Perturbation theory using Cohen-Tannoudji

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on stationary perturbation theory as presented in Cohen-Tannoudji's book, specifically addressing the Hamiltonian split into a known part and a perturbation, expressed as H=H_{o}+\lambda \hat{W}. Participants analyze the expansion of the eigenvalue problem H(\lambda)|\Psi(\lambda)\rangle=E(\lambda)|\Psi(\lambda)\rangle and the subsequent equations derived for zeroth, first, and second orders. A key point of confusion arises regarding the projection of the first-order eigenvector correction |1> onto the degenerate subspace, despite the non-degenerate nature of the eigenvalue E_{n}^{o}. The discussion clarifies that the index i is necessary for labeling the complete set of states in the context of perturbation theory.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hamiltonian mechanics and quantum states
  • Familiarity with perturbation theory in quantum mechanics
  • Knowledge of eigenvalues and eigenvectors in quantum systems
  • Ability to interpret mathematical expressions in quantum mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of perturbation theory from Cohen-Tannoudji's "Quantum Mechanics" (specifically pages 1101 and equations B-5 to B-11)
  • Learn about the implications of degeneracy in quantum systems and how perturbations affect them
  • Explore the mathematical techniques for projecting states in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate higher-order perturbation corrections and their applications in quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in quantum mechanics, particularly those focusing on perturbation theory, eigenvalue problems, and the implications of degeneracy in quantum systems.

cire
I'm reading the Cohen-Tannoudji book and I found somthing I don't understand
in stationary perturbation theory.
the problem the Hamiltonian is split in the known part an the perturbation:
<br /> H=H_{o}+\lambda \hat{W}<br />
<br /> H_{o}|\varphi_{p}^{i}\rangle=E_{p}^{o}|\varphi_{p}^{i}\rangle<br /> (1)
and we want to solve the problem:
<br /> H(\lambda)|\Psi(\lambda)\rangle=E(\lambda)\Psi(\lambda)\rangle (2)
Expanding in \lambda series equation (2) I get after equating each term:
<br /> zeroth: (H_{o}-E_{o})|0\rangle=0<br /> (3)
<br /> first: (H_{o}-E_{o})|1\rangle+(\hat{W}-E_{1})|0\rangle=0<br /> (4)
<br /> second: (H_{o}-E_{o})|3\rangle+(\hat{W}-E_{1})|2\rangle<br /> E_{2}|1\rangle-E_{3}|0\rangle=0<br /> (5)

from normalizing the wave fuction order by order I get:
<br /> zeroth: \langle0|0\rangle=1<br /> (6)
<br /> first: \langle0|1\rangle= \langle1|0\rangle=0<br /> (7)
<br /> second: \langle0|2\rangle=<br /> \langle2|0\rangle=-\frac{1}{2}\langle1|1\rangle<br /> (8)

Solution for the non-degenerated level<br /> H_{o}|\varphi_{n}^{o}\rangle=E_{n}^{o}|\varphi_{n}^{o}\rangle<br />
zeroth order:
<br /> E_{o}=E_{n}^{o}<br />
<br /> |0\rangle=|\varphi_{n}\rangle<br />
first order projecting (4) onto the vector |\varphi_{n}\rangle
<br /> E_{n}(\lambda)=E_{n}^{o}+\langle\varphi_{n}|W|\varphi_{n}\rangle<br />
now this is the part that I don't understand:
when finding the eigenvector |1> the project equation (4) onto |\varphi_{p}^{i}\rangle why the putting the supscript i if it is non-degenerated? :confused:
|\Psi_{n}(\lambda)\rangle=|\varphi_{n}\rangle+\sum_{p\neq<br /> n}\sum_{i}\frac{\langle\varphi_{p}^{i}|W|\varphi_{n}\rangle}{E_{n}^{o}-E_{p}^{o}}|\varphi_{p}^{i}\rangle
see the book page 1101
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The eigenvalues are not necessarily degenerate. Read the line after equation (B-6) on page 1101.

Regards,
George
 
the book is talking about the non-degenerated case
H_{o}|\varphi_{n}\rangle=E_{n}^{o}|\varphi_{n} \rangle
why projecting in the degenerate subspace \{|\varphi_{p}^{i} \rangle\}eq B-6 ?
degenerace refers to the new perturbed energy? :confused: :confused:
 
The idea is to expand the first-order eigenvector correction |1> in terms of a complete set of states that consists of unperturbed energy eigenvectors, i.e., to arrive at equation (B-10). Since the only eigenvalue that is known to be non-degenerate is E_{0}^{n}, the index i has to used in the labelling of this complete set of states.

Regards,
George
 
I got it, thanks but the book is misleading why not to project directly in the entire basis (degenerated in general) and get a matrix in B-5 and B-10 and B-11 all make sense, then the non-degenare case the matrix shrink to one element ...
:biggrin:
 
cire said:
I got it, thanks but the book is misleading why not to project directly in the entire basis (degenerated in general) and get a matrix in B-5 and B-10 and B-11 all make sense, then the non-degenare case the matrix shrink to one element ...
:biggrin:

Of course the non-degenerate case is a special case of the degenerate case. But the degenerate case is slightly more subtle: you cannot just take ANY eigenvector of the unperturbed system and "perturbe it": the perturbation could lift the degeneracy (partly or entirely). So you first have to find out WHICH eigenvector you can perturbe in the first place (in fact, the original, say, 5-dimensional, set of eigenvectors with identical E0 will split in, say, a 2 dimensional set with one Ea, and 3 non-degenerate vectors with Eb, Ec and Ed respectively in first order ; the Ea can still potentially split at higher order).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K