Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian: Where did the time dependence go?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian and the apparent absence of time dependence in its formulation compared to the semiclassical treatment of a two-level atom interacting with an electric field. Participants explore the implications of this time independence, the transition to the interaction picture, and the nature of the quantized field versus semiclassical approximations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the semiclassical Hamiltonian for the electric field includes time dependence, while the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian appears time-independent.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian represents a quantized field, contrasting it with semiclassical approximations.
  • It is suggested that a time-dependent drive term can be added to the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian, but in the simplest case, the system behaves as a closed system with energy oscillating between the cavity and the two-level systems.
  • A participant questions the relationship between a closed system and the absence of time dependence, seeking clarification on how energy conservation relates to time independence.
  • One participant asserts that time dependence of operators typically vanishes in the Schrödinger picture, which may explain the observations regarding the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of time dependence in the context of the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian and the nature of the system being discussed. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the relationship between quantization, time dependence, and system closure.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity introduced by strong driving in the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian and the potential for confusion regarding the definitions of closed systems and time dependence.

yucheng
Messages
232
Reaction score
57
TL;DR
Semiclassically, the electric field varies harmonically in time, but sometimes, in the JC Hamiltonian, the time dependence disappears. What???
Consider the interaction of a two level atom and an electric field (semiclassically, we treat the field as 'external' i.e. not influenced by the atom; the full quantum treats the change in the field as well)

Electric field in semiclassical Hamiltonian: plane wave

##H_{int,~semiclassical}=-\mu \cdot E=-\mu \cdot E_{0}\cos \nu t##

Electric field in Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian, single mode i.e. plane wave
(Schrödinger picture)

##H_{int}=\hbar g(\sigma _{+}a+\sigma _{-}a^{\dagger })##

\bigskip

We realize ##H_{int}## is time independent! So where did the time-harmonic
dependence go? How does this compare to the classical case?

Also, how are we supposed to go to the interaction picture, with a constant
hamiltonian?

Furthermore, ##H_{int,~semiclassical}## is time-dependent, but isn't this the
Schrödinger picture Hamiltonian? Shouldn't it be time-independent?

Possibly related: Sakurai and Napolitano, Modern Quantum Mechanics: constant
perturbation turned on at t=0!?

Also see:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...hen-the-hamiltonian-is-time-dependent.971007/
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is also possible to add a time-dependent drive term to the J-C Hamiltonian.
However, in the simples case you have a situation where the energy is continuously moving between the cavity and the two-level systems; i.e. it is a closed system and there is no real time-dependence.

Note that the J-C Hamiltonian in the "strong driving" regime gets really complicated.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Demystifier said:
In the JC Hamiltonian, the field is quantized. It's not a semiclassical approximation.
Yes I understand that it's quantized, but... why must find dependence disappear if it's quantized?

f95toli said:
it is a closed system and there is no real time-dependence.
Perhaps this is a good hint. Closed system=energy conservation=no time dependence, but:
How do we know if the system is closed?
Why no time dependence=energy conservation?....
 
yucheng said:
Yes I understand that it's quantized, but... why must find dependence disappear if it's quantized?
Because the time dependence of operators usually disappears in the Schrödinger picture.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K