What makes a superposition of states a coherent superposition?

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 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.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
959
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Back
Top