See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/227748456

Measure synchronization in a coupled Hamiltonian system associated with

Nonlinear Schrodinger Equation

Article in Modern Physics Letters A · June 2005

DOI: 10.1142/S0217984905008748

CITATIONS READS

12 98

3 authors:

Uchechukwu Vincent A. N. Njah

Redeemer's University University of Lagos
104 PUBLICATIONS 2,002 CITATIONS 74 PUBLICATIONS 1,283 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

O. Akinlade
University of Agriculture, Abeokuta
66 PUBLICATIONS 862 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Stochastic nonlinear dynamics View project

Vibrational Resonance in plasma oscillators View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Uchechukwu Vincent on 20 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

August 11, 2005 13:33 WSPC/147-MPLB 00874

Modern Physics Letters B, Vol. 19, No. 15 (2005) 737–742

c World Scientific Publishing Company

MEASURE SYNCHRONIZATION IN A COUPLED

HAMILTONIAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATED WITH
NONLINEAR SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION

U. E. VINCENT∗,†,‡ , A. N. NJAH∗ and O. AKINLADE∗

∗ Department
of Physics, University of Agriculture,
P.M.B. 2240, Abeokuta, Nigeria
† Department of Physics and Solar Energy, Bowen University, Iwo, Nigeria
‡ rebuche p@yahoo.com

Received 15 January 2005

We present preliminary numerical findings concerning measure synchronization in a pair

of coupled Nonlinear Hamiltonian Systems (NLHS) derived from a Nonlinear Schrödinger
Equation (NLSE). The dynamics of the two coupled NLHS were found to exhibit a tran-
sition to coherent invariant measure; their orbits sharing the same phase space as the cou-
pling strength is increased. Transitions from quasiperiodicity (QP) measure desynchro-
nization to QP measure synchronization and QP measure desynchronization to chaotic
(CH) measure synchronization were observed.

Keywords: Measure synchronization; Schrödinger equation; Hamiltonian systems.

PACS Number(s): 05.45.Pq, 05.45.Xt, 05.45.-a

1. Introduction
Synchronization is a basic phenomena in physics discovered at the beginning of
the modern age of science by Huygens.1 Classically, synchronization implies the
frequency and phase locking of periodic oscillators due to weak interaction — this
formed the main focus of early studies. In the recent years, due to considerable
enlargement in the field, chaos synchronization has attracted much attention and
has been extensively studied.1 – 17 One of the major important motivations is to un-
derstand the coherent dynamical behavior of coupled systems. In this light, various
types of synchronization has been identified. These include complete synchroniza-
tion (CS),2,3 phase synchronization (PS),4,5 lag synchronization (LS),6,7 generalized
synchronization (GS)8,9 and anticipated synchronization (AS).10,11
Most work on synchronization to date have focused mainly on dissipative sys-
tems (DS), the reason is that synchronization between two trajectories is normally
related to the contraction of phase space volume. Recently, it has been reported that

‡ Corresponding author.

737
August 11, 2005 13:33 WSPC/147-MPLB 00874

738 U. E. Vincent, A. N. Njah & O. Akinlade

coupled Hamiltonian systems can exhibit a kind of weak synchronization and this
has attracted the attention of some researchers.15– 17 Hamiltonian systems (HS)
behave quite differently from dissipative systems (DS). Unlike DS, HS conserve
phase volumes12 and do not (in the original sense) allow synchronization, i.e. ex-
hibit a situation in which two nonidentical trajectories approach an identical one
asymptotically.
Hamiltonian systems are very significant because they serve as typical models
in classical and quantum mechanics; and numerous practical systems can be well
approximated by Hamiltonian formalism even with weak dissipation.13,14 For this
reason, exploring the synchronization phenomenon in HS is a very crucial step to-
wards understanding the significance of the concept, mode and possible application
of synchronization in quantum systems.
In Ref. 15, Hampton and Zanette observed certain collective behavior between
two mutually coupled identical HS. The coupled systems were found to exhibit a
transition in phase space from a “nonsynchronous” state to a “synchronous” state,
the synchronous state being referred to as measure synchronization (MS). The main
characteristic of MS is that two orbits share the same phase space with the same
identical invariant measure, though the two systems are not strictly synchronized.
In a recent paper, Xingang et al.16 reported the existence of partial measure syn-
chronization in a system of coupled φ4 Hamiltonian systems. In a more recent
study, Xingang and Zhang17 considered the transition phenomenon to MS both in
the quasiperiodic and chaotic cases.
The study and analysis of collective behavior in Hamiltonian systems has re-
ceived relatively less attention. In this present letter, we report the existence of
measure synchronization in a classical Nonlinear Schrödinger Hamiltonian systems.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. 2, we describe our Nonlinear Schrödinger
(NLS) model. In Sec. 3, measure synchronization in NLS Hamiltonian is discussed.
Conclusions and extension of the present study are finally given in Sec. 4.

2. The Model
The Nonlinear Schrödinger Equation (NLSE) in its various versions is one of the
most important models of mathematical physics, with applications to different
fields such as plasma physics,18 nonlinear optics, water waves and biomolecular
dynamics,19 to cite only a few cases. In this work we study Hamiltonian systems
governed by the NLSE given by


∂ψ
2 2 2
i
= − ∇ + |ψ| ψ (1)
∂t 2M

where ψ is the eigenstate of a particle of mass, M, and
= 1. Recently, Njah

and Akin-Ojo20 obtained a nonlinear hamiltonian for the NLSE (Eq. (1)) with two
degrees of freedom using a Fourier analysis in a bounded interval. Our hamiltonian
model is a modified version of the nonlinear hamiltonian defined in Ref. 20, i.e. two
August 11, 2005 13:33 WSPC/147-MPLB 00874

Measure Synchronization in a Coupled Hamiltonian System 739

linearly coupled identical systems with the hamiltonian

1 1
H= [s1 (p21 + q12 ) + s2 (p22 + q22 )] − [p21 + q12 + p22 + q22 + 2(p1 p2 + q1 q2 )]2
4M 2
+ K(q1 − q2 )2 , (2)
where pi and qi (i = 1, 2) represent positions and momenta for any particle, i, of
mass, M. K is the coupling strength. Numerically, we simulate the corresponding
canonical equations:
si
ṗ1 = − q1 + 2[p21 + q12 + p22 + q22 + 2(p1 p2 + q1 q2 )](q1 + q2 ) + 2K(q2 − q1 )
2M
s2
ṗ2 = − q2 + 2[p21 + q12 + p22 + q22 + 2(p1 p2 + q1 q2 )](q1 + q2 ) + 2K(q1 − q2 )
2M
s1
q̇1 = p1 + 2[p21 + q12 + p22 + q22 + 2(p1 p2 + q1 q2 )](p1 + p2 ) (3)
2M
s2
q̇2 = p2 + 2[p21 + q12 + p22 + q22 + 2(p1 p2 + q1 q2 )](p1 + p2 ) .
2M
si
The 2M in the first term on the right stands for the total energy, E of the system.
In our computation, both K and E were used as control parameters to achieve
measure synchronization. The initial conditions for pi and qi were fixed. Our choice
of control parameters is evident from a simple analysis in Ref. 20 for which variety
of periodic and chaotic solutions were observed as the energy, E was varied. We
note that in Ref. 7 the initial conditions and the coupling constant were used as
control parameters following the work of Hampton and Zanette,15 while the energy
was fixed.

3. Measure Synchronization
We have studied Measure Synchronization (MS) in the coupled Nonlinear Hamil-
tonian System (NLHS) given by Eq. (2) using the total energy, E of the system
as well as the coupling strength, K as the control parameters from (K, E) = (0, 0)
up to (K, E) = (1, 10). With these parameter variations varieties of dynamical be-
haviors (transition) were found, including MS. As stated in the introduction, our
main objective is in the existence of MS. Thus for brevity we report only on this
phenomenon both for the quasiperiodic and the chaotic cases.
We begin by considering a case where the coupled NLHS is in the zone of regular
nonchaotic evolution. In this direction, we study the low energy region, which quar-
antees regular solutions. Thus, we present in Fig. 1 the result for energy, E = 1.5,
and initial conditions (q1 (0), q2 (0)) = (0, 0) and (p1 (0), p2 (0)) = (0.04, 0.06). In
the absence of coupling, K = 0, these conditions correspond to two different pe-
riodic orbits (PO), which cover closed curves in the (qi , pi ) phase plane as shown
in Fig. 1(a). When a small nonzero coupling is switched on (K = 0.0025), the two
periodic orbits are replaced by two smooth quasiperiodic (QP) orbits as shown in
August 11, 2005 13:33 WSPC/147-MPLB 00874

740 U. E. Vincent, A. N. Njah & O. Akinlade

g ( )
0.08
0.08

0.06
0.06

0.04
0.04

0.02 0.02
p1,2

p1,2
0 0

-0.02 -0.02

-0.04 -0.04

-0.06 -0.06

-0.08 -0.08
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
q1,2 q1,2

(a) (b)

0.08
0.08

0.06
0.06

0.04
0.04

0.02
0.02
p1

p2
0
0

-0.02
-0.02

-0.04
-0.04

-0.06
-0.06

-0.08
-0.08
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
q1 q2

(c) (d)
Fig. 1. (a) The periodic orbits of the two oscillators defined by Eq. (3) in the (q, p) plane.
E = 0; K = 0. No measure synchronization exsit between the two oscillators. (b) As in (a), but
for a small nonzero coupling, K = 0.0025. The motion becomes quasiperiodic. No MS exists
between them. (c) and (d) same as (b) with coupling increased to k = 0.01 beyond a critical value
(Kc = 0.008). The two trajectories share the same phase space and MS is reached.

Fig. 1(b). These orbits wander in two distinct tori as a result of the increase in
the effective dimension of the whole Hamiltonian system.7 By further increasing K
(Figs. 1(c) and 1(d)), the two distinct tori of Fig. 1(b) widens in such a way that
the external border of the inner tori approaches the internal border of the outer
tori and vice versa. Hence, the two regions merge into a single and enlarged identi-
cal tori, sharing the same phase domain with their quasiperiodic orbits, signalling
the phenomenon of measure synchronization. MS in the QP zone is maintained for
higher value of K and was also observed within range E = (0.1, 3).
Using the same initial conditions for qi and pi , we plot the trajectories for
E = 5.4. In this case the result are quite different from those of Fig. 1 and there
were no periodic orbits for all values of K studied. For K = 0, the orbits are
quasiperiodic with the outer part of the oscillator 1 tending to approach the inner
part of oscillator 2 (Fig. 2(a)). This behavior is maintained up to K < 0.0025 after
which the boundaries of the two orbits collides at K ≈ 0.00447; and the orbits
begins to merge as shown in Fig. 2(b) for K = 0.005. With further increase in the
coupling strength, the coupled system undergoes several transformations in phase
August 11, 2005 13:33 WSPC/147-MPLB 00874

Measure Synchronization in a Coupled Hamiltonian System 741

g
0.08 0.06

0.06
0.04

0.04

0.02
0.02
p1,2

p1,2
0 0

-0.02
-0.02

-0.04

-0.04
-0.06

-0.08 -0.06
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
q1,2 q1,2

(a) (b)

0.08
0.08

0.06
0.06

0.04
0.04

0.02
0.02

p2
p1

0
0

-0.02
-0.02

-0.04
-0.04

-0.06
-0.06

-0.08
-0.08 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
q1 q2

(c) (d)

0.08 0.08

0.06 0.06

0.04 0.04

0.02 0.02
p2
p1

0 0

-0.02 -0.02

-0.04 -0.04

-0.06 -0.06

-0.08 -0.08
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

q1 q2

(e) (f)
Fig. 2. (a) The same as in Fig. 1(a), but with E = 5.4. The motion is quasiperiodic. (b) Same
as in Fig. 1(b) but for E = 5.4 and K = 0.005. oscillator 1 orbit begins to merge with oscillator
2 orbit. No MS is achieved. (c) and (d) same as in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d) but for E = 5.4 and
K = 0.076. Measure synchronization is achieved. The motion is chaotic in both orbits. (e) and (f)
same as in Figs. 2(c) and 2(d) but for K = 1.0. The region of chaos is increased as K increases
further beyond the critical value Kc = 0.07.

space and for a critical value of K about Kc = 0.07, a change from QP orbits to
chaotic (CH) orbits is observed with the two orbits sharing an identical invariant
measure (Figs. 2(c) and 2(d) for K = 0.076). Just above Kc , the chaotic regions in
the phase space increases with much stronger synchronism as shown in Figs. 2(e)
and 2(f).
 August 11, 2005 13:33 WSPC/147-MPLB 00874

742 U. E. Vincent, A. N. Njah & O. Akinlade

4. Conclusion
In summary, we have shown the existence of measure synchronization in a Hamilto-
nian system which is related to the Nonlinear Schrödinger Equation. Our numerical
findings reveals that transition from quasiperiodicity (QP) measure desynchroniza-
tion to QP measure synchronization and QP measure desynchronization to chaotic
(CH) measure synchronization are the generic features characterizing the relation
among coupled NLHS subsystems. The characterization of measure synchronization
in this coupled NLHS with higher degree of freedom and the study of the transition
mechanisn to MS is the subject of our future work which is in progress.

References
1. C. Huygens, Horoloquim Oscillatorium (Paris, France, 1673).
2. L. M. Pecora and T. L. Carroll, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64 (1990) 821.
3. L. M. Pecora and T. L. Carroll, Chaos 7 (1997) 520.
4. M. G. Rosenblum, A. S. Pikovsky and J. Kurths, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76 (1996) 1804.
5. A. S. Pikosky et al., Physica D104 (1997) 219.
6. M. G. Rosenblum, A. S. Pikovsky and J. Kurths, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 4193.
7. S. Boccaletti and D. L. Valladares, Phys. Rev. E62 (2000) 7497.
8. N. F. Rulkov, M. M. Sushchik, L. S. Tsimring and H. D. I. Abarbanel, Phys. Rev.
E51 (1995) 980.
9. L. Kocarev and U. Parlitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76 (1996) 1816.
10. H. U. Voss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 014102.
11. C. Masoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 2782.
12. E. Ott, Chaos in Nonlinear Dynamical Systems (Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge, 2002).
13. V. V. Savkin, A. N. Rubtsov and T. Janssen, Phys. Rev. B65 (2002) 214103.
14. W. Xingang, Z. Ying and G. Hu, Phys. Lett. A298 (2002) 383.
15. A. Hampton and H. D. Zanette, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 2179.
16. W. Xingang, H. Li, K. Hu and G. Hu, Int. J. Bifurcation Chaos Appl. Sci. Eng. 12
(2002) 1143.
17. W. Xingang and Z. Meng, Phys. Rev. E67 (2003) 066215.
18. P. G. Drezin and R. S. Johnson, Solitons: An Introduction (Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 1992).
19. L. Vazquez, L. Streit and V. M. Perez-Garcia (eds.), Nonlinear Klein–Gordon and
Schrödinger Systems: Theory and Applications (World Scientific, Singapore, 1996).
20. A. N. Njah and R. Akin-Ojo, J. Nig. Ass. Math. Phys. 6 (2002) 19.

View publication stats