Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:2107.07050 · Physica Scripta

Hamiltonian point of view of quantum perturbation theory

A. D. Bermúdez Manjarres

Published Aug 28, 2025• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Abstract We explore the relation of Van Vleck-Primas perturbation theory of quantum mechanics with the Lie-series-based perturbation theory of Hamiltonian systems in classical mechanics. In contrast to previous works on the relation of quantum and classical perturbation theories, our approach is not based on the conceptual similarities between the two methods. Instead, we show that for quantum systems with a finite-dimensional Hilbert space, the Van Vleck-Primas procedure can be recast exactly into a classical perturbation problem. As a non-obvious consequence, this approach gives a new way of calculating the geometric phase of quantum systems using tools from the theory of classical canonical transformations.

DOI
10.1088/1402-4896/ae00a8

Related papers

From classical to quantum mechanics: “How to translate physical ideas into mathematical language”

Hervé Bergeron

Following previous works by E. Prugovečki [Physica A 91A, 202 (1978) and Stochastic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Space–time (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986)] on common features of classical and quantum mechanics, we develop a unified mathematical framework for classical and quantum mechanics (based on L2-spaces over classical phase space), in order to investigate to what extent quantum mechanics can be obtained as a simple modification of classical mechanics (on both logical and analytical levels). To obtain this unified framework, we split quantum theory in two parts: (i) general quantum axiomatics (a system is described by a state in a Hilbert space, observables are self-adjoints operators, and so on) and (ii) quantum mechanics proper that specifies the Hilbert space as L2(Rn); the Heisenberg rule [pi,qj]=−iℏδij with p=−iℏ∇, the free Hamiltonian H=−ℏ2Δ/2m and so on. We show that general quantum axiomatics (up to a supplementary “axiom of classicity”) can be used as a nonstandard mathematical ground to formulate physical ideas and equations of ordinary classical statistical mechanics. So, the question of a “true quantization” with “ℏ” must be seen as an independent physical problem not directly related with quantum formalism. At this stage, we show that this nonstandard formulation of classical mechanics exhibits a new kind of operation that has no classical counterpart: this operation is related to the “quantization process,” and we show why quantization physically depends on group theory (the Galilei group). This analytical procedure of quantization replaces the “correspondence principle” (or canonical quantization) and allows us to map classical mechanics into quantum mechanics, giving all operators of quantum dynamics and the Schrödinger equation. The great advantage of this point of view is that quantization is based on concrete physical arguments and not derived from some “pure algebraic rule” (we exhibit also some limit of the correspondence principle). Moreover spins for particles are naturally generated, including an approximation of their interaction with magnetic fields. We also recover by this approach the semi-classical formalism developed by E. Prugovečki [Stochastic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Space–time (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986)].

arXiv:quant-ph/0102084•Journal of Mathematical Physics•Sep 1, 2001•12 citations

Connections between perturbation theory and the Van Vleck transformation: Illustrative calculations on the perturbed harmonic oscillator

Paul A. Westhaus

Abstract We continue to examine the connection between perturbation theory and the Van Vleck unitary transformation. Here we illustrate the formalism derived earlier by applying it to compute the stationary states of the perturbed harmonic oscillator. We find that each solution of the traditional Brillouin‐Wigner perturbation theory equations gives rise to a different unitary transformation which, when operating on the unperturbed ground state, produces one or the other of the perturbed eigenstates. With any of the perturbed states able to be reached by a unitary transformation on the unperturbed ground state, we advise caution in using approximate solutions of the perturbation equations in general cases, lest an unexpected stationary state be obtained.

International Journal of Quantum Chemistry•Mar 1, 1982•3 citations

On obtaining classical mechanics from quantum mechanics

Date, G

Constructing a classical mechanical system associated with a given quantum mechanical one, entails construction of a classical phase space and a corresponding Hamiltonian function from the available quantum structures and a notion of coarser observations. The Hilbert space of any quantum mechanical system naturally has the structure of an infinite dimensional symplectic manifold (`quantum phase space'). There is also a systematic, quotienting procedure which imparts a bundle structure to the quantum phase space and extracts a classical phase space as the base space. This works straight forwardly when the Hilbert space carries weakly continuous representation of the Heisenberg group and recovers the linear classical phase space $\\mathbb{R}^{\\mathrm{2N}}$. We report on how the procedure also allows extraction of non-linear classical phase spaces and illustrate it for Hilbert spaces being finite dimensional (spin-j systems), infinite dimensional but separable (particle on a circle) and infinite dimensional but non-separable (Bohr quantization). To construct a corresponding classical dynamics, one needs to choose a suitable section and identify an effective Hamiltonian. The effective dynamics mirrors the quantum dynamics provided the section satisfies conditions of semiclassicality and tangentiality. There is also an alternative and a priori distinct notion of effective Hamiltonian used in the context of a WKB approximation. These two notions are compared for the example of loop quantum cosmology.

•Jun 18, 2006•2 citations

On obtaining classical mechanics from quantum mechanics

Ghanashyam Date

Constructing a classical mechanical system associated with a given quantum-mechanical one entails construction of a classical phase space and a corresponding Hamiltonian function from the available quantum structures and a notion of coarser observations. The Hilbert space of any quantum-mechanical system naturally has the structure of an infinite-dimensional symplectic manifold ('quantum phase space'). There is also a systematic, quotienting procedure which imparts a bundle structure to the quantum phase space and extracts a classical phase space as the base space. This works straightforwardly when the Hilbert space carries weakly continuous representation of the Heisenberg group and one recovers the linear classical phase space . We report on how the procedure also allows extraction of nonlinear classical phase spaces and illustrate it for Hilbert spaces being finite dimensional (spin- j systems), infinite dimensional but separable (particle on a circle) and infinite dimensional but non-separable (polymer quantization). To construct a corresponding classical dynamics, one needs to choose a suitable section and identify an effective Hamiltonian. The effective dynamics mirrors the quantum dynamics provided the section satisfies conditions of semiclassicality and tangentiality.

arXiv:gr-qc/0606078•Classical and Quantum Gravity•Dec 19, 2006•4 citations

Quasi-Classical Transformation Theory

Ralph Schiller

The quasi-classical theory is the theory of the WKB approximation as defined by Van Vleck. This approximate wave theory is invariant under canonical transformations. We derive the transformation laws for wave functions and operators in this theory. The connection problem of the ordinary configuration space is discussed from the point of view of Van Vleck. The usual method of WKB quantization is then contrasted with another method of quantization in a classical configuration space of creation and destruction operators. In this new configuration space we find that, for some problems, the quasi-classical solutions are exact solutions of the Schr\"odinger equation. Finally, we show that the canonical transformations of the quasi-classical theory may be put into one-to-one correspondence with a group of approximate unitary transformations.

Physical Review•Feb 1, 1962•41 citations

Perturbation theory and the classical limit of quantum mechanics

S. M. McRae, Edward R. Vrscay

We consider the classical limit of quantum mechanics from the viewpoint of perturbation theory. The main focus is time dependent perturbation theory, in particular, the time evolution of a harmonic oscillator coherent state in an anharmonic potential. We explore in detail a perturbation method introduced by Bhaumik and Dutta-Roy [J. Math. Phys. 16, 1131 (1975)] and resolve several complications that arise when this method is extended to second order. A classical limit for coherent states used by the above authors is then applied to the quantum perturbation expansions and, to second order, the classical Poincaré–Lindstedt series is retrieved. We conclude with an investigation of the connection between the classical limits of time dependent and time independent perturbation theories, respectively.

Journal of Mathematical Physics•Jun 1, 1997•17 citations
Abstract We explore the relation of Van Vleck-Primas perturbation theory of quantum mechanics with the Lie-series-based perturbation theory of Hamiltonian systems in classical mechanics. In contrast to previous works on the relation of quantum and classical perturbation theories, our approach is not based on the conceptual similarities between the two methods. Instead, we show that for quantum systems with a finite-dimensional Hilbert space, the Van Vleck-Primas procedure can be recast exactly into a classical perturbation problem. As a non-obvious consequence, this approach gives a new way of calculating the geometric phase of quantum systems using tools from the theory of classical canonical transformations.
Following previous works by E. Prugovečki [Physica A 91A, 202 (1978) and Stochastic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Space–time (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986)] on common features of classical and quantum mechanics, we develop a unified mathematical framework for classical and quantum mechanics (based on L2-spaces over classical phase space), in order to investigate to what extent quantum mechanics can be obtained as a simple modification of classical mechanics (on both logical and analytical levels). To obtain this unified framework, we split quantum theory in two parts: (i) general quantum axiomatics (a system is described by a state in a Hilbert space, observables are self-adjoints operators, and so on) and (ii) quantum mechanics proper that specifies the Hilbert space as L2(Rn); the Heisenberg rule [pi,qj]=−iℏδij with p=−iℏ∇, the free Hamiltonian H=−ℏ2Δ/2m and so on. We show that general quantum axiomatics (up to a supplementary “axiom of classicity”) can be used as a nonstandard mathematical ground to formulate physical ideas and equations of ordinary classical statistical mechanics. So, the question of a “true quantization” with “ℏ” must be seen as an independent physical problem not directly related with quantum formalism. At this stage, we show that this nonstandard formulation of classical mechanics exhibits a new kind of operation that has no classical counterpart: this operation is related to the “quantization process,” and we show why quantization physically depends on group theory (the Galilei group). This analytical procedure of quantization replaces the “correspondence principle” (or canonical quantization) and allows us to map classical mechanics into quantum mechanics, giving all operators of quantum dynamics and the Schrödinger equation. The great advantage of this point of view is that quantization is based on concrete physical arguments and not derived from some “pure algebraic rule” (we exhibit also some limit of the correspondence principle). Moreover spins for particles are naturally generated, including an approximation of their interaction with magnetic fields. We also recover by this approach the semi-classical formalism developed by E. Prugovečki [Stochastic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Space–time (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986)].
Abstract We continue to examine the connection between perturbation theory and the Van Vleck unitary transformation. Here we illustrate the formalism derived earlier by applying it to compute the stationary states of the perturbed harmonic oscillator. We find that each solution of the traditional Brillouin‐Wigner perturbation theory equations gives rise to a different unitary transformation which, when operating on the unperturbed ground state, produces one or the other of the perturbed eigenstates. With any of the perturbed states able to be reached by a unitary transformation on the unperturbed ground state, we advise caution in using approximate solutions of the perturbation equations in general cases, lest an unexpected stationary state be obtained.
Constructing a classical mechanical system associated with a given quantum mechanical one, entails construction of a classical phase space and a corresponding Hamiltonian function from the available quantum structures and a notion of coarser observations. The Hilbert space of any quantum mechanical system naturally has the structure of an infinite dimensional symplectic manifold (`quantum phase space'). There is also a systematic, quotienting procedure which imparts a bundle structure to the quantum phase space and extracts a classical phase space as the base space. This works straight forwardly when the Hilbert space carries weakly continuous representation of the Heisenberg group and recovers the linear classical phase space mathbbRmathrm2N\\mathbb{R}^{\\mathrm{2N}}mathbbRmathrm2N. We report on how the procedure also allows extraction of non-linear classical phase spaces and illustrate it for Hilbert spaces being finite dimensional (spin-j systems), infinite dimensional but separable (particle on a circle) and infinite dimensional but non-separable (Bohr quantization). To construct a corresponding classical dynamics, one needs to choose a suitable section and identify an effective Hamiltonian. The effective dynamics mirrors the quantum dynamics provided the section satisfies conditions of semiclassicality and tangentiality. There is also an alternative and a priori distinct notion of effective Hamiltonian used in the context of a WKB approximation. These two notions are compared for the example of loop quantum cosmology.
Constructing a classical mechanical system associated with a given quantum-mechanical one entails construction of a classical phase space and a corresponding Hamiltonian function from the available quantum structures and a notion of coarser observations. The Hilbert space of any quantum-mechanical system naturally has the structure of an infinite-dimensional symplectic manifold ('quantum phase space'). There is also a systematic, quotienting procedure which imparts a bundle structure to the quantum phase space and extracts a classical phase space as the base space. This works straightforwardly when the Hilbert space carries weakly continuous representation of the Heisenberg group and one recovers the linear classical phase space . We report on how the procedure also allows extraction of nonlinear classical phase spaces and illustrate it for Hilbert spaces being finite dimensional (spin- j systems), infinite dimensional but separable (particle on a circle) and infinite dimensional but non-separable (polymer quantization). To construct a corresponding classical dynamics, one needs to choose a suitable section and identify an effective Hamiltonian. The effective dynamics mirrors the quantum dynamics provided the section satisfies conditions of semiclassicality and tangentiality.
The quasi-classical theory is the theory of the WKB approximation as defined by Van Vleck. This approximate wave theory is invariant under canonical transformations. We derive the transformation laws for wave functions and operators in this theory. The connection problem of the ordinary configuration space is discussed from the point of view of Van Vleck. The usual method of WKB quantization is then contrasted with another method of quantization in a classical configuration space of creation and destruction operators. In this new configuration space we find that, for some problems, the quasi-classical solutions are exact solutions of the Schr\"odinger equation. Finally, we show that the canonical transformations of the quasi-classical theory may be put into one-to-one correspondence with a group of approximate unitary transformations.
We consider the classical limit of quantum mechanics from the viewpoint of perturbation theory. The main focus is time dependent perturbation theory, in particular, the time evolution of a harmonic oscillator coherent state in an anharmonic potential. We explore in detail a perturbation method introduced by Bhaumik and Dutta-Roy [J. Math. Phys. 16, 1131 (1975)] and resolve several complications that arise when this method is extended to second order. A classical limit for coherent states used by the above authors is then applied to the quantum perturbation expansions and, to second order, the classical Poincaré–Lindstedt series is retrieved. We conclude with an investigation of the connection between the classical limits of time dependent and time independent perturbation theories, respectively.