We apply geometric phase ideas to coherent states to shed light on interference phenomenon in the phase space description of continuous variable Cartesian quantum systems. The motivating idea is Pancharatnam's concept of two Hilbert space vectors being ’’in phase”. This leads to special sums and integrals of vectors which are locally in-phase superpositions. Geometric phase considerations naturally lead to the emergence of phase space areas. Applied to the overcomplete family of coherent states, we are led to preferred in-phase integral representations for various states of physical significance, such as the position, momentum and Fock states as well as the squeezed vacuum state. Interestingly, the Husimi-Kano Q function is maximized along the line of such superpositions. We also get a fresh perspective on the Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization condition. Finally, we use our exact integral representations to obtain asymptotic expansions for state overlaps and matrix elements, leading to phase space area considerations similar to the ones noted earlier in the seminal works of Schleich, Wheeler and collaborators, but now from a geometric phase perspective.
We apply geometric phase ideas to coherent states to shed light on interference phenomenon in the phase space description of continuous variable Cartesian quantum systems. The motivating idea is Pancharatnam's concept of two Hilbert space vectors being ’’in phase”. This leads to special sums and integrals of vectors which are locally in-phase superpositions. Geometric phase considerations naturally lead to the emergence of phase space areas. Applied to the overcomplete family of coherent states, we are led to preferred in-phase integral representations for various states of physical significance, such as the position, momentum and Fock states as well as the squeezed vacuum state. Interestingly, the Husimi-Kano Q function is maximized along the line of such superpositions. We also get a fresh perspective on the Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization condition. Finally, we use our exact integral representations to obtain asymptotic expansions for state overlaps and matrix elements, leading to phase space area considerations similar to the ones noted earlier in the seminal works of Schleich, Wheeler and collaborators, but now from a geometric phase perspective.
We apply geometric phase ideas to coherent states to shed light on interference phenomenon in the phase space description of continuous variable Cartesian quantum systems. In contrast to Young's interference characterized by path lengths, phase space interference turns out to be determined by areas. The motivating idea is Pancharatnam's concept of "being in phase" for Hilbert space vectors. Applied to the overcomplete family of coherent states, we are led to preferred one-dimensional integral representations for various states of physical significance, such as the position, momentum, Fock states and the squeezed vacuum. These are special in the sense of being "in-phase superpositions". Area considerations emerge naturally within a fully quantum mechanical context. Interestingly, the Q-function is maximized along the line of such superpositions. We also get a fresh perspective on the Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization condition. Finally, we use our exact integral representations to obtain asymptotic expansions for state overlaps and matrix elements, leading to phase space area considerations similar to the ones noted earlier in the seminal works of Schleich, Wheeler and collaborators, but now from the perspective of geometric phase.
Getting coherent state superpositions to stay put in phase space: Q functions and one dimensional integral representations of generator eigenstates
We study quantum mechanics in the phase space associated with the coherent state (CS) manifold of Lie groups. Eigenstates of generators of the group are constructed as one dimensional integral superpositions of CS along their orbits. We distinguish certain privileged orbits where the superposition is in phase. Interestingly, for closed in phase orbits, the geometric phase must be quantized to 2πZ, else the superposition vanishes. This corresponds to exact Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization. The maximum of the Husimi-Kano Q quasiprobability distribution is used to diagnose where in phase space the eigenstates of the generators lie. The Q function of a generator eigenstate is constant along each orbit. We conjecture that the maximum of the Q function corresponds to these privileged in phase orbits. We provide some intuition for this proposition using interference in phase space, and then demonstrate it for canonical CS (H4 oscillator group), spin CS (SU(2)) and SU(1,1) CS, relevant to squeezing.
The discovery of the geometric phase is one of the most interesting and intriguing findings of the last few decades. It led to a deeper understanding of the concept of phase in quantum mechanics and motivated a surge of interest in fundamental quantum mechanical issues, disclosing unexpected applications in very diverse fields of physics. Although the key ideas underlying the existence of a purely geometrical phase had already been proposed in 1956 by Pancharatnam, it was Michael Berry who revived this issue 30 years later. The clarity of Berry's seminal paper, in 1984, was extraordinary. Research on the topic flourished at such a pace that it became difficult for non-experts to follow the many different theoretical ideas and experimental proposals which ensued. Diverse concepts in independent areas of mathematics, physics and chemistry were being applied, for what was (and can still be considered) a nascent arena for theory, experiments and technology. Although collections of papers by different authors appeared in the literature, sometimes with ample introductions, surprisingly, to the best of my knowledge, no specific and exhaustive book has ever been written on this subject. The Geometric Phase in Quantum Systems is the first thorough book on geometric phases and fills an important gap in the physical literature. Other books on the subject will undoubtedly follow. But it will take a fairly long time before other authors can cover that same variety of concepts in such a comprehensive manner. The book is enjoyable. The choice of topics presented is well balanced and appropriate. The appendices are well written, understandable and exhaustive - three rare qualities. I also find it praiseworthy that the authors decided to explicitly carry out most of the calculations, avoiding, as much as possible, the use of the joke `after a straightforward calculation, one finds...' This was one of the sentences I used to dislike most during my undergraduate studies. A student is inexperienced in such matters and needs to look at details. This book is addressed to graduate physics and chemistry students and was written thinking of students. However, I would recommend it also to young and mature physicists, even those who are already `into' the subject. It is a comprehensive work, jointly written by five researchers. After a simple introduction to the subject, the book gradually provides deeper concepts, more advanced theory and finally an interesting introduction and explanation of recent experiments. For its multidisciplinary features, this work could not have been written by one single author. The collaborative effort is undoubtedly one of its most interesting qualities. I would definitely recommend it to anyone who wants to learn more on the geometric phase, a topic that is both beautiful and intruiguing.
The geometric phase in quantum mechanics was originally elucidated in the context of the adiabatic theorem. This and other limitations were later removed. We show how this phase can be presented as the simplest functional of smooth open curves of unit vectors in Hilbert space, invariant under the two groups of local phase changes and monotonic reparametrisations. This viewpoint clarifies the role of the early Pancharatnam criterion for two Hilbert space vectors to be `in phase', in the later geometric phase context. Noncyclic evolution is handled in a very direct manner. Connections to the Bargmann invariants of quantum mechanics are immediate and can be exploited. A class of geometric phases arises in connection with unitary representations of Lie groups. In this case a surprisingly complete analysis of the structure of the geometric phase is possible, motivated by the Wigner-Eckart theorem. The interplay between geometric phase ideas and Lie group unitary representations is extraordinarily rich; the differential geometric structures of Lie groups and coset spaces play very important roles and allow classification of all possible geometric phases associated with a given Lie group. Examples involving SU(2), SU(3) and the metaplectic group Mp(2) are presented.
Spin coherent states, proposed by several workers in the early 70s, are shown to contain the natural generalization to higher spins of the phase discovered earlier by Pancharatnam for polarized light. They also provide a simple setting in which the geometric phase of Berry and of Aharonov and Anandan can be exhibited and some of its further properties, noted by Samuel and Bhandari, can be illustrated. It is pointed out how many of the foregoing results might have been deduced in the 70s by proceeding in strict analogy with the earlier work of Pancharatnam. A similar point is made in connection with the geometric phase of SU(1,1) coherent states. In addition to its possible historical interest, this approach shows how the concept of the geometric phase can be introduced and developed in a largely kinematic fashion as an addendum to the standard quantum theory of angular momentum.
The correct description of the phase variable in quantum mechanics is a question rooted in its earliest formulations. The atom mechanics [1] of Bohr and Sommerfeld—the precursor of modern quantum mechanics—ascribes a central role to action-angle variables. However, Heisenberg's matrix mechanics and Schrödinger's wave mechanics are formulated [2] in terms of the canonical variables representing cartesian coordinates and momenta. Stimulated by this work London [3] attempted a reformulation of these theories in the previously favored action-angle variables. However, this attempt failed due to the difficulty in ascribing quantum operators to the angle variables of classical theory. Despite these difficulties London found [4] an operator representation of the complex exponential of these angle variables. The quantum phase of light made its first appearance in Dirac's classic paper [5] on the quantization of the radiation field. In contrast to modern methods, he constructed the annihilation and creation operators for each field mode from the corresponding amplitude and phase operators. Phase and its quantum nature acquired new significance with the development of lasers in the early sixties: theoretical investigations highlighted significant problems with Dirac's original proposal for the phase operator. A particularly elegant illustration of the difficulty was given by Louisell [6] in 1963. The advent of phase sensitive quantum noise as demonstrated experimentally in the production and detection of squeezed light [7] has created a new wave of interest in the nature of quantum optical phase leading to the discovery of the hermitian optical phase operator [8]. There has followed an explosion of theoretical activity in this area stimulating fresh experimental investigations. In preparing this special issue we have attempted to present the current state of this active and rapidly moving field. We have arranged the papers into what we hope is a coherent representation of the field. The first papers give a historical perspective and overview of current thinking. The two recent experimental investigations which follow are intimately connected to the phase space description of quantum mechanics based on quasi-probability distributions. The representa tion of phase via phase space and its connection with phase-dependent measurements and the phase operator are addressed in the next section. Some more formal considerations pertinent to phase are presented in the following section. Gravitational wave detection and optical communication have motivated the study of the limits of phase noise. Some recent investigations on such optimal phase states are presented. The issue concludes with two papers discussing the significance of phase in light-matter interactions. In concluding we express our gratitude to the authors of the papers in this volume for their efforts in preparing their high quality presentations.