Rabi Hamiltonian : counter-rotating terms

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul159
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hamiltonian Terms
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 2K views
Paul159
Messages
15
Reaction score
4
Hello,

I'm trying to understand the counter-rotating terms of the Rabi Hamiltonian : ##a^\dagger \sigma_+## and ##a \sigma_-##.

I find these terms rather strange, in the sense that naively I would interpret them as describing an electron that gets excited by emitting a photon (and vice versa).
So how should these terms be correctly interpreted ?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'd need a bit more context. What are the annihilation and creation operators and the "spin-ladder operators" refer to? Maybe you refer to the Jaynes-Cummings model?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes–Cummings_model

Here a two-level "atom" is formally described using spin-1/2 operators. The "counter-rotating terms" mean transitions, where a photon is emitted and the atom is excited to a higher state or a photon is absorbed and the atom relaxes to its lower state.

As explained in the Wikipedia article these rapidly oscillating contributions are often neglected, leading to the solvable "rotating-wave approximation".
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Paul159
vanhees71 said:
I'd need a bit more context. What are the annihilation and creation operators and the "spin-ladder operators" refer to? Maybe you refer to the Jaynes-Cummings model?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes–Cummings_model

I'm referring to the Rabi Hamiltonian model (Jaynes-Cumming model without the rotating-wave approximation).

vanhees71 said:
Here a two-level "atom" is formally described using spin-1/2 operators. The "counter-rotating terms" mean transitions, where a photon is emitted and the atom is excited to a higher state or a photon is absorbed and the atom relaxes to its lower state.

Yes this is exactly what I don't understand (at least I found this terms counter-intuitive).

vanhees71 said:
As explained in the Wikipedia article these rapidly oscillating contributions are often neglected, leading to the solvable "rotating-wave approximation".

Yes but for strong coupling with matter we cannot neglect them.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71