Kubo Formula Deriviation - interaction picture, complete eigenbasis

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the derivation of the Kubo formula in the interaction picture, specifically referencing David Tong's notes on Quantum Hall Effect (QHE). Key concepts include the use of the unitary operator for time evolution, the complete eigenbasis of the unperturbed Hamiltonian \(H_0\), and the evaluation of ground-state expectation values for time-dependent operators. Participants clarify the distinction between perturbed states and eigenstates of \(H_0\), emphasizing the importance of correctly applying Dyson's formula and the implications of energy eigenvalues in the derivation process.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the interaction picture in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with Dyson's formula and unitary operators
  • Knowledge of Hamiltonians and eigenstates in quantum systems
  • Basic grasp of time-dependent operators and expectation values
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Kubo formula in detail
  • Learn about the implications of Dyson's series in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the properties of time-dependent operators in quantum systems
  • Investigate the role of eigenstates in perturbation theory
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, graduate students in theoretical physics, and researchers focusing on quantum mechanics and condensed matter physics will benefit from this discussion.

binbagsss
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
12
Hi I'm looking at David Tong notes on QHE http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/qhe/two.pdf (page 56), I've attached the relevant screenshot below also.

I understand we are working in the interaction picture whereby states evolve via the Unitary Operataor EQ 2.10 in the notes(I think this is possibly called Dyson's formula) and operators evolve via ##e^{-iH_o t/\bar{h}}O(t=0)e^{iH_0 t\/\bar{h}}=O(t=t)## (*), where ##H_0## is the unperturbed Hamiltonian and ##O## an operator.

I follow up until the top of page 56, but am stuck on the next part when we 'insert complete basis of the energy eigenstates of ##H_0##
page56.png
First of all, let me check my understanding on the notation and concepts. So we have a system perturbed by ##\Delta{H(t)}## and at the top of page 54, where we say ##H_0 |m>=E_m |m> ,m> ## (**)the energy eigentates of ##H_0##. Now to check when we speak of the ground-state |0> (obtained by evolving ##t \to -\infty ## etc) , would one also refer to this, then, as a eigenstate of ##H_0##.

Most importantly, when we use the notation ## | n> ## as the complete eigenbasis, we are referring to the perturbed states right? So to get from the expression at the top of page 56 to the next expression, we have already input the time evolution of the state 0>, but not n> (and not the operator )?

But if so, I am totally stuck how we then get the next line, since there seems to be no further use of the unitary operator ##U(t)## but instead two applications of something similar to (*).

However to deal with the ##J_x(t)## wouldn't we get for this term ##J_x(t) \to e^{-iH_o t/\bar{h}}J_x(t=0)e^{iH_0 t\bar{h}} ##. Now I'm confused also how once translates ##H_0## to a specific energy- ##H_0## tells us the system is in the unperturbed state right? I.E any of one of these eigenstates which satisfy (**)? So where have we picked and chose ##E_n## and ##E_0## from? Have we assumed the system is in the state with energy ##E_0## at ##t=0##, and then ##E_n## is the system at time ##t##? what has actually allowed us to replace ##H_0## with ##E_i##.

Finally, to sound stupid, am i right in thinking we can take these exponentials outside because they have no spatial dependence and the operator ##J## is made up from spatial derivatives only? But if this is the case, say if we have ## < n | B | n> ## for ##B## some operator, and ##B## is again only made up of spatial derivative operators, then, apply (*), we would be able to take this out of the bra-ket, and the exponential factors would cancel.

Apologies I'm pretty confused.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
binbagsss said:
Most importantly, when we use the notation ##|n\rangle## as the complete eigenbasis, we are referring to the perturbed states right?

No, the states ##|n\rangle## are the eigenstates of ##H_0##:
$$
H_0 |n\rangle = E_n |n\rangle.
$$

binbagsss said:
Now I'm confused also how once translates H0H0H_0 to a specific energy- H0H0H_0 tells us the system is in the unperturbed state right? I.E any of one of these eigenstates which satisfy (**)? So where have we picked and chose EnEnE_n and E0E0E_0 from? Have we assumed the system is in the state with energy E0E0E_0 at t=0t=0t=0, and then EnEnE_n is the system at time ttt? what has actually allowed us to replace H0H0H_0 with EiEiE_i.

I think you've confused yourself by trying to think of starting in some initial state and evolving to some final state. All Tong is trying to do is evaluate a ground-state expectation value of a particular time-dependent operator. Then you just turn the crank (I'll take hbar=1):
$$
\langle 0 | J_y e^{i H_0 t} J_x e^{- i H_0 t} - e^{i H_0 t} J_x e^{- i H_0 t} J_y | 0 \rangle = \sum_{n}\left[\langle 0 | J_y | n \rangle \langle n | e^{i H_0 t} J_x e^{- i H_0 t} - e^{i H_0 t} J_x e^{- i H_0 t}| n \rangle \langle n | J_y | 0 \rangle\right].
$$
But then you can just use ##H_0 |n\rangle = E_n |n\rangle## to evaluate the exponentials, and you get
$$
\sum_{n}\left[\langle 0 | J_y | n \rangle \langle n | J_x \rangle0 e^{i (E_n - E_0) t} - \langle 0 |J_x | n \rangle \langle n | J_y | 0 \rangle e^{-i (E_n - E_0) t} \right]
$$
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K