Operator in second quantization

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the second quantization formalism in quantum mechanics, specifically focusing on deriving the Hamiltonian for a system of non-interacting particles and exploring the representation of operators such as momentum and two-body interactions. The scope includes theoretical aspects and mathematical reasoning related to operator representations in quantum field theory.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks to derive the Hamiltonian for non-interacting particles using second quantization, expressing it in terms of the momentum operator and potential.
  • Another participant suggests a change of basis for the momentum operator and points out a mistake in variable labeling in the initial formulation.
  • A later reply proposes a specific form for the momentum operator in three dimensions, indicating a connection to the delta function in the context of integration.
  • Further discussion includes preferences for notation and representation of the momentum operator, emphasizing the quadratic form of the Hamiltonian.
  • One participant expresses interest in deriving the second quantized expression for a general two-body operator and questions the rearrangement of terms in the context of the diagonal representation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to engage in a constructive dialogue with some agreement on the forms of operators and their representations, but there is no consensus on the correctness of specific mathematical manipulations or the final expressions for the operators discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge potential errors in their formulations and express uncertainty about the rearrangement of terms in the two-body operator context. The discussion reflects a reliance on specific mathematical identities and assumptions that may not be universally agreed upon.

Alexios
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I'm struggling with the second quantization formalism. I'd like to derive the hamiltonian of a system with non-interacting particles
[tex]\hat{H}=\int dx\,a(x)^\dagger \left[\frac{\hat{P}}{2m}+V(x)\right]a(x),[/tex]
where [tex]a(x) = \hat{\Psi}(x)[/tex].

I know the second quantized representation of a single-particle operator [tex]\hat{O}[/tex] which is diagonal in the basis [tex]\{|\alpha\rangle\}[/tex]:

[tex]\hat{O}=\sum_i o_{\alpha_i} a_{\alpha_i}^\dagger a_{\alpha_i}[/tex]

My idea was, as a first step, to derive the expression of the linear momentum operator:

[tex]\hat{P}=\sum_i p_{p_i} a_{p_i}^\dagger a_{p_i} =\sum_i \int dx\, \langle x|p_i\rangle a^\dagger(x) \int dx\, \langle p_i|x\rangle a(x) ??[/tex]

The above is probably wrong (and I don't know how to proceed in order to derive an expression which is of similar form as [tex]\hat{H}[/tex])

Any help is much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Alexios said:
My idea was, as a first step, to derive the expression of the linear momentum operator:

[tex]\hat{P}=\sum_i p_{p_i} a_{p_i}^\dagger a_{p_i} =\sum_i \int dx\, \langle x|p_i\rangle a^\dagger(x) \int dx\, \langle p_i|x\rangle a(x) ??[/tex]

The above is probably wrong (and I don't know how to proceed in order to derive an expression which is of similar form as [tex]\hat{H}[/tex])

Any help is much appreciated.
It is wrong, but not very wrong. I guess you are trying to use the change of basis:
[tex] a_p = \int dx\, \langle p_i|x\rangle a(x)[/tex]
[tex] a_p^\dagger = \int dx\, \langle x|p_i\rangle a^\dagger(x)[/tex]

to expand the diagonal representation
[tex]\hat{P}=\sum_p p a_{p}^\dagger a_{p}[/tex]

Your biggest mistake is failing to use different labels for dummy variables of integration. You should instead have written:
[tex]\hat{P}=\sum_p p \int dx_2\, \langle x_2|p_i\rangle a^\dagger(x_2) \int dx_1\, \langle p_i|x_1\rangle a(x_1)[/tex]
[tex]\hat{P}=\iint dx_2dx_1a^\dagger(x_2) a(x_1)\sum_p p \langle x_2|p_i\rangle \langle p_i|x_1\rangle[/tex]

This takes you closer. Can you manipulate it further to derive what you want?
 
Thanks, that makes sense to me. As far as I know, the momentum operator in 3 dimensions should be
[tex]\hat{P}=-i\hbar \int d^3 x a^\dagger (x) \nabla a(x)[/tex]

Your equation slightly modified gives
[tex]\int \int dx_1\, dx_2\, a^\dagger (x_2)\langle x_2|\left(\sum \hat{P}_i |p_i\rangle \langle p_i|\right)|x_1\rangle a(x_1)[/tex]

The inner term simplifies to [tex]\langle x_2|\hat{P}|x_1\rangle = -i\hbar \nabla \langle x_2|x_1\rangle[/tex]?! Because [tex]\langle x_2|x_1\rangle = \delta(x_1-x_2)[/tex] the above double integration indeed gives the desired result.
 
Alexios said:
The inner term simplifies to [tex]\langle x_2|\hat{P}|x_1\rangle = -i\hbar \nabla \langle x_2|x_1\rangle[/tex]?! Because [tex]\langle x_2|x_1\rangle = \delta(x_1-x_2)[/tex] the above double integration indeed gives the desired result.
Perfect.
I'd have a preference for saying
[tex]\langle x_2|\hat{P}|x_1\rangle = -i\hbar\delta(x_2-x_1)\nabla_{x_1}[/tex]
since derivatives of delta functions tend to scare me.

As an aside, I'm also a fan of keeping the final answer like:
[tex] H = \int dxdx' a(x')^\dagger\delta(x-x')\left[\frac{-\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 + V(x)\right]a(x)[/tex]
since that reminds me that we are really looking at a quadratic form.

FWIW, I mentioned some references on second quantization in this post in this thread:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2474928&postcount=14
 
Thanks a lot.

I'm trying now to derive the second quantized expression for a general two-body operator [tex]\hat{V}[/tex].

Diagonal representation: [tex]\hat{V}=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{ij} v_{ij}\hat{P}_{ij}[/tex]
where [tex]\hat{P}_{ij} = a_i^\dagger a_j^\dagger a_j a_i[/tex] counts the number of pairs of particles in states [tex]|i\rangle, |j\rangle[/tex].

When following the same procedure as before I get an ingegral over [tex]dx_1 \ldots dx_4[/tex] with the terms

[tex]\langle x_1|v_i\rangle \langle x_2 | v_j \rangle \langle v_j | x_3 \rangle \langle v_i |x_4\rangle[/tex].

Is it correct to rearrange these terms like

[tex]\langle x_1|\otimes \langle x_2| |v_i\rangle \otimes |v_j \rangle \langle v_j | \otimes \langle v_i | |x_3\rangle \otimes |x_4 \rangle[/tex]

so as to plug in [tex]\hat{V} = \sum_{ij} v_{ij} |v_i\rangle \otimes |v_j\rangle \langle v_j|\otimes \langle v_i|[/tex] ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
659
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K