1 views

Uploaded by huevonomar05

R. RES- PR.S2RDRDL

- IJCSS-25
- IJ 175 Antiga IJ ObjectnessMeasure
- Emotion Classification Using Facial Expression
- A New Preference Voting Method for Sustainable Location Planning Using Geographic Information System and Data Envelopment Analysis
- Math 285 Formula Sheet
- Total Least Mean Squares Algorithm
- Chapter 2
- NUMERICAL RANGES OF UNBOUNDED OPERATORS
- Respuesta Dinamica de Puentes Atirantados
- Blind Multichannel System Identification
- Matrix Pd
- Final Exam
- GATE Maths Qs All Branch Mondal
- Linear Algebra Study Guide: MIT
- Buckling strength of hydraulic cylinders
- MATH 311 Syllabus
- protasi
- Huang 2009
- 01 Csikos Differential Geometry
- Vol2No2Page143to147

You are on page 1of 13

SPECTRUM

1. Introduction

arXiv:1705.03039v1 [math-ph] 8 May 2017

(1.1) H ` V

where is a kinetic term and V is an random potential. In the standard formulation, is the discrete

Laplacian and V is a diagonal matrix with i.i.d. random entries with bounded density . H acts on the

Hilbert space H 2 pq for Zd . For sufficiently small , H has only pure point spectrum with

exponentially localized eigenvectors. The eigenvalues are a random point process, so that eigenvalues

corresponding to eigenfunctions localized at sufficient distances are nearly independent.

Our interest is in dynamics of models in the Anderson localized phase possessing highly correlated

energies localized at large distances. Our objective here is to consider a simple example of the phe-

nomena. To this end, consider the graph 2 created from two copies of Zd and an edge connecting the

origins of both lattices. Sites on this lattice may be labeled px, iq for x P Zd and i 1, 2, a natural

lattice distance may be incorporated into 2 as

"

}x y}1 if i j

d2 ppx, iq, py, jqq .

}x}1 ` }y}1 if i g

A natural basis for 2 p2 q is |x, iy which takes a value of 1 at site px, iq and 0 at all other sites.

Let both copies of Zd be equipped with a copy of the Hamiltonian H with identical potentials V

and let g parametrize a hopping between the origins of the respective lattices. That is we define the

Hamiltonian,

(1.2) hg HZd HZd ` gp|0, 1yx0, 2| ` |0, 2yx0, 1|q

acting on 2 p2 q.

Whereas the rescaled eigenvalues of (1.1) obey Poisson statistics for small [8],[5], the rescaled

eigenvalues of (2.1) attain a clustering eigenvalue process of eigenvalue pairs. The pairs become

degenerate at g 0 but eigenvalues are almost surely simple at g 0. The lattice distance between

sites px, 1q and px, 2q is 2}x}1 , however, the eigenvalues localized in the region of these sites are highly

correlated.

At a first viewing, (1.2) may appear unrelated to the more prominent multiparticle Anderson model

[1]. However, we would like to draw attention to the similarities these models possess. Both models

should be expected to exhibit resonant tunneling behavior, the dynamics of which have not been

explored in the multiparticle Anderson model case.

2

In the multiparticle model N copies of (1.1) act on a Hilbert space bN i1 pq for N particles. The

term becomes a Laplacian on each copy of Zd and the operator V is the local potential acting

on each particle. An additional term U is added for interactions between particles. For 2 particles,

configurations of the positions of the model are given by px, yq for x, y P Zd . As discussed in [1],

the symmetrized metric is the proper for indistinguishable particles. However, if the particles are

distinguishable then it is meaningful to ask about the dynamical properties in the non-symmetrized

metric. If the particles are of different species, say having slightly different mass or charge then a

Date: November, 2016.

1

2 RAJINDER MAVI AND JEFFREY SCHENKER

transition of px, yq py, xq will be strongly resonant, and it is interesting to ask how long it takes

for the particles to exchange positions.

In a many body setting, similar propagations of excitations may well be infinite dimensional. In a

forthcoming paper [7], we consider the localized phase of a model of a tracer particle interacting with

a field of oscillators. A localized particle will affect the excitations at arbitrary distances, and the

nature of the statistics of the motion of the excitations is a nontrivial question.

2. Model

The double lattice model above (1.2) may be naturally recast as (1.1) describing state of a spin 1{2

particle perturbed by a transverse magnetic potential near the origin. Thus, we equivalently define

the Hilbert space as, H2 2 pxPZd C2 q the Hamiltonian becomes,

1 0 0 |yx|

(2.1) hg p ` V q `g

0 1 |yx| 0

where P 2 pZd q, so that }}2 1 with bounded support, and g is coupling to the external magnetic

potential. We will alter the above notation of the basis to |x, iy for i 1 and x P Zd . We will slightly

abuse notation and write |, iy for a state with entirely spin i electron for an 2 function .

It is well known that there exists a 0 0 so that || 0 implies H as defined in (1.1) obtains

pure point spectrum with simple eigenvalues and exponentially decaying eigenvectors. Moreover, H

obeys the fractional moment bound, see for example [2]. That is, there exists a C 8 so that, for

sC

any 0 s 1 and 0 so that 1s 1 and z P C`

s |xy|

` s C C

(2.2) 1

E xy|pH zq |xy

1s 1s

Fractional moment bounds for (2.1) may almost immediately be inferred from (2.2).

sC

Theorem 2.1. For any 0 s 1{4, there exists a C1 8 so that, for any 0 so that 1s

1

and z P C`

s 21 d2 ppx,iq,py,jqq

` s C

1

E xy, j|phg zq |x, iy C1

1s

One virtue of fractional moment bounds such as (2.2) is their use in obtaining statements of Anderson

Localization. In particular, the property of dynamical localization for (1.1) was first obtained by this

method. Dynamical localization for H states that, there exists C 8 and 0 so that

itH

(2.3) E sup |xy|e |xy| Ce|xy| .

t

Dynamical localization is a strong form of Anderson Localization, indeed it implies spectral localization

and bounds on eigenfunction correlators [2]. No such strong form of Anderson localization follows for

(2.1) in the metric d2 . However, we can extract a bound on rate of flipping spins for bounded times.

Let us define the support of as supp tx P Zd : pxq 0u.

Corollary 2.2. There exists C 8, 0 and 0 0 so that for any 0 0

`

E xy, i|eithg |x, iy tCeL

for L distpx, supp q ` distpy, supp q

Bounds of this form may be practically more useful for studying split level resonances in Anderson

localized systems as it would be easier to obtain in many cases. Indeed, such a bound can be obtained

for the model introduced in [7]. On the other hand, for (2.1) we can study the behavior of states

transfering between split energy levels much more precisely.

RESONANT TUNNELING IN A SYSTEM WITH CORRELATED PURE POINT SPECTRUM 3

Our main theorem is the the following. Let us define the localization center of a vector P H2 as a

point x P Zd so that |xex , 0|y| _ |x0, ex |y| is maximized. Let us define distance

d1 ppx, iq, py, jqq }x y}

Let Ppx project to states within distance |x|{2 of |x, `1y in the d1 distance, that is

(2.4) Ppx |u, jyxu, j|.

u,j:d1 ppu,jq,px,`1qq|x|{2

We will examine the dynamics of a nearly localized eigenvector with spin entirely `1.

Theorem 2.3. There is a sequence of vectors k P H with localization centers xk with the following

properties.

There is an 0 so that, for t e|xk | the packet is stable, almost entirely spin up

@ D

(2.5) k , `1|eithg |k , `1 1 e|xk |

There is a time t 8 so that the packet reflects almost perfectly to the spin down position

@ D

(2.6) k , 1|eithg |k , `1 1 e|xk | .

Finally, the support at all times is almost entirely contained in |xk |{2 pxk q

t0

REMARK 2.4. The purpose of (2.7) is to emphasize that the particle travels to the second layer

only by tunneling, as no significant portion of the wave packet is ever near the edge connecting the two

layers.

In fact, (2.7) can be improved to a dynamical localization statement. That is, a statement analogous

to (2.3) holds for hg , which can be seen from Lemma (3.2) which depends on SULE (3.1).

Let us describe the organization of the rest of the paper. In the following subsection 2.1 we demon-

strate that the model with spin hg may be reduced to rank one perturbations of the spinless model and

thus obtain the spectral decomposition of (2.1) through that of (1.1). In Section 3 we introduce SULE

localization and describe the effect of the SULE basis under a rank one perturbation. In Section 4.1

we recall the Minami estimate and in Section 4.2 we utilze the SULE basis and the Minami estimate

to match vectors after a rank one perturbation. Finally in Section 5 we study the dynamics of the

(2.1) through the inherited SULE basis and matched eigenvalues, this obtains the proof of Theorem

2.3. In Appendix A we conclude with the short proofs of Theorem 2.1 and Corollary 2.2.

defined by,

(2.8) Hg H ` gD

where g P R and D |yx|. We will relate the Anderson localized phase of hg to Hg .

Proposition 2.5. (1.) For any g 0 and 0 the phg q pHg q Y pHg q.

(2.) Given g 0 there is a 0 0 so that for 0 0 , hg has simple pure point spectrum with

exponentially localized eigenvectors in the d1 metric. Moreover, pp phg q pp pHg q Y pp pHg q, and the

eigenvectors of hg are of the form | , `1y | , 1y where is an eigenvector of Hg . Conversely,

if is an eigenvector of Hg then | , `1y | , 1y is an eigenvector of hg .

This result `essentially follows from the

fact that hg commutes with

` p`1q the rotation operator U on H2 ,

p`1q p1q p1q

defined by U | , `1y ` | , 1y | , 1y ` | , `1y .

4 RAJINDER MAVI AND JEFFREY SCHENKER

Proof. Recall that generalized eigenvectors with associated generalized eigenvalues in this context

are formal solutions, h for h hg or h Hg , not necessarily in 2 , which are polynomially

bounded. The usual arguments imply that the spectrum is exactly the closure of the set of generalized

eigenvalues. In fact, the growth of the generalized eigenfunctions may be bounded by a power d{2.

For details, see [3].

Suppose | p`1q , `1y ` | p1q , 1y is a generalized eigenvector, with generalized eigenvalue ie

hg . Then we have H piq ` gD piq piq , for i 1, from which we have

At least one of p p`1q p1q q are nonzero, thus, any generalized eigenvalue of hg is a generalized eigen-

value of Hg or Hg . Conversely, if is a generalized eigenvector of Hg with associated generalized

eigenvalue , then | , `1y | , 1y is a generalized eigenvalue of hg with generalized eigenvalue .

Thus, the set of generalized eigenvalues of hg is exactly given by the union of generalized eigenvalues

of Hg and Hg .

We first prove part (1.). The spectrum of Hg (and hg ) is the closure of its generalized eigenvalues,

as the generalized eigenvalues of hg is the union of generalized eigenvalues of Hg and Hg , the claim

follows.

Let us now prove part (2.). For given g and sufficiently small 0, Hg has almost surely simple

point spectrum and all generalized eigenvectors are exponentially decaying eigenvectors. Moreover,

with probability 1 pp pHg q X pp pHg q H [6], thus, in (2.9) at least one of p0q p1q is identically

0. The symmetry of eigenvectors of hg follows. The converse statement is immediate.

Let us consider stability of eigen-systems for Hg over g P R. For small enough , the Hamiltonian

Hg ` gD ` V is almost surely Anderson localized. For any eigenvector define the center of

localization to be a site x P Zd such that |xd`1 pxq| }X d`1 }8 . Where this definition is ambiguous,

select x which is left-most in terms of a lexicographic ordering of elements px1 , .., xd q. We will always

pgq pgq

suppose R is finite and 0 P . For g P , let I pgq index the eigenpairs pi , i q with normalized

pgq pgq pgq pgq pgq

eigenvectors }i }2 1, so that pH ` gDqi i i . Finally, let xi P Zd denote the center of

pgq

localization of i selected above.

3.1. SULE Localization. We recall the statement of SULE localization [2](Theorem 7.4). Let R

be a fixed finite set.

Theorem 3.1. Given , there is 0 0, so that for any 0 0 there exists a set 1

so that Pp1 q 1 and for every P 1 the Hamiltonian Hg has pure point spectrum, dense in

r0, 4ds ` supppq, such that all eigenvectors are exponentially decaying.

SULE (Semi Uniformly Localized Eigenfunctions) There exists a constant A A p, q and 0

so that for every g P and i P I pgq

pgq

pgq pgq

(3.1) |i pxq| A p1 ` |xi |qd`1 e|xxi | .

Let us define the local index set, for g P and Zd , the set is defined as

! )

pgq pgq

(3.2) I : i : xi P

! )

pgq pgq pgq

(3.3) : i : i P I .

RESONANT TUNNELING IN A SYSTEM WITH CORRELATED PURE POINT SPECTRUM 5

For Zd let us write P xP |xyxx| and for g P we write the local eigenbasis projection

pgq

pgq pgq

P |i yxi |.

pgq

iPI

pgq

In the next section we compare projections P to P .

3.2. Concentration of indices of SULE localization. We first show a limit on the fluctuation of

concentration of localization centers. Let us define the neighborhood of a set ,

p pq :

B tu P Zd : |u x| u

xP

p pq Zd zB

p pqd

Z z

pq

p may be empty.

Depending on the choice of and , the set

Let us define a parameter p 1 and a sufficiently large constant C depending on d, , p, and the

realization of the random field. For u P Zd let u logp pC ` |u|q, for Zd let supuP u , we

define the standard neighborhood and core as

(3.4) p p q ;

B : B p p q .

:

pgq

The following lemma relates the basis of I to the spatial basis p|xyqx .

Lemma 3.2. Let parameters p, be as above. Moreover, fix 1, then let C be sufficiently large

depending on p, , and . Let be any subset Zd and let .

We have,

pgq

(3.5) }p1 PBp pq qP }2 e .

which implies,

pgq

(3.6) trpP q trpPB q.

On the other hand,

pgq

(3.7) }p1 P qPp pq }2 e .

which implies,

pgq

(3.8) trpP q trpP q

Observe that (3.5) states P projects almost entirely to PB , similarly, (3.7) states P projects

pgq

almost entirely to P . This observation leads to the implied statements (3.6) and (3.8) whose proofs

are included. The necessity of the increasing widths of the buffers are due to the prefactors in (3.1).

As a first application of Lemma 3.2 we bound the number of localization centers contained in a box.

For any u P Zd any L 1 and the box L puq : tx P Zd ||x u| Lu, the nesting

pLlogp pC `|u|`Lqq puq B pL`logp pC `|u|`Lqq puq

implies a bound on the number of states in the box

pgq

(3.9) |pLlogp pC `|u|`Lqq puq| |IL puq | 1 |pL`logp pC `|u|`Lqq puq|.

Now we prove the lemma.

6 RAJINDER MAVI AND JEFFREY SCHENKER

Proof. The proof of the concentration inequalities (3.8) and (3.6) will follow immediately from esti-

mates (3.5) and (3.7). Indeed, all that is required is a general calculation for a seperable Hilbert space

r Let Pra and Prb be geometric projectors associated to different orthonormal eigenbases. That is, let

H.

tri u and tri u be o.n. bases of H.

r Let Pra N |rpaq yxrpaq | and Prb M |rpbq yxrpbq |

paq pbq

i1 i i j1 j j

trrp1 Prb qPra s trrp1 Prb qPra Pra s trrPra s}p1 Prb qPra }

Thus we have,

(3.10) trrPra s 1 }p1 Prb qPra } trrPrb Pra s trrPrb s

pgq

Now let us prove (3.5). Let i P I , a state with localization center x xi inside then, as

x ,

pgq pgq

pgq pgq

}p1 PB qP |i y}2 |i pyq|2 |i pyq|2

yRB y:|xy|

8

pgq pgq

}p1 PB qP |i y}2 Cd A2 p1 ` |x|q4 k d1 e2k e .

kx

The final inequality follows if x logp pC ` |x|q is taken large enough. We obtain (3.6) via (3.10).

Now let us prove (3.7) for x P

pgq

pgq

}p1 P qP |xy}2 |i pxq|2 .

pgq

iRI

Let us first expand the sum on the right hand side at each y R , by the eigenfunctions with localization

centers at xi y,

pgq pgq pgq

(3.11) |i pxq|2 |i pxq|2 |i pxq|2 .

pgq y:|yx| iPI pgq y:|yx| pgq

iRI tyu

iPItyu

From (3.6) the number of states with localization center at site y is bounded by 1 |By | 1 Cd logpd pC `

pgq

|y|q. Moreover, we use the SULE localization bound for i P Ityu , thus we have,

pgq

(3.12) |i pxq|2 1 Cd logpd pC ` |y|qA2 p1 ` |y|q2d`2 e2|xy| .

pgq y:|yx|

iRI

Clearly we have 1 Cd logpd pC ` |y|qA2 p1 ` |y|q2d`2 A2 p1 ` |y|q2d`3 for a large constant A . For

large enough C , which implies x is large, we have,

(3.13) Ap2 p1 ` |y|q2d`3 e|xy| 1.

y:|yx|

pgq

Which implies iRI

pgq |i pxq|2 e obtaining (3.7) using (3.10).

RESONANT TUNNELING IN A SYSTEM WITH CORRELATED PURE POINT SPECTRUM 7

4. Matching Eigenbases

We are able to match eigenbases under rank for indices in regions with SULE localization and well

separated eigenvalues. The first step is to probabilistically control the local separation of eigenvalues.

The second step is a relatively standard perturbation argument for a system assuming well separated

eigenvalues.

4.1. Minami Estimate. Let us recall the standard Minami estimate for the Anderson model H

` V on a box . For an operator A on H and a subset Zd let us define the restriction to

as A P AP . We are only interested in sets away from the support of so this is equivalent

to the local Minami estimates for H. That is, for L puq, so that X supp H, we have

pH ` gDq H . As we will consider only boxes with support away from the support of , we will

simply use H below without further comment. For P H let us define a restriction and normalization

to as,

}}

(4.1) P .

}P }

Finally let us define the minimal separation for values in a finite set. For a finite set T tt1 , .., tN u,

we define,

min rT s : mint|ti tj | : i ju.

Now let us introduce Minamis estimate [2] for the local minimum separation of eigenvalues.

Theorem 4.1. For any interval J R and subset Zd ,

` 2

P tr PpH`gDq pJq 2 p}}8 |J|||q2 .

2

As an immediate corollary we find a probabilistic bound on min rpH qs.

Corollary 4.2. For with compact support, there is some finite C so that for any 0,

P pmin rpH qs q Cp}}8 ||q2 .

Let puk q8 d 8

k1 be a sequence of sites uk P Z such that, there is a corresponding sequence pLk qk1 with

1

elements Lk 1 so that Lk 8 and, for all k, k , |uk uk1 | Lk ` Lk1 . For k P N let k Lk puk q

and let k L2d1

k .

Corollary 4.3. There are infinitely many k P N so that min rpHk qs k .

Proof. The events tmin rpHk qs k u are independent, and obey

P pmin rpHk qs k q 1 CL1

k ,

In particular, P pmin rpHk qsq 1 so that the sum of the probabilities over k is infinite. Thus, the

corollary follows from the second Borel-Cantelli theorem.

4.2. Matching Eigenbases. Let us now combine the above Minami estimate with a SULE localized

model. We will establish that the labelings are stable under the rank one perturbation.

Let C be a sufficiently large constant, and for x P Zd and Zd define x and as discussed in

Section 3.2. We will consider , so that, from the definitions in Section 3.2,

(4.2) p pq B

B p pq .

1 pgq pg 1 q

(indexed by j P I pg q ) if |i j | ,

pgq pg 1 q

(4.3) |xi , j y| 1 ,

8 RAJINDER MAVI AND JEFFREY SCHENKER

pgq pg 1 q

and |xi xj | r. For any p, rq-corresponding eigenvecors we will always choose the phase so that

pgq pg 1 q pg,g 1 q

|xi , j y 1| . Let I p, rq be the pairs of indices for p, rq-corresponding eigenpairs with

localization centers contained in .

Theorem 4.4. Suppose SULE holds for H ` gD for all g P . Given Zd , let and let us

p pq and

write B B p pq .

pgq pgq

1. For all g P and every i P I , there is an eigenvalue pi of HB so that |i pi | e{4 .

Moreover, assume that HB has simple spectrum satisfying min rpHB qs for some e{8 . Then

we have the following.

pg 1 q pg 2 q

2. For g 1 , g 2 P , suppose there are i P I and j P I associated to the same P pHB q, that

pg 1 q pg 2 q

is |i |, |j | e{4, then

pg 1 q pg 2 q

(4.4) |xi |j y| 1 e{16

pgq

3. For any g P , the associated eigenvalues of HB are distinct. That is, for i, j P I so that

i j, we have i j Moreover, there is a minimum separation for the local spectrum at :

pgq

min {2.

4. For any g 1 , g 2 P ,

pg 1 ,g 2 q

(4.5) |I pe{16 , q| 2|| |B|

that is there at least 2|| |B| pairs of pe{16 , q-corresponding eigenstates with centers in

.

It follows immediately from Corollary 4.3 and 4.4 that infinitely many eigenvectors will be matchable

between models. For u0 P Zd zt0u, let uk 4k`1 u0 for all k P N and Lk 4k1 |u0 |, finally let

k Lk puk q and k k .

Corollary 4.5. Suppose SULE holds for H ` gD for g g 1 , g 2 P . There is an 0 0 so that for

pg 1 q pg 2 q

any satisfying 0 0 , there are infinitely many k P N so that there exist ik P Ik and jk P Ik

pg 1 q

|xi |

which index pe k , k q-corresponding eigenpairs.

Proof. Let c 0 be sufficiently small and for all k let lk cLk let Bk B p plk q L `l puk q and

k k k

p plk q 2

k k Lk lk puk q. Let k Lk , then Corollary 4.3 states there are infinitely many k P N so

that min rpHBk qs k .

For each such k we apply Theorem 4.4 with k , B Bk and k . From Theorem 4.4 there

are 2|k | |Bk | 2 |k | many pelk {16 , k q corresponding pairs of eigenvectors. From each such k

pgq pg 1 q

let ik P Ik and jk P Ik index one pair of these vectors. Finally, for large enough k, |xik | lk {16

which obtains the result.

We now prove Theorem 4.4.

Proof. We begin by truncating the eigensystem on Zd to the subset B and comparing these to the

eigensystem of HB .

pgq pgq

For g P and i P I from (3.5) in Lemma 3.2 the normalization factors in (4.1) obey }i }

pgq

2}PB i }. Moreover, let us write the remainder term

}i }

pgq

pgq pgq pgq pgq

pHqB i pi qB pgq

|xy i pyq : Ri .

}PB i } xPBB yx:yRB

RESONANT TUNNELING IN A SYSTEM WITH CORRELATED PURE POINT SPECTRUM 9

2

pgq

pgq 2 }i } pgq

}Ri }2 pgq

}p1 PB qi }2 4e

}PB i }

On the other hand, observe that

pgq pgq pgq pgq

(4.6) |xpi q |pH i q2 |pi q y| }Ri }22

Thus, by the min-max theorem, there is an eigenvalue P pHB q, with an associated eigenvector

pgq

P CB , so that | i | 2e{2 e{4, which proves part 1.

Let us compare the truncated and normalized eigenvectors to the eigenvector of the truncated

pgq pgq

system. Continue to assume g P and i P I and that is the HB associated to i . Now let

0 0 1 2 N be the eigenvalues of pHB q2 , and let P j project to the eigenspace of

HB associated to j . Now, from the calculation in part 1, we have,

pgq pgq pgq

(4.7) xpi qB |pH q2 |pi qB y }pi qpi qB ` Ri }22 4e{2.

On the other hand we have,

8

2 pgq pgq

(4.8) xpi qB |pH q |pi qB y j xpi qB |P j |pi qB y 1 xpi qB |p1 P0 q|pi qB y.

j1

pgq pgq

But the i , and therefore the pi qB are normalized, thus we may combine (4.7) and (4.8) to obtain

4e{2 pgq

(4.9) x|pi qB y2 .

1

1

We will obtain both conclusions 2 and 3 of the lemma from equation (4.9). Let us now suppose that

pHB q is simple and min ppHB qq . Under this assumption 1 2 .

pgq

We now prove part 2. From part 1, we have that every eigenvalue of is within e{4 of pHB q.

pg 1 q pg 2 q

For an eigenpair p, q of H and g 1, g 2 P let us suppose there are two indices i P Iu,L and j P Iu,L

pgq pg 1 q

so that |i |, |j | e{4 . From, (4.9) we have for p, gq pi, g 1q, pj, g 2 q,

4 {2

1 2

e x|ppgq q y2 .

pgq pgq pgq

Therefore, as is normalized, we may write p q x|p q y|y ` | y where } }2 42 e{2

and x|y 0. It follows that

pg1 q pg 2 q pg 1 q pg 2 q 4 {2 4 {2

xpi q |pj q y x|pi q yx|pj q y |xi |j y| 1 2 e 2e .

The conclusion, (4.4) follows from the lower bound of .

Let us now show part 3, the separation in the local spectrum. From part 1, we have that every

pgq pgq

eigenvalue of is within e{4 of pHB q. Thus, using g g 1 g 2 suppose there is i, j P I , then,

pgq pgq pgq pgq pgq pgq pgq pgq

|xpi q |pj q y| 4|xP i |P j y| 4|xi ` pP 1qi |j ` p1 P qj y|

pgq pgq

if i j, then xi |j y 0 so that, using (3.7)

pgq pgq

|xpi q |pj q y| 16e .

pgq pgq pgq pgq

On the other hand, if i and j are both associated to eigenvalue P pHB q then i , j both

pgq pgq

obey (4.4) which is clearly a contradiction. Thus every eigenvalue of i P is associated to a

pgq

distinct eigenvalue pi of pHB q, so that |i pi | e {4 . The desired minimum separation follows

pgq pgq

from the minimum separation of pHB q, that is |i j | 2e{4.

10 RAJINDER MAVI AND JEFFREY SCHENKER

Finally, let us prove part 4, again we assume a minimal separation of of the spectrum of HB . From

pgq

part 3 every index of I is associated to a distinct eigenvalue of HB . Using the pigeon hole principle

pg 1 q pg 2 q

we see that there are |I | ` |I | |pHB q| pairs of indices associated to the same eigenvalue of HB .

pg 1 q pg 2 q

Of course |pHB q| |B|, on the other hand, from (3.8) we have, |I |`|I | 2| |. We claim that

pg 1 q pg 2 q

indices of I and I corresponding to the same eigenvalue of HB are p2e{4, q corresponding so

that (4.5) follows from (4.2).

pg 1 q pg 2 q

To obtain the claim, consider i P I and j P I both associated to the same eigenvalue P pHq.

Closeness of eigenvalues and eigenvectors follow from part 2 of the theorem: indeed, we obtain closeness

pg 1 q pg 2 q

of eigenvalues we have |i j | 2e{4 and condition (4.3) implies the largeness of the scalar

product. Finally, we show the closeness of the centers of localization by supposing the converse.

pg 1 q pg 2 q pg 1 q pg 2 q

Suppose, |xi xj | logp pC ` |xi | _ |xj |q it would then follow from (3.5) that,

pg 1 q pg 2 q

pg 1 q pg 2 q

(4.10) |xi |j y| e|xi xj |{8

.

pg 1 q pg 2 q pg 1 q pg 2 q

Indeed, writing y1 xi , y2 xj and r |xi xj | note that

2 2

pg 1 q pg 2 q 2 pg1 q pg 2 q pg1 q pg 2 q

}Py1 Py2 } Py1 1 PByr{4 Py2 ` Py1 1 PByr{4 Py2 .

1 2

1 2

}Pypg1 q Pypg2 q }2 2epr{4q

which obtains (4.10).

In this section we utilize the description of p, q-corresponding pairs of Hg and Hg to analyze the

evolution operator eithg on selected states initialized in the spin up state. That is, let us assume Hg

and Hg both obtain SULE localization.

Let us write the indices of the eigenbases of Hg as i P I pgq . The corresponding eigenvectors

pgq pgq

and eigenvalues are then i and i . By Proposition 2.5, the (normalized) eigenvectors of hg are

exactly the vectors

1 pgq E E

pgq

(5.1) i ? i , `1 i , 1

2

for i P I pgq .

pgq pgq

Proposition 5.1. Let P I index a given pe|x | , q-corresponding eigenpair. We have the

following for all t 0,

ith pgq 1 it

pgq

it

pgq pgq

(5.2) e g

|i` , `1y ? Je

` ` Ie

` e|x |{4

2

1 0

for J and I J 2 .

0 1

pgq

Proof. First let us consider the expression of |i` , 0y in the eigenbasis of hg . For j P I pgq we may

A E

pgq pgq

write aj j ` using expression (5.1) we have

1 E E

? ipgq

`

, `1 `

pgq

i` , 1 aj j .

2 j PI pgq

RESONANT TUNNELING IN A SYSTEM WITH CORRELATED PURE POINT SPECTRUM 11

pgq 1 1

|` , `1y ? ` ` ? aj j

2 j PI pgq

2

pgq

itphg q pgq 1 1 itppgq pgq q

(5.3) e ` |

i` , `1y ?

` ` ? e j

`

aj j

2 2 j PI pgq

Expanding p` we find

pgq

itphg q pgq 1 pgq

itpj

pgq

q

e ` |` , `1y ? J ` Ie ` aj j .

2 j PI pgq

2

1 pgq

itpj

pgq

q pgq

? J ` Ie ` a 4 |aj |2 8e|x |

2 j j

j PI pgq ztp u j PI pgq ztp u

and A E

pgq pgq pgq pgq

p` ` p p 4e{2

by the eigenfunction correspondence assumption.

pgq pgq

|x |

Proposition 5.2. Let P I index a given pe , q-corresponding eigenpair. For all 0 t

pgq

|x |{2

e `

pgq

pgq ithg pgq |x |{4

(5.4) xi` , `1|e |` , `1y 1 e ` .

pgq

On the other hand, for xp` is sufficiently far from the origin,

pgq

p ithg pgq |x |{4

(5.5) sup pI Pxp` qe |` , `1y e `

t0

pgq pgq

Finally, for t |pi pi |1

`

ith pgq it

pgq

pgq pgq

(5.6) e g | , `1y e p | , 1y e|x |{4

i ` i `

Theorem 2.3 now follows by combining Corollary 4.5 with Theorem 5.2. Indeed, Corollary 4.5

guarantees an infinite sequence of index pairs ik , jk which have the correspondence property fulfilling

pgq

the conditions of Theorem 5.2. Thus for each ik set ik then set k which obtains the desired

sequence of Theorem 2.3. The result follows as |u| |u| for u far enough from the origin.

pgq pgq pgq

|x |{2 it it q pgq

Proof. For t e ` , by the correspondence of eigenvalues we have |e e ` | 2t|

pgq

pgq |x |{2

` | 2e ` . Therefore,

2 0 pgq

it

pgq

it pgq

(5.7) Je ` ` Ie 4e|x` |{2

0 0

Combining this with, (5.2) we have

ithg pgq pgq pgq

|x |{4

e |i` , `1y |i` , `1y 2e ` .

Therefore,

pgq ithg pgq pgq

|x |{4

xi` , `1|e |` , `1y 1 e ` ,

12 RAJINDER MAVI AND JEFFREY SCHENKER

The localization statement follows from a combination of (3.5) and (5.2). From (3.5) we have for

pgq

all t 0, and for large enough |x` |

p pgq

|x` |{2

Pxpgq

` 2e

`

pgq pgq

Finally, set t |p p` |1 (5.6)

Here we will recall the results in fractional moment bounds for the standard Anderson model and

the related dynamical localization model. In [2](Theorem 6.3) fractional moments are bounded in

terms of self avoiding random walks. The following fractional moment bound holds.

Theorem A.1. There is a finite constant C C,d so that for any 0 s 1 and any z P CzR

s |xy|

1 s C C

Ep|xx|pH zq |yy| q

1s 1s

Transition probabilities may be bounded in terms of fractional moments. For I pHq Theorem

7.7 of [2] states,

Theorem A.2. There is C 8 depending on s so that,

itH

Ep|xx|e |yy|q C lim inf Ep|xx|pH pE ` iqq1 |yy|s qdE

0 I

From these statements we can easily demonstrate Theorem 2.1 and Corollary 2.2.

0 |yx|

Proof. Let us write D then the resolvent equation states, for z P CzR,

|yx| 0

(A.1) phg zq1 ph zq1 gph zq1 Dphg zq1 .

Thus, if i j, two applications of of the above equation implies,

xx, i|phg zq1 |y, iy xx|pH zq1 |yy ` g 2 xx|pH zq1 |yx, i|phg zq1 |, iyx|pH zq1 |yy.

Now we take the sth moment for 0 s 1{4. For the first term we may apply Theorem A.1 directly.

For the second, we apply Holder inequality to find,

E|xx, i|phg zq1 |y, iy|s E|xx|pH zq1 |yy|s `

g 2s pE|xx|pH zq1 |y|4s q1{4 pE|x, i|phg zq1 |, iy|2s y1{2 pE|x|pH zq1 |yy|4s yq1{4

Assume |x| |y|, then we may bound the second and third factors of the second term, by a constant,

using Theorem 1.1 of [4]. Thus we have, using Theorem A.1,

s |xy| s |xu|

1 s C C 2s C C

E|xx, i|phg zq |y, iy| `g C

1s 1s uPsupp

1s 1s

s |xy|^p|x|L q

p C

C ,

1s

where L maxt|u| : u P supp u. As |x y| 2|x|,

s L s |xy|{2

1 s p C

E|xx, i|phg zq |y, iy| C

C

1s 1s

concluding the result in this case.

RESONANT TUNNELING IN A SYSTEM WITH CORRELATED PURE POINT SPECTRUM 13

xx, i|phg zq1 |y, iy gxx, i|ph zq1 |, iyx, i|phg zq1 |y, iy

Again take the s-moment for 0 s 1{4, and apply Holders theorem,

` 1{2 ` 1{2

E|xx, 0|phg zq1 |0, yy|s g s E|xex , 0|ph zq1 |, 0y|2s E|x0, |phg zq1 |0, ey y|2s

Again, assume |x| |y| and bound the second term by a constant to obtain,

s |xu| s |x|L

1 s s C C C

E|xx, i|phg zq |y, iy| g C C1 ,

uPsupp

1s 1s 1s

which concludes the proof.

Proof. The perturbation theorem for semigroups obtains,

t

ithg ith

(A.2) e e ig eishg Deiptsqh ds.

0

Now let us take the expectation of the transition probability of A.2,

t

ithg

E|xy, 1|e |x, `1y| g E|xy, 1|eishg |, 1yx, `1|eiptsqh|x, `1y|ds

0

gt sup E|x|eisH |xy|ds.

s

The Corollary now follows from Theorem (A.1) and Theorem (A.2).

References

[1] Michael Aizenman and Simone Warzel. Localization bounds for multiparticle systems. Communications in Mathe-

matical Physics, 290(3):903934, 2009.

[2] Michael Aizenman and Simone Warzel. Random Operators: Disorder Effects on Quantum Spectra and Dynamics,

volume 168 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, 2015.

[3] H.L. Cycon, R.G. Froese, W. Kirsch, and B. Simon. Schr odinger Operators: With Application to Quantum Mechanics

and Global Geometry. Theoretical and Mathematical Physics. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.

[4] Alexander Elgart, Mira Shamis, and Sasha Sodin. Localisation for non-monotone schrodinger operators. Journal of

the European Mathematical Society, 16(5):909924, 2014.

[5] Francois Germinet and Frederic Klopp. Spectral statistics for random Schrodinger odinger operators in the localized

regime. arXiv preprint arXiv:1011.1832, 2010.

[6] Vojkan Jaksic and Yoram Last. Spectral structure of anderson type hamiltonians. Inventiones mathematicae,

141(3):561577, 2000.

[7] Rajinder Mavi and Jeffrey Schenker. Anderson localization in the holstein model. preprint, 2016.

[8] Nariyuki Minami. Local fluctuation of the spectrum of a multidimensional anderson tight binding model. Commu-

nications in mathematical physics, 177(3):709725, 1996.

- IJCSS-25Uploaded byGanesh Kumar Arumugam
- IJ 175 Antiga IJ ObjectnessMeasureUploaded bykkolli
- Emotion Classification Using Facial ExpressionUploaded byEditor IJACSA
- A New Preference Voting Method for Sustainable Location Planning Using Geographic Information System and Data Envelopment AnalysisUploaded byYans Pangerungan
- Math 285 Formula SheetUploaded byjosiahgerber
- Total Least Mean Squares AlgorithmUploaded byAnonymous KW6VIS
- Chapter 2Uploaded byapi-26021617
- NUMERICAL RANGES OF UNBOUNDED OPERATORSUploaded byAdedokun Abayomi
- Respuesta Dinamica de Puentes AtirantadosUploaded byVinayaga Murthy G
- Blind Multichannel System IdentificationUploaded bysprynavid
- Matrix PdUploaded byRizwan Ahmed Rana
- Final ExamUploaded bySara Gallego
- GATE Maths Qs All Branch MondalUploaded byNishankzatt
- Linear Algebra Study Guide: MITUploaded byFroForSale
- Buckling strength of hydraulic cylindersUploaded byiescobarz
- MATH 311 SyllabusUploaded byJoseph Kfoury
- protasiUploaded byAiolos Gr
- Huang 2009Uploaded byKelly De Leon Tuliao
- 01 Csikos Differential GeometryUploaded byAqua
- Vol2No2Page143to147Uploaded byMonica Chipana Marcas
- Linear Matrix Inequalities in System & Control TheoryUploaded byhighwatt
- An Introduction to Optimization 4th Edition Solution ManualUploaded byFaraz Hassan Khan
- discretizzazione matrice lineareUploaded byMarco Leonardi
- sgde 0ErrataUploaded byeduardox1
- Atmosphere 05 00101Uploaded bymuhammad syahdan
- Chapter6-1Uploaded bymasyuki1979
- jsv10-nnmUploaded byRafa Palacios
- Quantum mech HandoutUploaded byFredrick Mutunga
- Matrix (Mathematics) - Wikipedia, The Free EncyclopediaUploaded byjaygobee
- (Control engineering (Marcel Dekker Inc.) 8) Brown, Forbes T-Engineering system dynamics _ a unified graph-centered approach-Marcel Dekker (2001).pdfUploaded bywilcha

- 17129334Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 18.05515Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 1800__0006.pdfUploaded byhuevonomar05
- 1801101__24Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 171207__650Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- Cita ConchaUploaded byhuevonomar05
- TTR2LLUploaded byhuevonomar05
- TTTLQRTYGBHJUploaded byhuevonomar05
- 180096__87Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 1802018__48.pdfUploaded byhuevonomar05
- 18002__735Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 18003014.pdfUploaded byhuevonomar05
- -_-----180202705Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 1801100__43Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 171252__85Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 1713150Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- _171__203185Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 17120318___7Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 1703123.pdfUploaded byhuevonomar05
- 1703123.pdfUploaded byhuevonomar05
- 171.03189__Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 1712.03156Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 171203129Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 171205115 Av 56Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- 171205215.pdfUploaded byhuevonomar05
- 171205215.pdfUploaded byhuevonomar05
- 17103224Uploaded byhuevonomar05
- La estructura de un trabajo escrito.docxUploaded byVictor Mario Moreno Prieto
- Problemas TepeyacUploaded byhuevonomar05
- 171204__934Uploaded byhuevonomar05

- Mobile Photos in 2011 (Content, Sharing, And Online Behavior) - PhilippinesUploaded byverbosity
- Bay Area DACA Collaborative, Press Release, 2013.01.23Uploaded byEast Bay Community Law Center
- Centre of Excellence in Water and Sanitation Strategic Plan 2012-2016Uploaded byEddiemtonga
- Alibaba WSIS Presentation 22 May 08 v3Uploaded byNishant Sharma
- GTAE ME Forenoon 1st FebUploaded byhussainamir786
- What is GRCUploaded byjacobR9B
- Wilo Formula's BookletUploaded byMuhammad Fahrul Fauzi
- OTNUploaded byVikash Singh
- Mechanical SealsUploaded byVamsikrishna Lakamsani
- MAE4023 Chap1 OverviewUploaded byhisyamstark
- Programacion Natural Science 4 EnglishUploaded byNOE
- Beaumont Metric SidUploaded byAbdu Abdoulaye
- Coulter Smia6e Im 06Uploaded byposbox
- El Mejor Análisis 51-23 PSMS 500WUploaded byDiego Pollini
- Comsol Acdc Rf v43aUploaded byHaris Apriyanto
- CAT Combine machineUploaded bymhchitsazzadeh
- ABB 800xA - Minerals Library Overview 5p1s4aUploaded byman_y2k
- 01 - Understanding Supply ChainUploaded byImran Rafiq
- 05-14-12editionUploaded bySan Mateo Daily Journal
- IME-NLVUploaded byEi Leen
- Test Bank for Federal Tax Research 11th Edition Sawyers, Raabe, Whittenburg, GillUploaded bya801194669
- Nation at a Glance -- (04/05/18)Uploaded byBusinessWorld
- Dental Management of AsthmaUploaded byLorenzini Grant
- asam uratUploaded byindah
- Spiral of Inquiry Guide to the Six Phases 2014Uploaded byMarlon Cordeiro da Fonseca
- Marketing Elements Handouts 29July09Uploaded byAnne Bartlett-Bragg
- Geraline C. Lin and Richard A. Glennon- Hallucinogens: An UpdateUploaded byCortate15g
- Relay logic diagram sampleUploaded bynknfive
- Goetz_et_al_2011_Integrating physical and empirical landslide susceptibility models using GAM.pdfUploaded byParag Jyoti Dutta
- Aso Compact Outline 133544Uploaded byksrsarma