Proving Coherent States are Eigenfunctions of Annihilation Operators

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that coherent states are eigenfunctions of annihilation operators, specifically through the equation a exp(φ a†) |0> = φ exp(φ a†) |0>. A question arises about whether a_i exp(Σ φ_i a_i†) |0> = φ_i exp(Σ φ_i a_i†) |0> holds true, contingent on the validity of the operator exponential identity exp(A+B+...) = exp(A)exp(B)exp(C)... for non-commuting operators. It is noted that Taylor expansion of the operator sum introduces cross terms, complicating the proof. The conversation highlights that if operators A, B, and C commute, the factorization of the exponential is valid, allowing for the desired conclusion. The discussion emphasizes the importance of operator commutation in proving the eigenfunction property of coherent states.
aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
Look at the following attached picture, where they prove the coherent states are eigenfunctions of the annihiliation operators by simply proving aexp(φa)l0> = φexp(φa)l0>. I understand the proof but does that also prove that:
aiexp(Σφiai)l0> = φiexp(Σφiai)l0> ?
I can see that it would if you can use that:
exp(A+B+...) = exp(A)exp(B)exp(C)...
but does that identity hold for operators and how do you see that?
Because if you just taylor expand the operator sum you get cross terms between i and j and I'm not sure what to do with these.
Edit: the picture might be a bit too small, so you can also just look at p158-159 of http://nanotheoryou.wikispaces.com/file/view/Atland+And+Simons.pdf
 

Attachments

  • atland.png
    atland.png
    56.3 KB · Views: 587
Physics news on Phys.org
If the operators A, B, C commute, you can reorder them like ordinary numbers and hence the factorization of the exponential holds.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K