This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

K. Kowalski and J. Rembieli´ ski n Department of Theoretical Physics, University of L´d´, o z ul. Pomorska 149/153, 90-236 L´d´, Poland o z

arXiv:0712.1724v1 [quant-ph] 11 Dec 2007

Abstract

The coherent states for the quantum mechanics on a torus and their basic properties are discussed.

PACS numbers: 02.20.Sv, 03.65.-w, 03.65.Sq

1

more precisely a cotangent bundle T ∗ M. 3] and the sphere [4] have been introduced very recently. 3. In spite of their importance the theory of coherent states in the case when the conﬁguration space has nontrivial topology is far from complete. INTRODUCTION Coherent states have attracted much attention in diﬀerent branches of physics [1]. In this work we study the coherent states for the quantum mechanics on a torus based on the construction of coherent states for a particle on a circle as a solution of some eigenvalue equation [2]. For example the coherent states for a quantum particle on a circle [2. Unfortunately. some preliminary results concerning coherent states for the torus utilizing the Zak transform have been described in section 5 of ref. in many cases interesting from the physical point of view such as a particle on a circle. Section 3 deals with the quantum mechanics on a torus. In view of the lack of the general method for the construction of coherent states one is forced to study each case of a particle on a concrete manifold separately. where M is the conﬁguration space. 2 . We remark that is no general method for construction of coherent states for a particle on an arbitrary manifold. the phase space whose points should label the coherent states. As a matter of fact. sphere or torus. As a matter of fact. As far as we are aware the most general approach involving the case of the n-dimensional sphere S n as a conﬁguration space was recently introduced by Hall [7]. Section 4 is devoted to the deﬁnition of the coherent states for the torus and discussion of their basic properties. is not a homogeneous space. In section 2 we recall the construction of the coherent states for a quantum particle on a circle [2]. For an excellent review of quantum mechanics on a circle including the coherent states we refer to very recent paper [5].I. Nevertheless. the exposition of the subject presented herein is much more complete. there exists a general algorithm introduced by Perelomov [6] of construction of coherent states for homogeneous spaces X which are quotiens: X = G/H of a Lie-group manifold G and the stability subgroup H.

3 j2 j2 (2.5) parametrizes the circular cylinder S 1 × R which is the classical phase space for a particle moving in a circle. U] = U.II. U = eiϕ is the unitary operator representing the position of a quantum particle on a (unit) circle and we set h = 1.4) can be alternatively obtained by means of the Zak transform [3]. and ϕ we can write (2. PRELIMINARIES — COHERENT STATES FOR A QUANTUM PARTICLE ON A CIRCLE In this section we collect the basic facts about the coherent states for the quantum mechanics on a circle. namely U|j = |j + 1 .4) (2. (2. Consider the eigenvalue ¯ equation J|j = j|j . α = elj−ijα e− 2 . These states are related to the algebra of the form [J. Using the parameters l. (2.2) Demanding the time-reversal invariance of the algebra (2. The projection of the vectors |z onto the basis vectors |j is given by j|z = z −j e− 2 . U † |j = |j − 1 . [J. The coherent states for the quantum mechanics on a circle can be deﬁned by means of the eigenvalue equation [2] Z|z = z|z .1) we ﬁnd that the eigenvalues j of the operator J can be only integer and half-integer [2]. where Z = e−J+ 2 U and the complex number z = e−l+iα (2.8) .7) (2.7) as j|l.3) (2.6) 1 (2. U † ] = −U † .1) ˆ where J is the angular momentum operator. The operators U and U † act on vectors |j as the ladder operators. The coherent states speciﬁed by (2.

α) (2.13) = l.9b) where θ3 and θ2 are the Jacobi theta-functions deﬁned by ∞ θ3 (v|τ ) = n=−∞ ∞ q n (eiπv )2n .α) ≈ eiα . Therefore.α) (l. we get U (l. α|l. We point out that the approximate relation (2. the parameter l in z can be identiﬁed with the classical angular momentum. (integer case) (half-integer case) (2.14) cannot hold in the case of the expectation value U U is not diagonal in the coherent state basis. α 1 ≈ e− 4 eiα . q (n− 2 ) (eiπv )2n−1 .α) (0. with z = e−l+iα . α . The expectation value of the angular momentum in the coherent state is l. We have remarkable exact equality for l integer or half-integer. α / l.11) where the very good approximation of the relative error is [2]: ∆l/l ≈ 2π exp(−π 2 ) sin(2lπ)/l (see also the very recent paper [8]). so the maximal error arising in the case l → 0 is of order 0.10b) θ2 (v|τ ) = where q = eiπτ and Im τ > 0.1 per cent. α (2. α|U|l. . α|l. On deﬁning the relative expectation value U where U (l. 4 (l.α) because . α|l.14) Therefore. Furthermore. The coherent states are not orthogonal. l.where |l.12) := U U (l.9a) (2. (2. α|U|l. α ≈ l. α where the approximation is very good. α ≡ |z . We have z|w = θ3 z|w = θ2 i ln z ∗ w 2π i ln z ∗ w 2π i π i π . n=−∞ 1 2 2 (2.10a) (2. the parameter α can be interpreted as a classical angle. l. we have the following formula on the expectation value of the unitary operator U representing the position of a particle on a circle: l. α|J|l.α) . (2.

Uj† ] = [Ui .1) satisﬁed by Ji ’s and the cosine and sine of the angle operators such that 1 cos ϕi = 2 (Ui + Ui† ). i. j2 ). 2. and the fact that from the topological point of view the two-torus T 2 can be identiﬁed with the product of two circles. 2.1) [Ji . indicates the following algebra adequate for the study of the motion on a torus: [Ji .4) we can generate the whole basis {|j } of the Hilbert space of states from the unique vector |j0 . In 5 .6) From (3. i.1) under time inversion. 2. We have T Ji T −1 = −Ji .3) where J = (J1 . Jj ] = [Ui . T Ui T −1 = Ui† . By (3.1). We point out that a version of the algebra (3. j = 1.3) it follows that the operators Ui and Uj† . Uj† ] = −δij Uj† . Further. 0). j = 1.5) implying the invariance of the algebra (3. (3.6) it follows that T is well deﬁned on the Hilbert space of states spanned by the vectors |j if and only if the spectrum of J is symmetric with respect to 0 = (0. and e2 = (0. Ui† |j = |j − ei . 1) are the unit vectors. ˆ sin ϕi = ˆ 1 (Ui 2i − Ui† ) (3. T Ui† T −1 = Ui (3. 1).4) where e1 = (1. i. (3. and j = (j1 . act on the vectors |j as the ladder operators. [Ji . From (3.e. where j0i ∈ [0. Consider the eigenvalue equations J |j = j|j . Now. Uj† ] = 0.III. Uj ] = δij Uj . 0). Evidently.4) imply T |j = | − j . representations with diﬀerent values of j0 are nonequivalent. in particular the form of the algebra (2.1) and (3. our experience with the case of the circle discussed in the previous section. QUANTUM MECHANICS ON A TORUS Now. (3. J2 ). (3. Uj ] = [Ui† . we have Ui |j = |j + ei .3) and (3. i = 1. relations (3.2) were originally introduced in the context of the quantum mechanics on a torus by Isham [9] (see also [10]). let T be the anti-unitary operator of time inversion.

(3. then completeness gives rise to a functional representation of vectors of the form 1 f |g = 2 4π 2π 2π dϕ1 0 0 dϕ2 f ∗ (ϕ)g(ϕ).6) this means that j01 = 0 or j01 = 1 2 and j02 = 0 or j02 = 1 .0) and ( 1 . 2 ).10) If we treat torus T 2 as a product of two circles.9) These vectors form the complete set. k = 1. that is we restrict to the topological aspects of the torus. The resolution of the identity can be written as 1 4π 2 2π 2π dϕ1 0 0 dϕ2 |ϕ ϕ| = I.0). 6 (3. Clearly j0i = 0 2 1 (j0i = 2 ) implies integer (half-integer) eigenvalues ji . 2. 1 1 These cases will be symbolically designated by (0. 0) and ( 1 . j∈Z2 where Z is the set of integers and the substitution j2 → j2 − 1 . We point out that in opposition to the quantum mechanics on a circle [2] the physical interpretation of the spectrum of the angular momentum operator J 1 is not obvious. and j1 -half-integer and j2 -half-integer. it turns out that demanding the time-reversal invariance we have four possibilities left: j1 -integer and j2 -integer. 2 ). 2 2 throughout this work. (3. j1 → j1 − 1 . is understood. respectively. (3. ( 1 . We ﬁnally write down the orthogonality and completeness conditions satisﬁed by the vectors |j of the form ′ ′ j|j ′ = δj1 j1 δj2 j2 .11) where f (ϕ) = ϕ|f .0) and ( 1 . (3. 2 2 We now discuss the coordinate representation for the quantum mechanics on a torus.7) (3. respectively.12) . ( 2 . For example both cases (0. 1 ). Since the basis vectors |j are represented by the functions ej (ϕ) = ϕ|j = eij·ϕ.8) |j j| = I.view of (3. (0. j1 -half-integer and j2 -integer. however it is not clear what is the physical diﬀerence between them. and j1 → j1 − 1 2 2 2 and j2 → j2 − 1 2 1 1 in the cases (0. 2 ). 2 ) seem to correspond to integer spin of 2 a particle. j1 -integer and j2 -half-integer. Consider the common eigenvectors |ϕ of the operators Uk representing the position of a particle on a torus such that Uk |ϕ = eiϕk |ϕ . Thus.

where u·v = 2 i=1 ui vi .16) Using (3. (3.15) are isomorphic. x2 = (R + r cos ϕ2 ) sin ϕ1 .18) (3. ϕ2 ) . x3 = r sin ϕ2 .12) periodic or antiperiodic ones in ϕ1 and ϕ2 . where ϕ1 is the azimuthal angle and ϕ2 polar angle. k = 1.15) as follows ˜ ∂f ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ . + ∂ϕ2 2 1 + (r/R) cos ϕ2 ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ k = 1. i. ϕ2 ) = f (ϕ1 . J1 f (ϕ) = V J1 V −1 f (ϕ) = J1 f (ϕ) = −i ∂ϕ1 ˜ ∂f i (r/R) sin ϕ2 ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ J2 f (ϕ) = V J2 V −1 f (ϕ) = −i f.16) and (3.13) We now return to (3. ∂ϕk Uk f (ϕ) = eiϕk f (ϕ). 2. following directly from (3.11) in the following way: Jk f (ϕ) = −i ∂f .15) is of the form ˜ V f (ϕ1 .4). R and r are the outer and inner radius of the torus.11) and (3.15) where the measure (1+(r/R) cos ϕ2 )dϕ1 dϕ2 coincides up to the multiplicative normalization constant with the surface element of the torus dS = r(R + r cos ϕ2 )dϕ1dϕ2 . ϕ2 ) = f (ϕ1 . In such a case the scalar product is given by [11] 1 ˜g f |˜ = 2 4π 2π 2π (3. An alternative functional representation arises when the torus is viewed as a two-dimensional surface embedded in R3 deﬁned by x1 = (R + r cos ϕ2 ) cos ϕ1 . therefore the functions which are the elements of the Hilbert space speciﬁed by the scalar product (3. 1 + (r/R) cos ϕ2 (3. respectively.19) We ﬁnally point out that the probability density for the coordinates in the normalized state 7 . Uk f (ϕ) = V Uk V −1 f (ϕ) = Uk f (ϕ) = eiϕk f . The operators Ji and Uj . g (3.11). 2.17) (3. The unitary operator mapping (3.11) are accordingly to (3.14) dϕ1 0 0 ˜ dϕ2 (1 + (r/R) cos ϕ2 )f ∗ (ϕ)˜(ϕ). 2 act in the representation (3.9) and (3. j = 1.11) into (3. The representations (3.13) we ﬁnd that the operators act in the representation (3. (3.

we have 1 4π 2 1 = 2 4π ϕ1 +∆ϕ1 ϕ2 +∆ϕ2 dϕ1 ϕ1 ϕ2 ϕ2 +∆ϕ2 ˜ dϕ2 (1 + (r/R) cos ϕ2 )|f(ϕ)|2 (3. . Indeed.3) Therefore.8) we ﬁnd that the overlap of the coherent states is z|w = θ3 z|w = θ3 z|w = θ2 z|w = θ2 i ∗ ln z1 w1 2π i ∗ ln z1 w1 2π i ∗ ln z1 w1 2π i ∗ ln z1 w1 2π i π i π i π i π θ3 θ2 θ3 θ2 8 i 2π i 2π i 2π i 2π i π i ∗ ln z2 w2 π i ∗ ln z2 w2 π i ∗ ln z2 w2 π ∗ ln z2 w2 .4) we get −j −j j|z = z1 1 z2 2 e− 2 j . ((0.5c) (4. A.4) Using (4. and Zi = e−Ji + 2 Ui . z2 ) ∈ C 2 .15). Taking into account (4. 1 2 (4. where ∆ϕ1 ≪ 1 and ∆ϕ2 ≪ 1.20) ϕ1 +∆ϕ1 dϕ1 ϕ1 ϕ2 dϕ2 |f (ϕ)|2 = |f (ϕ)|2∆ϕ1 ∆ϕ2 .3) and (3. 2 ) case) 2 (4. IV.11) or (3.|f does not depend on the choice of the representation (3.5a) (4. where z = (z1 . (3. the coherent state |z is given by |z = j∈Z2 −j −j z1 1 z2 2 e− 2 j |j .3) and (3.0) case) 1 (( 1 .1) i = 1.5d) . 2.0) case) ((0. . 1 ) case) 2 1 (( 2 . (4.2) (4.1).5b) (4.5) we deﬁne the coherent states for the quantum mechanics on a torus as the solution of the eigenvalue equation such that Z|z = z|z . 1 2 1 (4. COHERENT STATES FOR THE QUANTUM MECHANICS ON A TORUS Deﬁnition of coherent states Based on a form of (2. .

α ≡ |z with zk = e−lk +iαk . β = θ3 l1 + h1 i i 1 (α1 − β1 ) − 2π 2 π π l1 + h1 i i 1 (α1 − β1 ) − 2π 2 π π 1 l1 + h1 i i (α1 − β1 ) − 2π 2 π π 1 l1 + h1 i i (α1 − β1 ) − 2π 2 π π θ3 1 l2 + h2 i i .6) take the following form: j|l. Therefore we can write the coherent state in the form |l.8) and (2. α|h. β = θ2 θ2 (4. we can use the parametrization (2.6) The relations (4.7) where |l.0) case) 1 l2 + h2 i i .8).6): l. (3. Consider ﬁrst the expectation values of the angular momentum J .5) written in the parametrization (4.9b) l. (α2 − β2 ) − 2π 2 π π ((0. k = 1. α|h. (3.9c) l. (α2 − β2 ) − 2π 2 π π 1 (( 1 . Coherent states and the classical phase space As with the coherent states |z for a quantum particle on a circle our criterion to test the correctness of the introduced coherent states |z for the quantum mechanics on a torus will be their closeness to the classical phase space described by the formulae like (2. 2.14). α|h. 1 2 (4. 2 ) case) 2 (4. (3.5) written in the parametrization (4.8) An immediate consequence of (4.9a) l. 1 2 (4.6) and write the coordinates of the vector z labelling the phase space for a quantum particle on a torus as zk = e−lk +iαk . k = 1. 1 ) case) 2 1 l2 + h2 i i .11) and (2.0) case) 2 1 l2 + h2 i i . α = el·j−iα·j e− 2 j .7).10) are the following formulae on the scalar products (4.9d) B. 2.3)–(4. Therefore. α|h. β = θ2 θ3 (4. the phase space for a quantum particle on a torus is the cotangent bundle T ∗ T 2 = T 2 ×R2 which is topologically equivalent to the product of two cylinders (S 1 ×R)×(S 1 ×R).3) 9 . β = θ3 θ2 (4. (α2 − β2 ) − 2π 2 π π ((0.Now. Eqs. α = j∈Z2 el·j−iα·j e− 2 j |j . (4. (α2 − β2 ) − 2π 2 π π (( 1 .

Proceeding analogously as in the case of the coherent states for the circle we ﬁnd that for (4.10b) (4.4) and (4. α|U1(2) |l. α|Jk |l. α = l. Therefore We now discuss the expectation values of the unitary operators Ui representing the position of a quantum particle on a torus. α|l. Therefore. 2 ) case) (4. α the parameter l can be regarded as a classical angular momentum. 1 ) case) 2 (( 1 . α|l.α) .10c) (4. i ) π i ) π . (( 2 . On using (3. α|l. α π π ) 1(2) 2θ3(2) ( π π ((0. k = 1.7) we arrive at the following relations ilk 1 l. 2 ) case) = θ 2 ilk i dl 2 l. 2. α l. α = l.13a) (4. α − 4 iαk θ2 ( π = e e l. α|l. α|l. α il1(2) i d 1 . (( 1 . α l.12) where the approximation is very good (the maximal error is of order 0. = θ ilk i dl 3 l. l. 2.0) case) 2 1 1 k = 1. k = 1. i ) π ((0. (( 2 . i ) π .7) taken together yield l. α|l. α|l. α π π 2θ2 ( π π ) k li -integer or half-integer l.0) case) 1 ((0. α ((0. α π π 2θ2(3) ( π π ) dl1(2) d 1 ilk i l. α|Uk |l. α and in general case l. α|l. 2.14) where the approximation is very good. 2. 2. α π π 2θ3 ( π π ) k l. 2 ) case) As with the case of the coherent states for the circle it follows that in arbitrary case l. (3. α =l l. α = l. k = 1.13c) (4. α|Uk |l. i ) π il1(2) 1 − 4 iα1(2) θ2(3) ( π e e il θ3(2) ( 1(2) π il1(2) θ3(2) ( π 1 e− 4 eiα1(2) il θ2(3) ( 1(2) π ilk i θ3 ( π π ) 1 e− 4 eiαk . α|J1(2) |l. (4. l. α θ3 ( ilk π i ) π . α|l. α d 1 ilk i . α|J1(2) |l. α k = 1. α 1 ≈ e− 4 eiαk . α 1 . α|l. = θ3(2) il1(2) i dl l.1 per cent). α|J |l.15) 10 . α ≈ l.10a) (4.α) := Uk Uk (l. α|l. (4. α|Uk |l. introducing the relative expectation value Uk (l. α|J |l. α|U1(2) |l. 2.8).13b) (4.and (4.10d) l.13d) l. i θ2 ( ilk π ) π k = 1. α|Jk |l.0) case) = il1(2) i l.0) case) (4.α) (0.11) (4. α il1(2) i d 1 1 θ2(3) .

Another evidence for such interpretation of the parameters αk is provided by the behaviour of the probability density for the coordinates in the normalized coherent state.α) = l.0). α|Uk |l.17) with l1 = 1.α) (ϕ) is peaked at ϕ = α (see ﬁgures). α . α θ3 ( il1 π )θ3 ( il2 π ) π π i )|2 2π (4. α|l. 11 . where Uk (l.α) ≈ eiαk .16) Thus. Indeed. we obtain Uk (l. From computer simulations it follows that the function p(l. k = 1. 1: The plot of the probability density given by (4. The view point slightly above the surface. it turns out that αk can be regarded as a classical angle parametrizing the position of a particle on a torus. let us restrict for brevity to the case (0. The probability density is then given by i 1 1 |θ3 ( 2π (ϕ1 − α1 − il1 ) 2π )θ3 ( 2π (ϕ2 − α2 − il2 ) | ϕ|l. α |2 p(l.α) (ϕ) = = i i l.12) and (4.10 p 5 2 3 0 2 4 1 1 2 0 -1 6 FIG. This observation conﬁrms once more the role of αk as a classical angle. l2 = 1. α|l.17) following directly from (3. (4. α / l. α1 = π and α2 = π/3. 2.7).

(4.12) and (3. In fact. Generalization to quasiperiodic boundary conditions Bearing in mind the possible applications of the introduced approach in the condensed matter physics one should involve the case of the general j0 labelling the ground state |j0 (see (3. ϕ2 ). We also point out that the quasiperiodic boundary condition analogous to (4. For the general 12 . C. ϕ2 ) = ei2πj01 ei2πj02 f (ϕ1 . 2: The plot of the surface from ﬁgure 1 with the view point directly above. the wavefunctions which are the elements of the Hilbert space of states speciﬁed by the scalar product (3.18) following directly from (3.1 0 3 2 Π 4 6 2 Π 3 2 0 FIG.4) and discussion below). The maximum of the probability density given by (4.18) arises for the quantum mechanics on a circle.8) with j replaced with j + j0 . Similar functions (Bloch functions) appear in solid state physics.17) at ϕ1 = π and ϕ2 = π/3 is easily seen.11) obey then the general quasiperiodic boundary condition f (ϕ1 .

13) we get the expectation values of the unitary operators Ui representing the position of the quantum particle on a torus such that i i θ2 ( π (lk − j0k ) π ) 1 l. α|l.case of the quantum mechanics on multiply-connected spaces such condition was discussed by D¨ rr et al [12].22).19) 1 .21) Now. (4.10) we arrive at the following formula on the expectation value of the angular momentum J in the case of an arbitrary j0 : l. k = 1. 2.19). α|Uk |l. i i l. α 2θ3 ( i(lk −j0k ) π d θ i dl 3 ) k i(lk − j0k ) i π π . 2. 2 In the parametrization (4. θ3 (−v|τ ) = θ3 (v|τ ).10a) it follows that the approximate relation (4.5b).22) and (4. The formulas (4. α|h. It can be easily checked that (4.23) 13 . (4.20) θ3 1 l2 + h2 − 2j02 i i (α2 − β2 ) − 2π 2 π π . β = e(l+h)·j0 +i(α−β)·j0 e−j0 l1 + h1 − 2j01 i i 1 (α1 − β1 ) − × θ3 2π 2 π π 2 τ are (4. The generalization of the results obtained earlier to the case of arbitrary j0 is straightforward.5d) referring to j0i = implied by (4. The scalar product of coherent states is given by ∗ ∗ z|w = (z1 w1 )−j01 (z2 w2 )−j02 e−j01 −j02 θ3 2 2 i i ∗ (ln z1 w1 + 2j01 ) 2π π θ3 i i ∗ . (4. We recall that the case of the time-reversal symmetry discussed before implied j0i = 0 or j0i = 1 .19) and the identity θ3(2) (v + τ |τ ) = e−iπ( 4 +v) θ2(3) (v|τ ).20) and the fact that the Jacobi theta-functions are even functions of v.22) π From (4. i. and θ2 (−v|τ ) = θ2 (v|τ ). Clearly. (ln z2 w2 + 2j02 ) 2π π (4. Furthermore. 2 i = 1. α|Jk |l. 2 The relations (4. α = e− 4 eiαk . the plane with an extracted point is also an example of a multiply-connected space.6) the scalar product of the coherent states takes the form l. α|l. (4.5a) is an immediate consequence of (4. 2. In the context of the quantum mechanics of a free particle on a plane u with an extracted point the quasiperiodic boundary condition was investigated by us in [13].5c) and (4. (4. Indeed.e.10) are implied by (4. that is the periodic and antiperiodic functions in ϕ1 and ϕ2 .12) holds in the case of an arbitrary j0 . α θ3 ( π (lk − j0k ) π ) k = 1. (4. using technique applied for derivation (4. proceeding as with (4.5) can be easily obtained from (4. α 1 = j0k + l.19).

one can easily obtain the following generalization of the formula (4. we hope that similarly as with the coherent states for a particle on a circle which have been applied by Ashtekar et al [15] in loop quantum gravity also introduced coherent states for the torus would be of importance in this theory. the observations of this work would be of importance in the theory of quantum chaos. Finally.23) with the help of (4.The formulas (4.20). CONCLUSION In this work we have introduced the coherent states for the quantum mechanics on a torus. Acknowledgements This paper has been supported by the Polish Ministry of Scientiﬁc Research and Information Technology under the grant No PBZ-MIN-008/P03/2003. 14 . Taking into account (4. We only recall that the torus is the conﬁguration space of the double pendulum and toroidal pendulum which are well known to show chaotic behaviour. Skagerstam Coherent States–Applications in Physics and Mathematical Physics (World Scientiﬁc.13a) we ﬁnd that the approximation relation (4.23) and (4.α) (ϕ) = i 1 1 |θ3 ( 2π (ϕ1 − α1 − i(l1 − j01 )) 2π )θ3 ( 2π (ϕ2 − α2 − i(l2 − j02 )) | ϕ|l. [1] J. In our opinion. Singapore.14) is valid for every j0 .R. especially nanoscopic quantum rings [14]. V. Another possible application of the constructed coherent states is nanotechnology. Klauder and B. 1985).17) on the probability density for the coordinates in the normalized coherent state p(l.S. α |2 = i i i i l. α θ3 ( π (l1 − j01 ) π )θ3 ( π (l2 − j02 ) π ) i )|2 2π .24) is peaked at ϕ = α for an arbitrary j0 . We have not discussed in this paper the Bargmann representation which can be easily obtained by using the relations derived for the circle [2].13) can be easily derived from (4. We ﬁnally remark that the results of this paper can be immediately generalized to the case of the n-dimensional torus. Furthermore. α|l. besides of the possible applications in the solid state physics mentioned above.24) Comparing (4. (4.24) and (4.17) we ﬁnd that the probability density (4.

Les Houches. Rev.[2] K. 052104 (2006). [14] A. 2223 (2000). Kowalski et al. 4149 (1996). Korsch. pp. 1984). Phys. Ann. 636 (1989). quant-ph/0611116 (2006). Theor. Isham. Math. Mitchell. [7] B. Phys. [6] A. J. Perelomov. Quantum Grav. Rembieli´ski. 43. 791 (2006). Phys. Math. Phys. [5] H. Kowalski et al. 032118 (2002). [10] H.A. Phys. in: DeWitt B S and Stora R. a [4] K.J. Rev. Ishikawa et al. Groups and Topology II . A 29. [11] S. A 31. Lett. Topological and global aspects of quantum theory.C. J. Amsterdam. A 66. A 40. Phys. [15] A. D 40. del Olmo. Phys. Rev. [3] J. Phys.A. A 73. 1986). J. D¨rr et al. 2997 (2007). Kastrup.A. 1983 (Elsevier. A 33. [13] K. Mod. [9] C. 3363 (1996). editors. 1059–1290. J. Quantum mechanics on a circle: Husimi phase space distributions and semiclassical coherent states propagators. 84. Session XL. Phys. Lorke et al. 8841 (1998). Hall and J. D¨rr et al. n n J. [8] B. 42. J. u u e 7. Bahr and H. Generalized Coherent States and Their Applications (Springer. Inst. Kowalski and J. 20. 4138 (2001). 1031 (2003). J. Ashtekar et al.J. Class. Gonz´les and M. D. [12] D. Phys. Relativity. Phys. H. Rembieli´ski. Rev. 15 . A 11.M.J. Kowalski and J. Zainuddin. Int. 6035 (2000) . K. Poincar´ Phys. 1211 (2002). Berlin.

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot useful- Geometrization of Quantum Mechanics - Kibble
- Varadarajan - Introduction to Super Symmetry for Mathematicians
- 7Nrymx1ULis.pdf
- Quantum State 2
- Physics Faq
- fock
- Topological Quantum Field Theory
- A Philosopher's Understanding of Quantum Mechanics [Vermaas]
- 1.4823600
- QC-v1
- The Emergent Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics - Timothy J. Hollowood
- NU Phys Course
- interprtations of quantum mechanics
- Bohr, Heisenberg and the Divergent Views of Complementarity
- Quantum Measure from a Philosophical Viewpoint
- Microvita and the Various Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics
- Karakostas_Limitations on Stochastic Localization Models of State Vector Reduction
- Quantum Mechanics
- Birkhoff G., Neumann J.-the Logic of Quantum Mechanics. 37(1936)
- Quantum Mechanics
- The Role of Decoherence in Quantum Mechanics
- Do We Understand Quantum Mechanics
- chapter 1
- 09 Difficulties With Collapse Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics
- BHW7 Commentary Thirteen
- Heisenberg
- Gato de Schrodinger
- Klaus Colanero - Decoherence and Definite Outcomes
- IJNSVol08No4Paper11
- MORE THAN IMPOSSIBLE
- Coherent States for the Quantum Mechanics on a Torus