Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Two different expressions of Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian

  1. Aug 20, 2012 #1
    Hi, I have a question about two different expressions of Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian

    [itex]H=\Delta_c a^{\dagger}a+\Delta_a \sigma_{+} \sigma_{-} +
    g (a^{\dagger}\sigma_{-} +a\sigma_{+} )[/itex]

    and

    [itex]H=\Delta_c a^{\dagger}a+\Delta_a \sigma_{+} \sigma_{-} +i
    g (a^{\dagger}\sigma_{-} -a\sigma_{+} )[/itex].[itex](\hbar=1)[/itex]

    I read them from different papers and books.

    Why are they equal, and how to derive one from another?
    How to choose the appropriate expression when utilizing the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian?

    Thanks!
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2012
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 20, 2012 #2

    Physics Monkey

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Suppose I took the first form and wrote [itex] -i \tilde{a} = a [/itex]. How does the Hamiltonian look in terms of [itex] \tilde{a} [/itex]?
     
  4. Aug 20, 2012 #3
    Thanks for your answer. I can derive the second equantion using your transformation.
    But in both expressions, [itex] a[/itex] and [itex] a^{\dagger}[/itex] are annihilation and creation operators, respectively, and they are real. Is the transformation still valid?
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2012
  5. Aug 21, 2012 #4

    Physics Monkey

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Why do you think "they are real"? It seems to me you need to go back and get some basics down first. For example, how does the creation operator evolve in time? How is it related to x and p variables in a harmonic oscillator or equivalently to the physical electromagnetic field?
     
  6. Aug 21, 2012 #5
    Thank you very much! And I'll figure it out.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook