4 views

Uploaded by OmegaUser

Statistical mechanics lecture notes
undergraduate course
2006

- Final Advice
- Entanglement I 13
- Mahbub Sir Paper
- Teleportation
- quantum teleportation word docs(seminar report) by prashant kumar shantipuri motihari./ KSIT bangalore/7829674013
- hw5
- Slides Talk at UnB
- 6096-Smirne-dottorato.pdf
- Twin photons and quantum teleportation.txt
- Sanjeet Presentation
- 144kmFreeSpace Distribution of Entanglement
- Many Worlds Interpretation
- Neuroquant Vol8 Issue2 Consciousness an Everett Many Min Interpretation
- Pragmatic Information in Quantum Mechanics - Roederer*
- (Lecture Notes in Physics 931) Mukund Rangamani, Tadashi Takayanagi (Auth.)-Holographic Entanglement Entropy-Springer International Publishing (2017)
- Hari Sharma Chapter
- quantum (2).ppt
- Time-Fractal
- Quantum Communication
- Quantum MagnetoHidrodynamics

You are on page 1of 6

Now we turn to a quantum-mechanical version of the physics of the previous lecture. Let us begin with a short review of some facts from quantum statistical mechanics: the Hamiltonian of a system determines both its energy levels (its statics) and its time evolution (its dynamics). The time evolution of a state in the Schrodinger picture is given by i h or for a time-independent Hamiltonian

h (t) = eiHt/ (0).

= H, t

(1)

(2)

The time evolution of the expectation value of an operator can be determined from the above:

h h O (t) = (t)|O|(t) = (0)|eiHt/ OeiHt/ |(0) ,

(3)

so it is also valid to use the Heisenberg picture where states are constant but operators evolve as h h O(t) eiHt/ O(0)eiHt/ . The fundamental object of quantum statistical mechanics is the density matrix . Recall that classical stat. mech. averages can be written O = The quantum-mechanical version of this is T r eH O = O = T r O = T r eH

H i Oi e . H ie

(4)

eE |O

eE

(5)

where the trace is taken over a full set of states (assumed to be energy eigenstates in the second equality) and the density matrix at equilibrium is eH . T r eH (6)

This density matrix is normalized to 1 and satises the other properties of a density matrix mentioned in quantum mechanics textbooks (some of these properties are reviewed in a moment). Below we will consider other density matrices representing changes in the above equilibrium distribution. The quantum denition reduces to the classical one in the event that all observables commute, as it should. We will see below that uctuation-dissipation ideas are if anything even simpler in the quantum case. Now we give a brief review of density matrices, as we will have to consider perturbations to the equilibrium density matrix dened above. Consider a quantum-mechanical system of states |n . The expectation value of an operator A in the pure state |i is just i|A|i . Suppose that there is a 1

large ensemble of systems, each of which is in one pure state. If the probability of a system being in state i is Wi , then we have the overall normalization Wi = 1

i

(7)

i

Wi i|A|i .

(8)

Now the above formula makes no assumption about the orthogonality of the states |i . The density operator is explicitly written as

N

=

=1

| W |,

(9)

where | are some normalized states (not necessarily orthogonal or complete). This is now shown to reproduce the sort of statistical average discussed above. Lets take an operator A and ask about its statistical expectation. In a particular orthonormal basis, the matrix representation of is

N

n,n = n||n =

=1

n| |n Wi .

(10)

Now T r A =

n,n

n,n An ,n =

n,n ,

n| |n W n |A|n .

(11)

We can simplify this greatly using the completeness relation for the basis |n : completeness requires |n n| = 1.

n

(12)

Then in the above sum, both the sums over n and n just give unity, leaving T r A =

W |A| .

(13)

Some simple properties of the density matrix that follow from the above denition are Tr = 1 (14)

and all diagonal elements are nonnegative, since the diagonal elements are just the probabilities of being in dierent pure states. Can you show that for a pure state, 2 = ? Finally, the evolution of the density matrix under the Hamiltonian H is h d = i[H, ] = i(H H). dt (15)

N

=

=1

| W |. 2

(16)

Then, in the Schrodinger picture where time dependence is carried by the states, the time derivative is d dt

N

=

=1

d| d | W | + | W dt dt | W | +

i i

iH h

| W |

iH . h

(17)

Then we obtain the above equation. Henceforth in this lecture we set h = 1. A standard method of quantum mechanics is to divide a Hamiltonian into two parts, a starting part H0 and a small perturbation H1 . A small perturbation H1 added to the equilibrium distribution at some time is expected to introduce a small change in the values of statistical averages at all later times, which we now attempt to calculate. Write H = H0 + O1 (t), (18) so H1 (t) = O1 (t). The evolution of the density matrix in the Hamiltonian H (see above) is h d = i[H, ] = i(H H). dt (19)

h h For a time-independent Hamiltonian, this is satised by (t) = eiHt/ (0)eiHt/ . You can show that the equilibrium density matrix is constant in time by noting that both it and H are diagonal in a basis of energy eigenstates.

We want to consider the case of a system whose density matrix begins in the equilibrium distribution eq of H0 at time t0 . This density matrix evolves with time once the perturbation is turned on. Dene the so-called Liouville operators L0 and L1 through iL0 = i[H0 , ]/ , h Then iL1 = i[O1 , ]/ . h (20)

d(t) = iL0 + iL1 (t). (21) dt We want to turn the dierential equation for the evolution of into an integral equation. Consider

t

t0

(22)

Taking the derivative of this equation should turn out to give the time evolution equation (21). The rst term gives iL0 exp(i(t t0 )L0 )(t0 ). The second term gives two parts: iL1 (t)(t), from the upper limit of integration, and

t

t0

(23)

This second part, combined with the rst term, is just iL0 (t). Hence the time evolution equation is indeed satised. Note that this integral equation is very similar to that for u(t) in the classical case (??) above. 3

The point of this rewriting is that the integral equation can be linearized for small ; the approximation involved is that (t ) in the integrand is now replaced by eq . Doing so and taking t0 = gives i t h h dt ei(tt )H0 / [H1 (t ), eq ]ei(tt )H0 / . (24) (t) = eq h This equation gives the change induced in the density matrix by the perturbation H1 . Finally, let us ask how the value of an observable O2 at time t is modied. The change in the 2 is value of O O2 = T r (t)O2 T r eq O2 t i h h = dt T r ei(tt )H0 / [H1 (t ), eq ]ei(tt )H0 / O2 . h

(25)

Now we will complete the derivation of the quantum version of linear response. Return to the above integral equation for the density matrix time evolution,

t

t0

(26)

In the limit of small , the (t ) can be replaced by eq inside the integral, as L1 is already of order so anything resulting from the dierence in this replacement will be of order 2 . Remember that the action of L1 was dened to be iL1 = i [O1 , ], h (27)

so that iL0 + iL1 gives the full time evolution under H. Finally note that the density matrix eq is invariant under H0 , and take t0 . With these substitutions, the above integral equation becomes t i dt exp(i(t t )L0 )( (t) = eq + [O1 , eq ]). (28) h Finally, substituting in the action of L0 , using its time-independence, and setting = 1 gives h

t

(t) = eq +

(29)

Our goal is to understand how the value of an observable O2 at time t is modied. The change in the value of O2 is O2 = T r (t)O2 T r eq O2

t

= i

t

= i

Here we have used the cyclic property of the trace in the last line, and O2 (t t ) indicates the 2 , Heisenberg-evolved O O2 (t t ) ei(tt )H0 O2 ei(tt )H0 . (31) 4

One last simplication that can be made by cycling factors in the trace gives O2 = i

t

dt T r eq [O2 (t t ), O1 (t )] .

(32)

Since the trace of a quantity with respect to the equilibrium density matrix is just the statistical expectation, this can be written as O2 = i

t

dt [O2 (t t ), O1 (t )] .

(33)

This is the fundamental quantum statement of linear response. It can be used to derive quantum equivalents of the conductivity formula given previously. Occasionally it is written in the simplied notation t O2 = dt O2 (t t ), O1 (t ) , (34) h where (A, B) i[A, B], so that (A, B) is Hermitian if both A and B are Hermitian, and we have restored the factor of h. Note that all the quantum systems we study have a Hamiltonian and hence a uniquely specied dynamics. In some classical systems such as the Ising model, one has an energy functional but no associated Hamiltonian, so one is free to choose the dynamics using physical principles such as detailed balance. In the Langevin equation for Brownian motion, we similarly used the physical requirement of thermal equilibrium to constrain a model for the dynamics. Parenthetical note I: Classically we considered Brownian particles with charge e and have density n: then the Langevin equation predicts that the average current in an electric eld E is j(t) = ne u(t) = Re((0 )K0 ne2 ei0 t ), where the complex mobility is () =

0

(35)

eit u(0)u(t) .

(36)

The quantum-mechanical version of this is known as the Kubo formula (this term is also sometimes used for the general linear-response formula derived above): the conductivity is given by the correlation function of the current at time 0 with the current at time t. Parenthetical note II: You might ask, given the density matrix, how to express the entropy of a quantum system. The logical denition is the von Neumann entropy, dened as S() = T r log2 . (37)

For a diagonal density matrix with equal probabilities (this is a mixed state) this reduces to the classical entropy up to a constant. Any pure quantum mechanical state has entropy 0, since a pure state can be converted by a change of basis to a matrix with diagonal elements 1, 0, . . . , 0. This is connected to some recent developments in the theory of entanglement of quantum systems. Suppose that a quantum system is divided into two subsystems A and B, and that the whole system is in a pure state = | |. (38) 5

We can dene the reduced density matrix for subsystem A by a partial trace over subsystem B: 1 |A |2 =

j

( 1 | j |)| |(|2 |j ).

(39)

Note that this can be a mixed density matrix even if we started from a pure state for the whole system. As an example, consider the state (| | )/ 2 for a state of two spin-half. You can conrm by a simple calculation that this gives 0 for a product state | = | 1 | 2 , and 1 for a fully entangled state of two qubits (e.g., a singlet (| | )/ 2.

- Final AdviceUploaded byJonathan Li
- Entanglement I 13Uploaded byAmanGupta
- Mahbub Sir PaperUploaded bySowmitraDas
- TeleportationUploaded byshijinbgopal
- quantum teleportation word docs(seminar report) by prashant kumar shantipuri motihari./ KSIT bangalore/7829674013Uploaded byprashant_2884
- hw5Uploaded byGabe
- Slides Talk at UnBUploaded byJanusDC
- 6096-Smirne-dottorato.pdfUploaded byAnonymous Nzf9XA
- Twin photons and quantum teleportation.txtUploaded byquantumrealm
- Sanjeet PresentationUploaded bysanjeet2287
- 144kmFreeSpace Distribution of EntanglementUploaded byprueva
- Many Worlds InterpretationUploaded byahsbon
- Neuroquant Vol8 Issue2 Consciousness an Everett Many Min InterpretationUploaded bygerdwh
- Pragmatic Information in Quantum Mechanics - Roederer*Uploaded bygiorgiotedde
- (Lecture Notes in Physics 931) Mukund Rangamani, Tadashi Takayanagi (Auth.)-Holographic Entanglement Entropy-Springer International Publishing (2017)Uploaded byVigneshwaran Kannan
- Hari Sharma ChapterUploaded bydynamic2004
- quantum (2).pptUploaded bymedellincolombia
- Time-FractalUploaded byapi-3777036
- Quantum CommunicationUploaded byGourav Gupta
- Quantum MagnetoHidrodynamicsUploaded byDeath Anonimatum
- Gravity as Entanglement, and Entanglement as Gravity (Introduction)Uploaded byVasil Penchev
- For Upload.txtUploaded byAdam Green
- On Born Jordan 1925Uploaded byDavid Romero Vidal
- H. Godfrin et al- Direct Observation of Ripplons in ^4-He Films by Neutron ScatteringUploaded byLomewcx
- Superposition Quantum PhyUploaded byBharat AV Sreyus
- CSIRUploaded byAloke Rajkishore
- quantumUploaded bycdcrossroader
- Board 01Uploaded byrahul
- David Hochberg- Quantum Mechanical Lorentzian Wormholes in Cosmological BackgroundsUploaded byDex30KM
- Basic PostulatesUploaded byIyn Ciie Chicy Kadetechy

- Adventures of Huckleberry FinnUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 5 Momentum HopsUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 1 OverviewUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 0 OutlineUploaded byOmegaUser
- tensor analysisUploaded byபுகழேந்தி தனஞ்செயன்
- Part 4 Diffusion and HopsUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 4 Diffusion and HopsUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 4 Diffusion and HopsUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 2 Basics of Statistical Physics1Uploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 2 Basics of Statistical Physics1Uploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 3 Lattice Quantum Ising RGUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 7 Mean Field TheoryUploaded byOmegaUser
- 1962_physics of PlanetsUploaded byOmegaUser
- Comets and MeteorsUploaded byOmegaUser
- Math 404 Lecture NotesUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 6 Boson-FermionUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 6 Boson-FermionUploaded byOmegaUser
- Statistical mechanics lecture notes (2006), L13Uploaded byOmegaUser
- Chapter 2 chemUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 5 Momentum HopsUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 5 Momentum HopsUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 0 OutlineUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 0 OutlineUploaded byOmegaUser
- Chapter 1 chemUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 8 Beyond Mean FieldUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 3 Lattice Quantum Ising RGUploaded byOmegaUser
- Part 3 Lattice Quantum Ising RGUploaded byOmegaUser
- Statistical mechanics lecture notes (2006), L28Uploaded byOmegaUser
- Statistical mechanics lecture notes (2006), L19Uploaded byOmegaUser
- chemistry lecture 1Uploaded byOmegaUser

- Errors 11Uploaded byTushar Raj
- Numerical Weather Prediction (Nwp)Uploaded byHildaAyuPratikasiwi
- Philosophy of Statistics SyllabusUploaded byMatt Delhey
- QbismUploaded byMajordomus
- 094 Quantum Field TheoryUploaded byMarsCS
- LLJ110705Uploaded byFatima Beena
- Sbst3103 651001085712001 Introductory Data AnalysisUploaded byIr Hj Wan Amil
- Hector Calderon and William A. Hiscock- Quantum fields and “Big Rip” expansion singularitiesUploaded byDex30KM
- cálculo matemático sencillo del entrelazamientoUploaded bygasafsdaghsdhg
- ΣΤΑΤΙΣΤΙΚΗ ΛΥΜΕΝΕΣ ΑΣΚΗΣΕΙΣUploaded byGwgw Veliou
- Boyle's lawUploaded byEn Csak
- Fit StatisticsUploaded byalimnasim
- Classical Yang Mills (1)Uploaded byRichard Martin Martirosian
- H.E. Puthoff- Casimir Vacuum Energy and the Semiclassical ElectronUploaded byRtpom
- Entanglement in a Multiverse With No Common Space-timeUploaded byLime Cat
- Theoretical FrameworkUploaded byPatziedawn Gonzalvo
- Discrete Event SimulationUploaded byNebojšaLazarević
- Relativistic Quantum Fields 2Uploaded bypticicaaa
- Interstellar 03Uploaded byAnuprava Bokshi
- Chowdhury an Introduction to Information Loss Paradox, Fuzzballs and FirewallsUploaded byValael1
- Akaike Information CriterionUploaded byDivyashri Jain
- CHAPTER 1_26112014Uploaded byNoorhazlinda
- Cobweb Model (1)Uploaded byMaimoona Ghani
- RJournal_2011-2_Arnold+Emerson (1).pdfUploaded bytiik27
- Hawking Cracks Black Hole ParadoxUploaded byBrian Watanabe Perdigao
- Akaike AIC Criterion.Uploaded byAlberto No Mercy
- Intro_M&MUploaded byAnthony Federico
- SyllabusUploaded byDibyojyoti Bhadury
- Hypothesis Testing of Population MeanUploaded byRamesh Goud
- Categorizing HypothesesUploaded byNanay Gi