What makes a superposition of states a coherent superposition?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of coherent superpositions in quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of spontaneously generated coherence (SGC) and its implications for atomic states. Participants explore the conditions under which a superposition of states can be classified as coherent, referencing theoretical frameworks and mathematical formulations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant introduces the concept of spontaneously generated coherence (SGC) and references an article discussing how spontaneous emission can lead to coherent superpositions of states.
  • Another participant defines a coherent superposition in quantum mechanics as one where there exists a relevant observable such that the inner product between the states is non-zero, implying physical distinguishability from a statistical mixture.
  • A follow-up question seeks clarification on the relationship between coherence conditions and the density matrix, specifically regarding non-zero off-diagonal elements.
  • A further elaboration on the density matrix shows that while the pure state and mixed state may yield the same expectation values for observables, the presence of off-diagonal terms in the density matrix indicates coherence, which is absent when states lie in different superselection sectors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of coherence and its mathematical representation, indicating that multiple perspectives on the definition and implications of coherent superpositions exist. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the broader implications of these definitions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes complex mathematical formulations and assumptions about the nature of observables and superselection sectors, which may not be fully articulated or agreed upon by all participants.

vtahmoorian
Messages
16
Reaction score
1
Hi everyone
I am investigating spontaneously generated coherence(SGC), I found that it happens when an excited atomic state decays to one or more closed atomic levels so that atom goes to a coherent superposition of states , Effect of State Superpositions Created by Spontaneous Emission on Laser-Driven Transitions.
J. JAVANAINEN
Europhys. Lett., 17 (5), pp. 407-412 (1992)

according to this article "spontaneous emission from a single
initial state may give rise to a coherent superposition of two (or more) receiving states"..
Now I have a question,
I am wondering when can we call a superposition of states a coherent one?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In QM, you can usually specify a set of physically relevant observables ##\mathcal A##. A superposition ##\left|\psi\right> = \alpha \left|\psi_1\right> + \beta \left|\psi_2\right>## is said to be a coherent superposition of ##\left|\psi_1\right>## and ##\left|\psi_2\right>## if there is an ##A\in\mathcal A## such that ##\left<\psi_1\right|A\left|\psi_2\right> \neq 0##.

The reason for this definition is that if there is no such ##A##, the state can't be physically distinguished from the statistical mixture ##\rho = |\alpha|^2 \left|\psi_1\right>\left<\psi_1\right|+|\beta|^2 \left|\psi_2\right>\left<\psi_2\right|##.
 
Thank you dear Rubi
I understand your first statement , it is related to the coherence condition,which is,having non zero off-diagonal elements of density matrix operator, right?
but can you explain more about your second statement?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: yucheng
The density matrix corresponding to the state ##\left|\psi\right>## from my earlier post would be ##\rho_\psi = \left|\psi\right>\left<\psi\right|##. It differs from the ##\rho## I wrote earlier in the off-diagonal terms: ##\rho_\psi = \rho + \alpha\beta^*\left|\psi_1\right>\left<\psi_2\right| + \alpha^*\beta\left|\psi_2\right>\left<\psi_1\right|##. However, for all physical observables ##A\in\mathcal A##, the expectation values are the same: ##\mathrm{Tr}(\rho_\psi A) = \mathrm{Tr}(\rho A)##. The off-diagonal terms don't contribute since ##\left<\psi_1\right|A\left|\psi_2\right> = 0##, so the pure state ##\rho_\psi## can't be physically distinguished from the mixed state ##\rho##. One says that ##\left|\psi_1\right>## and ##\left|\psi_2\right>## lie in different superselection sectors. From the form of ##\rho##, you can see that the relative phase between ##\left|\psi_1\right>## and ##\left|\psi_2\right>## cancels out completely, so there can't be any interference.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K