What can be done when eigenvalues of a Non Hermitian Hamiltonian are complex?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Physicslad78
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hamiltonian Hermitian
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges of solving a differential equation related to a non-Hermitian Hamiltonian, particularly focusing on the implications of obtaining complex eigenvalues. Participants explore the nature of the differential equation, its origins, and potential solutions or transformations that could yield physically meaningful results.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes constructing a series solution for a differential equation that yields complex eigenvalues, questioning the physical validity of these results.
  • Another participant suggests that if the equation corresponds to a time-independent Schrödinger equation, the energy eigenvalues should be real, implying a possible mistake in the formulation.
  • Clarifications are sought regarding the Hamiltonian and the transformation of the original equation, which involves angular momentum and spherical harmonics.
  • Participants discuss boundary conditions and their potential impact on the numerical solutions, with one suggesting that regularity conditions at the endpoints may be necessary.
  • A transformation involving the cosine of an angle is proposed, leading to a connection with Clebsch-Gordon coefficients and possibly Mathieu functions.
  • One participant identifies the differential equation as the spheroidal wave equation, noting complications in obtaining eigenvalues due to the presence of a cosine term.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the differential equation and the implications of complex eigenvalues. There is no consensus on the correct approach to resolve the issues presented, and multiple competing perspectives remain throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential dependence on specific boundary conditions, the nature of the Hamiltonian, and the assumptions made regarding the variables involved. The discussion does not resolve these complexities.

Physicslad78
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
I have a question..I am trying to solve a differential equation that arises in my research problem. Because the differential equation has no solution in terms of well known functions, I had to construct a series solution for the differential equation which is physical and agrees with the potential energy of the system (potential energy minimum at a point,then wavefunctions maximum at that particular point). Anyhow the eigenvalues of the matrix arising from solving the series are energies but are sometimes complex which makes the solution non physical! what can be done in this case? Changing the matrix into Hermitian by adding it to the Transpose and dividing by 2 is mathematical I guess and will not produce the correct values of energies..Can anyone help please. Thanks..

N.B: The differential equation is:

(1-x^2)~ \frac{\partial ^2 F(x,y)}{\partial x}+\left(\frac{1-2x^2}{x}\right)~\frac{\partial F(x,y)}{\partial x}-\left[ax^2(1-2y^2)-c\right] F(x,y)=0

where x and y are the variables and a and c are constants
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Where did you get your differential equation? Is this supposed to be the time-independent Schrödinger equation corresponding to some hermitian hamiltonian? If so, then it's a theorem that the energy eigenvalues are real, so you must have made a mistake somewhere.
 
What is your Hamiltonian?
 
well this equation stems from the separation of radial and angular parts and this equation above is a transformed equation of the angular part..Originally it is:

\frac{L^2}{6k^2}\Psi+\frac{w\sqrt{3}}{2}\cos 2 \gamma \sin^2 \theta \Psi=E \Psi

where L is the usual angular momentum (depending on the angles \theta and \phi and there is an extra angle \gamma that arises. I am trying to find the values of the energies (E) where w is just a constant. As you can see the solution is spherical harmonics if w=0! I did the transformation x=\sin\theta and y=\sin\gamma and got the above equation.
 
Well, you've assumed no \phi dependence (m=0 in terms of spherical harmonics), but other than than your equation seems correct. However, x is restricted to be between 0 and 1, and your function has to obey some sort of regularity condition at the endpoints, so that may be messing up your numerics.
 
Yeah I have assumed m=0 for the first case but will take m=1 later on. I am not sure what the solution could be..U mean i need to add a boundary condition at the endpoints then?
 
Yes, you need some sort of boundary condition at the end points. Not sure what it should be off hand.
 
If gamma is independent of theta, LET Z=COS(THETA). Then the equation becomes
(L^^2 -E)W= g(1-z^^2). Take matrix elements to get l(l+1)W(l) = < l |g(1-z^^2)|W>, where g is constant and |W> is the state vector. The right hand side will be a linear expression in W(l+2), W(l+1),W(l), W(l-2), W(l-1), as in a Clebsch-Gordon expansion. Tough to solve-- probably related to Mathieu functions.
Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
 
Thanks very much for all your suggestions..It is an interesting one which reilly suggested. so u mean that the resulting equation could be a Mathieu equation in \gamma?But what about L^2? It will becomes a function of z i suppose. If m was non zero, would it still be as easy as that? I will try doing the transformation and see what happens...Thanks again..
 
  • #10
The differential equation turns out to be the spheroidal wave equation whose solution can be written as a linear combination of Legendre Polynomials which is sensical. The problem is when one tries to find eigenvalues, I form the matrix which contains the term \cos \gamma.This makes eigenvalues unobtainable and expressed in terms of Root in Mathematica...any ideas of how I can circumvent this?:(
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K