We report the experimental observation ofageometricphase for elastic wavesin awaveguidewith helicalshape. Thesetup reproducestheexperimentbyTomita and Chiao (Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 1986) that showed first evidence of a Berry phase, a geometric phase for adiabatic time evolution, in optics. Experimental evidence of non-adiabatic geometric has been reported in quantum mechanics. We have performed an experiment to observe the polarization transport of classical elastic waves. In a waveguide, these waves are polarized and dispersive. Whereas the wavelength is of the same order of magnitude as the helix ’ radius, no frequency dependent correction is necessary to account for the theoretical prediction. This shows that in this regime, the geometric phase results directly from geometry and not from a correction to an adiabatic phase. 1.
We report the experimental observation ofageometricphase for elastic wavesin awaveguidewith helicalshape. Thesetup reproducestheexperimentbyTomita and Chiao (Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 1986) that showed first evidence of a Berry phase, a geometric phase for adiabatic time evolution, in optics. Experimental evidence of non-adiabatic geometric has been reported in quantum mechanics. We have performed an experiment to observe the polarization transport of classical elastic waves. In a waveguide, these waves are polarized and dispersive. Whereas the wavelength is of the same order of magnitude as the helix ’ radius, no frequency dependent correction is necessary to account for the theoretical prediction. This shows that in this regime, the geometric phase results directly from geometry and not from a correction to an adiabatic phase. 1.
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
Concepts from non-Hermitian quantum mechanics have proven useful in understanding and manipulating a variety of classical systems, such as those encountered in optics, classical mechanics, and metamaterial design. Recently, the non-Hermitian analog of the Berry phase for adiabatic processes was experimentally measured. In non-Hermitian systems, the Berry phase can have an imaginary part, which contributes to the amplification or decay of the total wave intensity. When the imaginary part of the Berry curvature is zero, this geometric amplification factor is determined solely by the initial and final points of the adiabatic path in parameter space, and it does not depend on how these points are connected by the path. We list classes of non-Hermitian Hamiltonians where this path independence is guaranteed by suitable symmetries, and we find that, for some of these classes, the amplification factor can be written only in terms of the Petermann factors of the initial and final points. Our result can, in turn, be used to experimentally obtain the Petermann factor by observing how the norm of the wave function changes under adiabatic processes. We validate our theory using a couple of concrete examples of physical relevance.
The exact wave function and rigorous solution of Bloch equation for spin-1/2 under the rotating magnetic field are obtained in this paper. Berry's geometric phase can be obtained by taking the adiabatic limit on the exact wave function, and be compared with the slow helical neutron experiment done by Bitter et al. For general cyclic solution, the analytic expressions of AA geometric phase and dynamic phase are obtained, and a perfect explanation to a controversial helical optics fiber experiment done by Chiao et al is given. Another theorem in this paper shows that both Berry's dynamic phase and Berry's geometric phase can be obtained by taking the adiabatic limit on the AA dynamic phase. An orthogonal state method is proposed to reach parallel transport, which is practical for the non-adiabatic geometric quantum computation.
We unveil that even an infinitesimal deviation of the initial state from the eigenstates of the initial Hamiltonian can yield a significant change in the geometric phase accompanying adiabatic evolution without degeneracies of the energy levels. This leads to the counterintuitive result that the values of two geometric phases computed from the general definition of the Berry phase [Samuel and Bhandari, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 2339 (1988)] can dramatically differ from each other in the adiabatic limit even if their evolution paths are sufficiently close in a pointwise manner. The result of this work indicates that the widely accepted theory of geometric phases is not very consistent in the context of adiabatic evolution involving superposed eigenstates.
Quantum eigenstates undergoing cyclic changes acquire a phase factor of geometric origin. This phase, known as the Berry phase, or the geometric phase, has found applications in a wide range of disciplines throughout physics, including atomic and molecular physics, condensed matter physics, optics, and classical dynamics. In this article, the basic theory of the geometric phase is presented along with a number of representative applications. The article begins with an account of the geometric phase for cyclic adiabatic evolutions. An elementary derivation is given along with a worked example for two-state systems. The implications of time-reversal are explained, as is the fundamental connection between the geometric phase and energy level degeneracies. We also discuss methods of experimental observation. A brief account is given of geometric magnetism; this is a Lorenz-like force of geometric origin which appears in the dynamics of slow systems coupled to fast ones. A number of theoretical developments of the geometric phase are presented. These include an informal discussion of fibre bundles, and generalizations of the geometric phase to degenerate eigenstates (the nonabelian case) and to nonadiabatic evolution. There follows an account of applications. Manifestations in classical physics include the Hannay angle and kinematic geometric phases. Applications in optics concern polarization dynamics, including the theory and observation of Pancharatnam's phase. Applications in molecular physics include the molecular Aharonov-Bohm effect and nuclear magnetic resonance studies. In condensed matter physics, we discuss the role of the geometric phase in the theory of the quantum Hall effect.
The geometric phase was first anticipated 1956 by Pancharatnam, in the context of polarised light. Much later, in 1984, Berry made an analogue discovery, but this time in the context of quantum mechanics. It turns our that the geometric phase, or Berry's phase, or the Pancharatnam phase, is a very general phenomenon. It is a phase shift that can be acquired by a system, when it has undergone a adiabatic process, bringing it back to its original initial conditions. If the parameter space of the involved Hamiltonian is curved, the final condition may involve a phase change. This effect has been demonstrated in a range of different interferometry experiments. Although the Pancharatnam phase has been seen, this has always been in studies involving the first order correlation, g(1), this is in the intereferogramm of two or more wave amplitudes. Here, we demonstrate experimental proofs of the effect of the Pancharatnam phase in intensity interferometry, or in other words, where the second order correlation factor g(2) is the relevant description of the interference.