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

Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields

Some geometrical considerations of Berry’s phase

J. Anandan, Leo Stodolsky

Published Apr 15, 1987• 111 citations
Publisher

Abstract

A group-theoretic treatment is given of the new phase found by Berry in the adiabatic evolution of a quantum-mechanical system in a finite-dimensional Hilbert space. It is shown how the Berry phases for the various eigenstates of the Hamiltonian are obtained from a set of angles associated with a group element. For the special case of a two-level system there is just one such angle which corresponds to the holonomy transformation associated with parallel transport around a closed curve on a sphere.

DOI
10.1103/physrevd.35.2597

Related papers

Berry’s phase and loops in parameter space

Franco Salmistraro

For a quantum system we consider the evolution induced through a Hamiltonian H(R) by an arbitrary closed curve in the space of parameters R. By a proper choice of the basis in the Hilbert space of states, it is shown that one can associate a geometrical phase to each eigenvector of the Hamiltonian. The special cases of adiabatic and cyclic evolution of the state vector are discussed.

Physical Review A•Dec 1, 1988•3 citations

The Pancharatnam-Berry Phase: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects

Francisco De

In 1984 Berry addressed a quantum system undergoing a unitary and cyclic evolution under the action of a time-dependent Hamiltonian (M. V. Berry, 1984). The process was supposed to be adiabatic, meaning that the time scale of the system’s evolution was much shorter than the time scale of the changing Hamiltonian. Until Berry’s study, it was assumed that for a cyclic Hamiltonian the quantum state would acquire only so-called dynamical phases, deprived of physical meaning. Such phases could be eliminated by redefining the quantum state through a “gauge” transformation of the form |ψ〉 → eiα |ψ〉. However, Berry discovered that besides the dynamical, there was an additional phase that could not be “gauged away” and whose origin was geometric or topological. It depended on the path that |ψ〉 describes in the parameter space spanned by those parameters to which the Hamiltonian owed its time dependence. Berry’s discovery was the starting point for a great amount of investigations that brought to light topological aspects of both quantum and classical systems. Berry’s phase was soon recognized as a special case of more general phases that showed up when dealing with topological aspects of different systems. For example, the Aharonov-Bohm phase could be understood as a geometric phase. The rotation angle acquired by a parallel-transported vector after completing a closed loop in a gravitationally curved space-time region, is also a geometric, Berry-like phase. Another example is the precession of the plane of oscillation of a Foucault pendulum. Berry’s original formulation was directly applicable to the case of a spin-1/2 system evolving under the action of a slowly varying magnetic field that undergoes cyclic changes. A spin-1/2 system is a special case of a two-level system. Another instances are two-level atoms and polarized light, so that also in these cases we should expect to find geometric phases. In fact, the first experimental test of Berry’s phase was done using polarized, classical light (A. Tomita, 1986). Pancharatnam (S. Pancharatnam, 1956) anticipated Berry’s phase when he proposed, back in 1956, how to decide whether two polarization states are “in phase”. Pancharatnam’s prescription is an operational one, based upon observing whether the intensity of the interferogram formed by two polarized beams has maximal intensity. In that case, the two polarized beams are said to be “in phase”. Such a definition is analogous to the definition of distant parallelism in differential geometry. Polarized states can be subjected to different transformations which could be cyclic or not, adiabatic or not, unitary or not. The Pancharatnam-Berry Phase: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects

InTech eBooks•Feb 24, 2012•16 citations

Classical adiabatic holonomy in a Grassmannian system

E. Gozzi, William D. Thacker

The ``geometrical phase factor,'' found by Berry in his study of the quantum adiabatic theorem, has a classical analogue discovered recently by Hannay and Berry himself. This classical analogue consists of an extra angle swept by the system in its classical evolution during an adiabatic excursion. As in Berry's phase, Hannay's angle reflects a nontrivial holonomy of the system and it has a purely geometric character. In this paper we calculate Hannay's angles for the classical Grassmannian system associated to a quantum spin in a magnetic field. We also show their close relation to the corresponding quantum-mechanical phase of Berry for the same system.

Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields•Apr 15, 1987•31 citations

Berry phases and unitary transformations

Thomas F. Jordan

Berry phases for spin are defined for any closed loop made by a vector changing direction in three-dimensional space. A sequence of rotations moves the vector along the loop. Each rotation is around the axis perpendicular to the moving vector. The Berry phases come from the eigenvalues of the unitary operator for the product of these rotations. The angle of the product rotation is shown to be the solid angle enclosed by the loop. The proof uses the ordinary language of quantum mechanics. The product is calculated from the commutation relations for spin. A general framework is set up to define Berry phases for other transformations and states like those for rotations and spin. The integral formula is derived. Alternatives for dynamics are shown to provide different applications and interpretations of the same mathematics. An example is used to show how one Hamiltonian may be simpler than others. Adiabatic evolution is obtained in the limit as a coupling constant goes to zero, so the adiabatic changes are made by a weak perturbation that acts over a long time. The Berry phase is the same whether the coupling constant is large or small. A rationale for the definition of Berry phases is obtained from any of the alternatives for dynamics. It is particularly clear in both the limit of adiabatic evolution, where the Hamiltonian does not contain the operator that generates Berry phases, and the opposite extreme where the Hamiltonian is the operator that generates Berry phases. The latter is illustrated with an example for spin. The general definition of Berry phases and the method of calculating them are illustrated by obtaining Berry phases from Lorentz transformations. They are similar to those obtained from rotations. A vector traces a loop on a unit hyperboloid instead of the unit sphere. In place of the solid angle, the Berry phases contain the analogous measure of the area enclosed by the loop on the hyperboloid. The sign is opposite what it is for rotations. The general definition is shown to fit any unitary representation of a semisimple Lie group. The complete set of commuting operators is chosen to contain a basis for a Cartan subalgebra of the Lie algebra of generators. If a sequence of transformations by unitary operators in the group representation takes each operator in the Cartan subalgebra around a loop in the Lie algebra back to the same operator, it can be made by unitary operators in the group representation that have all the properties required for the definition of Berry phases. The loops are made by vectors moving in a real space, the Lie algebra. The motion of the vectors must maintain the lengths and angles defined by the Cartan metric of the Lie algebra. The Berry phases are determined by one loop made by one suitably chosen operator from the Cartan subalgebra.

Journal of Mathematical Physics•Sep 1, 1988•56 citations

Geometric quantum phase and angles

J. Anandan, Yakir Aharonov

The geometric phase in quantum mechanics is formulated for charged particles in a gauge-invariant, geometric manner. It is then extended to an evolution resulting from a sequence of measurements as in the work of Pancharatnam and Aharonov and Vardi. Its close connection to the Feynman formulation of quantum mechanics is pointed out. The geometric angles, which are generalizations of the classical, adiabatic angles introduced by Hannay and the quantum, adiabatic angles introduced by Anandan and Stodolsky in their group-theoretic treatment of Berry's phase, are studied in quantum and classical physics. The geometric phase for a quantum spin in a magnetic field due to a second particle is obtained using the quantum reference frame defined by the latter. The question of whether the geometric phase and angles are local or nonlocal and their relationship to the electromagnetic and gravitational phases are also discussed.

Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields•Sep 15, 1988•156 citations

Phase change during a cyclic quantum evolution

Yakir Aharonov, J. Anandan

A new geometric phase factor is defined for any cyclic evolution of a quantum system. This is independent of the phase factor relating the initial and final state vectors and the Hamiltonian, for a given projection of the evolution on the projective space of rays of the Hilbert space. Some applications, including the Aharonov-Bohm effect, are considered. For the special case of adiabatic evolution, this phase factor is a gauge-invariant generalization of the one found by Berry.

Physical Review Letters•Apr 20, 1987•2,185 citations
A group-theoretic treatment is given of the new phase found by Berry in the adiabatic evolution of a quantum-mechanical system in a finite-dimensional Hilbert space. It is shown how the Berry phases for the various eigenstates of the Hamiltonian are obtained from a set of angles associated with a group element. For the special case of a two-level system there is just one such angle which corresponds to the holonomy transformation associated with parallel transport around a closed curve on a sphere.
In 1984 Berry addressed a quantum system undergoing a unitary and cyclic evolution under the action of a time-dependent Hamiltonian (M. V. Berry, 1984). The process was supposed to be adiabatic, meaning that the time scale of the system’s evolution was much shorter than the time scale of the changing Hamiltonian. Until Berry’s study, it was assumed that for a cyclic Hamiltonian the quantum state would acquire only so-called dynamical phases, deprived of physical meaning. Such phases could be eliminated by redefining the quantum state through a “gauge” transformation of the form |ψ〉 → eiα |ψ〉. However, Berry discovered that besides the dynamical, there was an additional phase that could not be “gauged away” and whose origin was geometric or topological. It depended on the path that |ψ〉 describes in the parameter space spanned by those parameters to which the Hamiltonian owed its time dependence. Berry’s discovery was the starting point for a great amount of investigations that brought to light topological aspects of both quantum and classical systems. Berry’s phase was soon recognized as a special case of more general phases that showed up when dealing with topological aspects of different systems. For example, the Aharonov-Bohm phase could be understood as a geometric phase. The rotation angle acquired by a parallel-transported vector after completing a closed loop in a gravitationally curved space-time region, is also a geometric, Berry-like phase. Another example is the precession of the plane of oscillation of a Foucault pendulum. Berry’s original formulation was directly applicable to the case of a spin-1/2 system evolving under the action of a slowly varying magnetic field that undergoes cyclic changes. A spin-1/2 system is a special case of a two-level system. Another instances are two-level atoms and polarized light, so that also in these cases we should expect to find geometric phases. In fact, the first experimental test of Berry’s phase was done using polarized, classical light (A. Tomita, 1986). Pancharatnam (S. Pancharatnam, 1956) anticipated Berry’s phase when he proposed, back in 1956, how to decide whether two polarization states are “in phase”. Pancharatnam’s prescription is an operational one, based upon observing whether the intensity of the interferogram formed by two polarized beams has maximal intensity. In that case, the two polarized beams are said to be “in phase”. Such a definition is analogous to the definition of distant parallelism in differential geometry. Polarized states can be subjected to different transformations which could be cyclic or not, adiabatic or not, unitary or not. The Pancharatnam-Berry Phase: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects
The ``geometrical phase factor,'' found by Berry in his study of the quantum adiabatic theorem, has a classical analogue discovered recently by Hannay and Berry himself. This classical analogue consists of an extra angle swept by the system in its classical evolution during an adiabatic excursion. As in Berry's phase, Hannay's angle reflects a nontrivial holonomy of the system and it has a purely geometric character. In this paper we calculate Hannay's angles for the classical Grassmannian system associated to a quantum spin in a magnetic field. We also show their close relation to the corresponding quantum-mechanical phase of Berry for the same system.
Berry phases for spin are defined for any closed loop made by a vector changing direction in three-dimensional space. A sequence of rotations moves the vector along the loop. Each rotation is around the axis perpendicular to the moving vector. The Berry phases come from the eigenvalues of the unitary operator for the product of these rotations. The angle of the product rotation is shown to be the solid angle enclosed by the loop. The proof uses the ordinary language of quantum mechanics. The product is calculated from the commutation relations for spin. A general framework is set up to define Berry phases for other transformations and states like those for rotations and spin. The integral formula is derived. Alternatives for dynamics are shown to provide different applications and interpretations of the same mathematics. An example is used to show how one Hamiltonian may be simpler than others. Adiabatic evolution is obtained in the limit as a coupling constant goes to zero, so the adiabatic changes are made by a weak perturbation that acts over a long time. The Berry phase is the same whether the coupling constant is large or small. A rationale for the definition of Berry phases is obtained from any of the alternatives for dynamics. It is particularly clear in both the limit of adiabatic evolution, where the Hamiltonian does not contain the operator that generates Berry phases, and the opposite extreme where the Hamiltonian is the operator that generates Berry phases. The latter is illustrated with an example for spin. The general definition of Berry phases and the method of calculating them are illustrated by obtaining Berry phases from Lorentz transformations. They are similar to those obtained from rotations. A vector traces a loop on a unit hyperboloid instead of the unit sphere. In place of the solid angle, the Berry phases contain the analogous measure of the area enclosed by the loop on the hyperboloid. The sign is opposite what it is for rotations. The general definition is shown to fit any unitary representation of a semisimple Lie group. The complete set of commuting operators is chosen to contain a basis for a Cartan subalgebra of the Lie algebra of generators. If a sequence of transformations by unitary operators in the group representation takes each operator in the Cartan subalgebra around a loop in the Lie algebra back to the same operator, it can be made by unitary operators in the group representation that have all the properties required for the definition of Berry phases. The loops are made by vectors moving in a real space, the Lie algebra. The motion of the vectors must maintain the lengths and angles defined by the Cartan metric of the Lie algebra. The Berry phases are determined by one loop made by one suitably chosen operator from the Cartan subalgebra.
The geometric phase in quantum mechanics is formulated for charged particles in a gauge-invariant, geometric manner. It is then extended to an evolution resulting from a sequence of measurements as in the work of Pancharatnam and Aharonov and Vardi. Its close connection to the Feynman formulation of quantum mechanics is pointed out. The geometric angles, which are generalizations of the classical, adiabatic angles introduced by Hannay and the quantum, adiabatic angles introduced by Anandan and Stodolsky in their group-theoretic treatment of Berry's phase, are studied in quantum and classical physics. The geometric phase for a quantum spin in a magnetic field due to a second particle is obtained using the quantum reference frame defined by the latter. The question of whether the geometric phase and angles are local or nonlocal and their relationship to the electromagnetic and gravitational phases are also discussed.