Skip to main content

Coherent Expectations

OK, so let's say you're assigned the problem of determining the mean value, (the expectation value), for n, (the number state), in a harmonic oscillator with a coherent state.  You go back to your favorite coherent state reference by Nieto and Carruthers[1] and get the probability for finding your coherent oscillator in the nth level almost immediately, (picture 1),


You're looking for the expectation value for n though, so you need to multiply the probabilty by n and sum the whole mess over all possible values of n, (zero to infinity).  Here's what you get, (excuse my sloppiness in picture 2).  Also, the favored notation for coherent states around here happens to be lambda instead of alpha.



So, that looks like a mess. How do you make it more tractable and get down to a single value?  Enter our genius quantum mechanics professor.  He points out that if you just factorize and relabel things a bit, you wind up with (picture 3)


Cool!

Don't forget the fluctuation question though.  In order to work that one through, you need the expectation value for n squared.  That blows everything!  The trick above works for n, but no so much for n squared.  Time to roll up your sleeves and trudge into sums math again, or maybe not.  Our professor also pointed out that (picture 4)


And that was kind of cool, it gets us back to a product of n.  We needed a product with n squared though.  At which point after a little I rolling, you get shown (picture 5)


Oh... Oh Crap!  There's the product of n squared you needed.  And so to wrap up the expectation value for n squared (picture 6)


Pretty cool!

There are bits of this that elude me for the moment.  It's one of those cool math tricks that I can see my way to once I know what I need, but fail to see how I might have arrived at it without prompting from an outside source.

Another interesting point, for me anyway.  It's very reminiscent of the Hermitian recursion relation involving differentiation and multiplication by x that you run into when calculating expectation values for position and momentum in a non-forced harmonics oscillator.

Does anyone know if there's there a reason for the correspondence?

References:
1.  Nieto and Carruthers on coherent states
http://dx.doi.org/10.1119%2F1.1971895
Carruthers P. (1965). Coherent States and the Forced Quantum Oscillator, American Journal of Physics, 33 (7) 537. DOI:

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Cowbell! Record Production using Google Forms and Charts

First, the what : This article shows how to embed a new Google Form into any web page. To demonstrate ths, a chart and form that allow blog readers to control the recording levels of each instrument in Blue Oyster Cult's "(Don't Fear) The Reaper" is used. HTML code from the Google version of the form included on this page is shown and the parts that need to be modified are highlighted. Next, the why : Google recently released an e-mail form feature that allows users of Google Documents to create an e-mail a form that automatically places each user's input into an associated spreadsheet. As it turns out, with a little bit of work, the forms that are created by Google Docs can be embedded into any web page. Now, The Goods: Click on the instrument you want turned up, click the submit button and then refresh the page. Through the magic of Google Forms as soon as you click on submit and refresh this web page, the data chart will update immediately. Turn up the:

Cool Math Tricks: Deriving the Divergence, (Del or Nabla) into New (Cylindrical) Coordinate Systems

Now available as a Kindle ebook for 99 cents ! Get a spiffy ebook, and fund more physics The following is a pretty lengthy procedure, but converting the divergence, (nabla, del) operator between coordinate systems comes up pretty often. While there are tables for converting between common coordinate systems , there seem to be fewer explanations of the procedure for deriving the conversion, so here goes! What do we actually want? To convert the Cartesian nabla to the nabla for another coordinate system, say… cylindrical coordinates. What we’ll need: 1. The Cartesian Nabla: 2. A set of equations relating the Cartesian coordinates to cylindrical coordinates: 3. A set of equations relating the Cartesian basis vectors to the basis vectors of the new coordinate system: How to do it: Use the chain rule for differentiation to convert the derivatives with respect to the Cartesian variables to derivatives with respect to the cylindrical variables. The chain

The Valentine's Day Magnetic Monopole

There's an assymetry to the form of the two Maxwell's equations shown in picture 1.  While the divergence of the electric field is proportional to the electric charge density at a given point, the divergence of the magnetic field is equal to zero.  This is typically explained in the following way.  While we know that electrons, the fundamental electric charge carriers exist, evidence seems to indicate that magnetic monopoles, the particles that would carry magnetic 'charge', either don't exist, or, the energies required to create them are so high that they are exceedingly rare.  That doesn't stop us from looking for them though! Keeping with the theme of Fairbank[1] and his academic progeny over the semester break, today's post is about the discovery of a magnetic monopole candidate event by one of the Fairbank's graduate students, Blas Cabrera[2].  Cabrera was utilizing a loop type of magnetic monopole detector.  Its operation is in concept very sim