Undergrad Why the second quantization Hamiltonian works?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the application of single-particle and two-particle Hamiltonians in multi-particle quantum systems, particularly for non-interacting and interacting particles. It highlights the ability of a single-particle Hamiltonian to represent dynamics across all particle numbers in Fock space, where annihilation and creation operators operate. The question arises regarding the underlying principles that allow a two-particle Hamiltonian to be effectively used in multi-particle scenarios. Participants seek clarification on whether this phenomenon is coincidental or rooted in deeper theoretical frameworks. Understanding these concepts is crucial for grasping the formalism of quantum mechanics and its implications for many-body physics.
MichPod
Messages
231
Reaction score
46
I am puzzled by the fact that a "single-particle" Hamiltonian (in the annihilation and creation operator form) may be used for a multi-particle case (non-interacting particles) or that (only) a "two-particle" Hamiltonian (in the annihilation and creation operator form) may be used for a multi-particle case of many (pair-) interacting particles.

I'd like to learn more what ideas stay behind this i.e. why a two-particle Hamiltonian may be used so directly for a multiple-particle case. Is it just a coincidence, a trick, or there is some reason/theory/formalism behind this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A single-particle Hamiltonian has a representation on ##N##-particle space for all values of ##N##. The annihilation and creation operators act on the corresponding Fock space, which is the direct sum of all ##N##-particle spaces. The single-particle Hamiltonian has a representation there, too.
 
  • Like
Likes MichPod
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 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
11K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K