Gauging non-Hermitian Hamiltonians

We address the problem of coupling non-Hermitian systems, treated as fundamental rather than effective theories, to the electromagnetic field. In such theories the observables are not the x and p appearing in the Hamiltonian, but quantities X and P constructed by means of the metric operator. Following the analogous procedure of gauging a global symmetry in Hermitian quantum mechanics we find that the corresponding gauge transformation in X implies minimal substitution in the form P → P − e A ( X ). We discuss how the relevant matrix elements governing electromagnetic transitions may be calculated in the special case of the Swanson Hamiltonian, where the equivalent Hermitian Hamiltonian h is local, and in the more generic example of the imaginary cubic interaction, where H is local but h is not.We address the problem of coupling non-Hermitian systems, treated as fundamental rather than effective theories, to the electromagnetic field. In such theories the observables are not the x and p appearing in the Hamiltonian, but quantities X and P constructed by means of the metric operator. Following the analogous procedure of gauging a global symmetry in Hermitian quantum mechanics we find that the corresponding gauge transformation in X implies minimal substitution in the form P → P − e A ( X ). We discuss how the relevant matrix elements governing electromagnetic transitions may be calculated in the special case of the Swanson Hamiltonian, where the equivalent Hermitian Hamiltonian h is local, and in the more generic example of the imaginary cubic interaction, where H is local but h is not.

arXiv:0811.0305Journal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalMar 6, 200912 citations

On Pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians and Their Hermitian Counterparts

Hugh F Jones

In the context of two particularly interesting non-Hermitian models in quantum mechanics we explore the relationship between the original Hamiltonian H and its Hermitian counterpart h, obtained from H by a similarity transformation, as pointed out by Mostafazadeh. In the first model, due to Swanson, h turns out to be just a scaled harmonic oscillator, which explains the form of its spectrum. However, the transformation is not unique, which also means that the observables of the original theory are not uniquely determined by H alone. The second model we consider is the original PT-invariant Hamiltonian, with potential V = igx 3. In this case the corresponding h, which we are only able to construct in perturbation theory, corresponds to a complicated velocity-dependent potential. We again explore the relationship between the canonical variables x and p and the observables X and P. 1In the context of two particularly interesting non-Hermitian models in quantum mechanics we explore the relationship between the original Hamiltonian H and its Hermitian counterpart h, obtained from H by a similarity transformation, as pointed out by Mostafazadeh. In the first model, due to Swanson, h turns out to be just a scaled harmonic oscillator, which explains the form of its spectrum. However, the transformation is not unique, which also means that the observables of the original theory are not uniquely determined by H alone. The second model we consider is the original PT-invariant Hamiltonian, with potential V = igx 3. In this case the corresponding h, which we are only able to construct in perturbation theory, corresponds to a complicated velocity-dependent potential. We again explore the relationship between the canonical variables x and p and the observables X and P. 1

Nov 23, 200482 citations

On pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians and their Hermitian counterparts

H F Jones

In the context of two particularly interesting non-Hermitian models in quantum mechanics we explore the relationship between the original Hamiltonian H and its Hermitian counterpart h , obtained from H by a similarity transformation, as pointed out by Mostafazadeh. In the first model, due to Swanson, h turns out to be just a scaled harmonic oscillator, which explains the form of its spectrum. However, the transformation is not unique, which also means that the observables of the original theory are not uniquely determined by H alone. The second model we consider is the original PT -invariant Hamiltonian, with potential V = i gx 3 . In this case the corresponding h , which we are only able to construct in perturbation theory, corresponds to a complicated velocity-dependent potential. We again explore the relationship between the canonical variables x and p and the observables X and P .In the context of two particularly interesting non-Hermitian models in quantum mechanics we explore the relationship between the original Hamiltonian H and its Hermitian counterpart h , obtained from H by a similarity transformation, as pointed out by Mostafazadeh. In the first model, due to Swanson, h turns out to be just a scaled harmonic oscillator, which explains the form of its spectrum. However, the transformation is not unique, which also means that the observables of the original theory are not uniquely determined by H alone. The second model we consider is the original PT -invariant Hamiltonian, with potential V = i gx 3 . In this case the corresponding h , which we are only able to construct in perturbation theory, corresponds to a complicated velocity-dependent potential. We again explore the relationship between the canonical variables x and p and the observables X and P .

arXiv:quant-ph/0411171Journal of Physics A Mathematical and GeneralFeb 10, 2005153 citations

Time evolution of non-Hermitian Hamiltonian systems

Carla Figueira de Morisson Faria, A Fring

We provide time-evolution operators, gauge transformations and a perturbative treatment for non-Hermitian Hamiltonian systems, which are explicitly time dependent. We determine various new equivalence pairs for Hermitian and non-Hermitian Hamiltonians, which are therefore pseudo-Hermitian and in addition in some cases also invariant under PT -symmetry. In particular, for the harmonic oscillator perturbed by a cubic non-Hermitian term, we evaluate explicitly various transition amplitudes, for the situation when these systems are exposed to a monochromatic linearly polarized electric field.We provide time-evolution operators, gauge transformations and a perturbative treatment for non-Hermitian Hamiltonian systems, which are explicitly time dependent. We determine various new equivalence pairs for Hermitian and non-Hermitian Hamiltonians, which are therefore pseudo-Hermitian and in addition in some cases also invariant under PT -symmetry. In particular, for the harmonic oscillator perturbed by a cubic non-Hermitian term, we evaluate explicitly various transition amplitudes, for the situation when these systems are exposed to a monochromatic linearly polarized electric field.

arXiv:quant-ph/0604014Journal of Physics A Mathematical and GeneralJul 5, 2006121 citations

Disappearing Q operator

Hugh F Jones, R. J. Rivers

In the Schr\"odinger formulation of non-Hermitian quantum theories a positive-definite metric operator $\ensuremath{\eta}\ensuremath{\equiv}{e}^{\ensuremath{-}Q}$ must be introduced in order to ensure their probabilistic interpretation. This operator also gives an equivalent Hermitian theory, by means of a similarity transformation. If, however, quantum mechanics is formulated in terms of functional integrals, we show that the $Q$ operator makes only a subliminal appearance and is not needed for the calculation of expectation values. Instead, the relation to the Hermitian theory is encoded via the external source $j(t)$ . These points are illustrated and amplified for two non-Hermitian quantum theories: the Swanson model, a non-Hermitian transform of the simple harmonic oscillator, and the wrong-sign quartic oscillator, which has been shown to be equivalent to a conventional asymmetric quartic oscillator.In the Schr\"odinger formulation of non-Hermitian quantum theories a positive-definite metric operator $\ensuremath{\eta}\ensuremath{\equiv}{e}^{\ensuremath{-}Q}$ must be introduced in order to ensure their probabilistic interpretation. This operator also gives an equivalent Hermitian theory, by means of a similarity transformation. If, however, quantum mechanics is formulated in terms of functional integrals, we show that the $Q$ operator makes only a subliminal appearance and is not needed for the calculation of expectation values. Instead, the relation to the Hermitian theory is encoded via the external source $j(t)$. These points are illustrated and amplified for two non-Hermitian quantum theories: the Swanson model, a non-Hermitian transform of the simple harmonic oscillator, and the wrong-sign quartic oscillator, which has been shown to be equivalent to a conventional asymmetric quartic oscillator.

arXiv:hep-th/0612093Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fieldsJan 26, 200733 citations

Swanson's non-Hermitian Hamiltonian and su(1,1): a way towards generalizations

C. Quesne

The family of metric operators, constructed by Musumbu et al (2007 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40 F75), for Swanson’s PT-symmetric Hamiltonian, is re-examined in the light of an su(1,1) approach. An alternative derivation, only relying on properties of su(1,1) generators, is proposed. Being independent of the realization considered for the latter, it opens the way towards the construction of generalized Swanson’s non-Hermitian (not necessarily PT-symmetric) Hamiltonians related by similarity to Hermitian ones. Some examples of them are reviewed. Short title: Swanson’s non-Hermitian Hamiltonian and su(1,1)The family of metric operators, constructed by Musumbu et al (2007 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40 F75), for Swanson’s PT-symmetric Hamiltonian, is re-examined in the light of an su(1,1) approach. An alternative derivation, only relying on properties of su(1,1) generators, is proposed. Being independent of the realization considered for the latter, it opens the way towards the construction of generalized Swanson’s non-Hermitian (not necessarily PT-symmetric) Hamiltonians related by similarity to Hermitian ones. Some examples of them are reviewed. Short title: Swanson’s non-Hermitian Hamiltonian and su(1,1)

May 21, 20072 citations

Q

operator makes only a subliminal appearance and is not needed for the calculation of expectation values. Instead, the relation to the Hermitian theory is encoded via the external source

j(t)

. These points are illustrated and amplified for two non-Hermitian quantum theories: the Swanson model, a non-Hermitian transform of the simple harmonic oscillator, and the wrong-sign quartic oscillator, which has been shown to be equivalent to a conventional asymmetric quartic oscillator.