Undergrad Using the Variational Method to get higher sates

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on using the Variational Method to approximate higher energy states in quantum mechanics. By starting with the ground state wave function and then selecting an orthogonal ansatz for the first excited state, one can minimize energy to get closer to the true first excited state energy. The process resembles the Gram-Schmidt method for creating orthogonal bases, but the challenge lies in effectively choosing the ansatz. It is noted that trial functions can be creatively developed, although many problems provide specific ansatz choices, limiting exploration. Overall, the conversation highlights the potential for algorithmic approaches in expanding the variational method beyond ground state calculations.
ExplosivePete
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
TL;DR
An intro quantum course will teach you the Variational Method for approximating the ground state by minimizing an ansatz. But what about higher states?
In a typical quantum course we learn how to approximate the ground state of a particular Hamiltonian by making an educated guess at an ansatz with a tunable parameter then calculating the expectation energy for the ansatz. The result will depend on the tunable parameter if done correctly. Then we can minimize the energy with respect to that parameter, and that can give nice results approximating the ground state and energy. Cool stuff.

I have been wondering about what kind of algorithm we could cook up to find higher energy states. Say you have some Hamiltonian, H. We can apply the Variational method to get the ground state ψ0 and E0. Since the true energy states span the hilbert space, then we would hope that the expansion of ψ0 would mostly be composed of the true ground state. We could then apply the variational method again, but this time choose an ansatz, ψ1, which is orthogonal to ψ1. Assuming that ψ0 was a good guess, then ψ1 will be "mostly" orthogonal to the true ground state. Then the application of the variational method will result in an energy that will be closer to the first excited state energy. In fact, it would be easy to prove that if ψ0 is the exact ground state, then the energy of ψ1 will be bounded below by the first excited state energy.

This kind of has the feel of applying the Graham Schmidt process for finding orthogonal basis vectors, except the resulting basis is ordered by the energy. I assume there is some sort of algorithm out there to do this. The tricky part is how to handle the step of choosing the ansatz.

Let me know your thoughts and if you have seen something like this before.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The easier way of doing this is to start by picking a set of functions that you can guess are going to be close to spanning the ground state and the first excited state. You can then compute the matrix elements of the Hamiltonian in this subspace and you will get a 2x2 matrix that you can diagonalise to get approximations for the energies.

If you wish you can always let the functions in this procedure depend on some parameters and minimize the energies with respect to those parameters as well.
 
To avoid having the ansatz being "accidentally" orthogonal to the first excited state too, it's good to remember how the number of nodes depends on the level of excitation. At least this works in single-particle problems where there are no complications of making the wave function antisymmetric in the exchange of identical fermions.
 
Good point. There are a lot of nice tricks that would be nice to see summarized somewhere as far as techniques for choosing the ansatz. It is also useful to look at when the particle is in a "classically restricted region" (E < V(x)). In these regions, the wave function will be concave down (as easily shown from the Schrodinger equation).

Coming up with the trial functions can be a fun game, but unfortunately most assigned problems tell you what ansatz to use, which is all the fun. The rest is tedious calculation.
 
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
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K