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:hep-th/0612093 · Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields

Disappearing Q operator

Hugh F Jones, R. J. Rivers

Published Jan 26, 2007• 33 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

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.

DOI
10.1103/physrevd.75.025023

Related papers

The Metric Operator and the Functional Integral Formulation of Pseudo-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics

Hugh F Jones

Pseudo-Hermitian quantum theories are those in which the Hamiltonian H satisfies H† = ηHη-1, where η = e-Q is a positive-definite Hermitian operator, rather than the usual H† = H. In the operator formulation of such theories the standard Hilbert-space metric must be modified by the inclusion of η in order to ensure their probabilistic interpretation. With possible generalizations to quantum field theory in mind, it is important to ask how the functional integral formalism for pseudo-Hermitian theories differs from that of standard theories. It turns out that here Q plays quite a different role, serving primarily to implement a canonical transformation of the variables. It does not appear explicitly in the expression for the vacuum generating functional. Instead, the relation to the Hermitian theory is encoded via the dependence of Z on the external source j(t). These points are illustrated and amplified in various versions of the Swanson model, a non-Hermitian transform of the simple harmonic oscillator.

Acta Polytechnica•Jan 2, 2007•1 citation

Non-Stationary Non-Hermitian “Wrong-Sign” Quantum Oscillators and Their Meaningful Physical Interpretation

Miloslav Znojil

In the framework of quantum mechanics using quasi-Hermitian operators the standard unitary evolution of a non-stationary but still closed quantum system is only properly described in the non-Hermitian interaction picture (NIP). In this formulation of the theory both the states and the observables vary with time. A few aspects of implementation of this picture are illustrated via the "wrong-sign" quartic oscillators. It is shown that in contrast to the widespread belief, both of the related Schrödinger-equation generators G(t) and the Heisenberg-equation generators Σ(t) are just auxiliary concepts. Their spectra are phenomenologically irrelevant and, in general, complex. It is argued that only the sum H(t)=G(t)+Σ(t) of the latter operators retains the standard physical meaning of the instantaneous energy of the unitary quantum system in question.

arXiv:2304.07103•Entropy•Apr 19, 2023•4 citations

Gauging non-Hermitian Hamiltonians

H. F. Jones

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 −eA(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. PACS numbers: 03.65.Ca, 11.30.Er, 02.30.Mv 1

•Jan 1, 2009•7 citations

Gauging non-Hermitian Hamiltonians

H F Jones

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:0811.0305•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Mar 6, 2009•12 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. 1

•Nov 23, 2004•82 citations

Comparison of Different Approaches of Finding the Positive Definite Metric in Pseudo-Hermitian Theories

Ananya Ghatak, Bhabani Prasad Mandal

To develop a unitary quantum theory with probabilistic description for pseudo-Hermitian systems one needs to consider the theories in a different Hilbert space endowed with a positive definite metric operator. There are different approaches to find such metric operators. We compare the different approaches of calculating positive definite metric operators in pseudo-Hermitian theories with the help of several explicit examples in non-relativistic as well as in relativistic situations. Exceptional points and spontaneous symmetry breaking are also discussed in these models.

arXiv:1305.2022•Communications in Theoretical Physics•May 1, 2013•12 citations
In the Schr"odinger formulation of non-Hermitian quantum theories a positive-definite metric operator \ensuremathη\ensuremath≡e\ensuremath−Q\ensuremath{\eta}\ensuremath{\equiv}{e}^{\ensuremath{-}Q}\ensuremathη\ensuremath≡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 QQQ 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)j(t)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.
Pseudo-Hermitian quantum theories are those in which the Hamiltonian H satisfies H† = ηHη-1, where η = e-Q is a positive-definite Hermitian operator, rather than the usual H† = H. In the operator formulation of such theories the standard Hilbert-space metric must be modified by the inclusion of η in order to ensure their probabilistic interpretation. With possible generalizations to quantum field theory in mind, it is important to ask how the functional integral formalism for pseudo-Hermitian theories differs from that of standard theories. It turns out that here Q plays quite a different role, serving primarily to implement a canonical transformation of the variables. It does not appear explicitly in the expression for the vacuum generating functional. Instead, the relation to the Hermitian theory is encoded via the dependence of Z on the external source j(t). These points are illustrated and amplified in various versions of the Swanson model, a non-Hermitian transform of the simple harmonic oscillator.
In the framework of quantum mechanics using quasi-Hermitian operators the standard unitary evolution of a non-stationary but still closed quantum system is only properly described in the non-Hermitian interaction picture (NIP). In this formulation of the theory both the states and the observables vary with time. A few aspects of implementation of this picture are illustrated via the "wrong-sign" quartic oscillators. It is shown that in contrast to the widespread belief, both of the related Schrödinger-equation generators G(t) and the Heisenberg-equation generators Σ(t) are just auxiliary concepts. Their spectra are phenomenologically irrelevant and, in general, complex. It is argued that only the sum H(t)=G(t)+Σ(t) of the latter operators retains the standard physical meaning of the instantaneous energy of the unitary quantum system in question.
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 −eA(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. PACS numbers: 03.65.Ca, 11.30.Er, 02.30.Mv 1
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.
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. 1
To develop a unitary quantum theory with probabilistic description for pseudo-Hermitian systems one needs to consider the theories in a different Hilbert space endowed with a positive definite metric operator. There are different approaches to find such metric operators. We compare the different approaches of calculating positive definite metric operators in pseudo-Hermitian theories with the help of several explicit examples in non-relativistic as well as in relativistic situations. Exceptional points and spontaneous symmetry breaking are also discussed in these models.