbation theory to approximate the eigenvalue that grows out from the non-degenerate state of the unperturbed Hamiltonian. Compare to part b.

d) Use degenerate perturbation theory to find first order correction of the eigenvalue of the initially degenerate states. Compare to part b.

Homework Equations



Non-degenerate perturbation:
E_n \approx E_n^0+&lt;\psi_n^0|\hat{H_1}|\psi_n^0&gt;+\sum_{m \neq n} \frac{|&lt;\psi_m^0|\hat{H_1}|\psi_n^0&gt;|^2}{E_n^0-E_m^0}

E_n^0 are the unperturbed eigenvalues
|\psi_n^0&gt; are the unperturbed eigenstates


The Attempt at a Solution



a)
\mathbf{H_0}=V_0\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 1 &amp; 0 &amp;0 \\ <br /> 0&amp; 1&amp;0 \\ <br /> 0 &amp;0 &amp; 2<br /> \end{bmatrix}

Therefore:

E_1^0=V_0
E_2^0=V_0
E_3^0=2V_0
|\psi_1^0&gt;=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 1\\ 0<br /> \\ 0<br /> <br /> \end{bmatrix}
|\psi_2^0&gt;=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 0\\ 1<br /> \\ 0<br /> <br /> \end{bmatrix}
|\psi_3^0&gt;=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 0\\ 0<br /> \\ 1<br /> <br /> \end{bmatrix}


b) I subtracted lamda times the identity motrix from the hamiltonian matrix and set its determinant equal to 0 to find the eigenvalues the usual way. After the series approximation, I got:

\lambda_1=V_0-V_0 \epsilon
\lambda_2=V_0-V_0 \epsilon^2
\lambda_3=2V_0+V_0 \epsilon^2

c) I used the non-degenerate perturbation above and got recover what I got in part b for the 3rd lambda.

d) Here's the problem, I had no clue what to do. I know that I am suppose to set up a matrix and its eigenvalues are the first order correction. And I know how to pick out the matrix elements. But what is the size of my matrix? 2 by 2 because of 2-fold degeneration? Or 3 by 3 since the hamiltonian matrix is 3 by 3? And after I got the eigenvalues, how do I compare them with part b? Which eigenvalue here corresponds to which eigenvalue in part b?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You have correctly identified the degenerate subspace: {|ψ1>(0),|ψ2>(0)}. You must diagonalize the perturbing Hamiltonian, H-H(0), in this subspace, and then use the resulting eigenbasis.
 
Well since the basis vectors just forms the identity matrix after diagonalizing I will still get:
\mathbf{H-H_0}=\mathbf{H_1}=V_0 \begin{bmatrix}<br /> -\epsilon &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\ <br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; \epsilon\\ <br /> 0 &amp; \epsilon &amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}

This will lead to the 3 eigenvalues with the first 2 repeating:
\lambda_1 =V_0 \epsilon
and
\lambda_2 =V_0 \epsilon
and
\lambda_3 =-V_0 \epsilon

But which of these corresponsds to which unperturbed eigenvalue? In other words, how can I construct the followings?

E_1=E_1^0+\lambda_?
E_2=E_1^0+\lambda_?
E_3=E_1^0+\lambda_?

Which lambda goes where?
And even more troubling, none gives the lambda squared that is present part b. What am I doing wrong?
 
Last edited:
Form a matrix from the matrix elements:

f|(0) H(1)i>(0)

where {i,f} = {1,2} (the degenerate subspace). Then, diagonalize this matrix. Use the basis that diagonalizes this matrix as the basis for the degenerate subspace. This will guaruntee that perturbed transitions to different states in the degenerate subspace vanish, so that the divergent energy denominators will no longer be a problem.
 
Are you saying that my matrix elements should be:

\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}V_0\begin{bmatrix}<br /> -\epsilon &amp; 0 &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp;0 &amp; \epsilon\\ <br /> 0&amp; \epsilon &amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 1\\ 0<br /> \\ <br /> 0<br /> \end{bmatrix} =-V_0 \epsilon
\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}V_0\begin{bmatrix}<br /> -\epsilon &amp; 0 &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp;0 &amp; \epsilon\\ <br /> 0&amp; \epsilon &amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 0\\ 1<br /> \\ <br /> 0<br /> \end{bmatrix} =0
\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}V_0\begin{bmatrix}<br /> -\epsilon &amp; 0 &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp;0 &amp; \epsilon\\ <br /> 0&amp; \epsilon &amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 1\\ 0<br /> \\ <br /> 0<br /> \end{bmatrix} =0
\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}V_0\begin{bmatrix}<br /> -\epsilon &amp; 0 &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp;0 &amp; \epsilon\\ <br /> 0&amp; \epsilon &amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}<br /> 0\\ 1<br /> \\ <br /> 0<br /> \end{bmatrix} =0

Therefore forming the matrix:
\mathbf{A}=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> -V_0\epsilon &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0&amp; 0<br /> \end{bmatrix}
Then using:
|\mathbf{A}-\lambda\mathbf{I}|=\begin{vmatrix}<br /> -V_0\epsilon-\lambda &amp; 0\\ 0<br /> &amp; -\lambda<br /> \end{vmatrix}=(V_0\epsilon+\lambda)\lambda=0
to get the eigenvalues:
\lambda_1=-V_0\epsilon
\lambda_2=0
With only 2, I know that they correspond to the initially degenerate eigenvalues right? But neither of them recover my answers in part b, why is this so?
 
Last edited:
E92M3 said:
With only 2, I know that they correspond to the initially degenerate eigenvalues right? But neither of them recover my answers in part b, why is this so?
Think about the meaning of what you are doing. What is the physical meaning of a QM eigenvector? What is the meaning of a QM operator? What happens to the state if it is an eigenstate of an operator, and that operator is solely responsible to perturb the state?
 
turin said:
What happens to the state if it is an eigenstate of an operator, and that operator is solely responsible to perturb the state?

This I really don't know. We ran out of time due to some bad weather days on which classes were canceled. Perturbation theory wasn't really covered completely in class. I've got the equation (from the text) of dealing with non-degenerate perturbation. I know that the equation won't work for degenerate because we'll get a zero in the denominator, so we need to set up a matrix (n by n for n-fold degeneracy) for degenerate perturbation. I think we pick out the entries of the matrix as I did above. Then the eigenvalues of that matrix will be the first order correction. Am I correct?
 
E92M3 said:
Then the eigenvalues of that matrix will be the first order correction. Am I correct?
I believe so.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
46
Views
3K