* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Factorization Method and the Position
Atomic theory wikipedia , lookup
Quantum machine learning wikipedia , lookup
Copenhagen interpretation wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization wikipedia , lookup
Tight binding wikipedia , lookup
Hydrogen atom wikipedia , lookup
Matter wave wikipedia , lookup
History of quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Path integral formulation wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization group wikipedia , lookup
Dirac bracket wikipedia , lookup
Aharonov–Bohm effect wikipedia , lookup
Hidden variable theory wikipedia , lookup
Quantum group wikipedia , lookup
Wave function wikipedia , lookup
Wave–particle duality wikipedia , lookup
Quantum state wikipedia , lookup
Relativistic quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Theoretical and experimental justification for the Schrödinger equation wikipedia , lookup
Symmetry in quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Coherent states wikipedia , lookup
Molecular Hamiltonian wikipedia , lookup
Canonical quantum gravity wikipedia , lookup
Geometric Methods in Physics. XXX Workshop 2011 Trends in Mathematics, 229–237 c 2013 Springer Basel ⃝ Factorization Method and the Position-dependent Mass Problem Sara Cruz y Cruz To Professor Bogdan Mielnik, for all his contributions in Physics Abstract. The dynamics of position-dependent mass systems is considered from both, classical and quantum mechanical points of view, by means of the factorization method. Some examples are presented, with particular choices of the mass function, for the harmonic oscillator in order to illustrate our results. In the quantum regime, new isospectral position-dependent mass potentials are also constructed by the intertwining technique. Mathematics Subject Classification (2010). 81Q60; 34L10. Keywords. Position-dependent mass, factorization method, isospectral potentials. 1. Introduction The problem of describing the motion of systems endowed with position-dependent mass (PDM) has attracted interest since they appear in many physical problems. These include, e.g., the study of the electronic properties of semiconductors [1–3], quantum dots [4], the description of the dynamics of non linear oscillators [5, 6] as well as classical systems in curved spaces [7], just to mention few ones. The very concept of a PDM system is a fundamental problem which is far from being completely understood. Many contributions have been developed over the last years in different approaches [8–19]. In the quantum mechanical regime, it is well known that an ambiguity in ordering of the mass and the momentum operators appears and the goal is to choose the proper Hamiltonian. Some arguments have been given to this respect, e.g., the Galilean invariance [8] and the correspondence between classical and quantum PDM potentials [16]. In some other cases the ordering is fixed by the boundary conditions imposed on a particular system [19]. The generation of exactly solvable PDM problems has also been considered. The 230 S. Cruz y Cruz factorization method [20–22] has been explored in [10–17]. In this work we present the factorization method applied to the solution of the PDM problem in the classical as well as in the quantum mechanical frames. The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 the classical case is considered and some examples are presented for the harmonic oscillator algebra. In Section 3 the quantum mechanical problem is discussed and some new PDM potentials isospectral to the harmonic oscillator are constructed. We end this contribution with some general remarks. 2. Classical position-dependent mass systems Consider the classical position-dependent mass system described by the standard Hamiltonian 𝑝2 + 𝒱(𝑥) (1) ℋ= 2𝑚(𝑥) where 𝑥 and 𝑝 are the canonical variables of position and linear momentum. The mass 𝑚(𝑥) > 0 and the potential 𝒱(𝑥) are position-dependent functions setting the domain of definition 𝒟(ℋ) of the Hamiltonian. The problem can be addressed from two points of view: in the first one 𝒱 and 𝑚 are known and the phase space motion is determined by reducing the PDM problem to an equivalent CM one; in the second case, it is assumed that there is an algebraic structure fixing the potential and the phase space trajectories in terms of 𝑚(𝑥) [23] (see also [16]). In this work, the second approach is considered: the explicit form of the potential as well as the dynamics are determined from the algebraic properties of the system, by the factorization method. Suppose that the Hamiltonian ℋ can be factorized in terms of two complex functions [23] 𝑝 + 𝒲(𝑥)𝜙(ℋ) (2) 𝒜± = ∓𝑖𝑓 (𝑥) √ 2𝑚(𝑥) in the form ℋ = 𝒜− 𝒜+ + 𝜖 = 𝒜+ 𝒜− + 𝜖, (3) with 𝜖 the factorization constant, 𝑓 , 𝒲 functions of the position and 𝜙 a function of the energy of the system. Suppose, additionally, that 𝒜± , ℋ close the following algebra in terms of Poisson brackets { ± } { − +} (4) = 𝑖𝛾𝜙(ℋ), 𝒜 , ℋ = ±𝑖𝛾𝜙(ℋ)𝒜± , 𝒜 ,𝒜 where 𝛾 is a constant. Observe that two complex-conjugate, non autonomous integrals of motion can be constructed in the form 𝒬± = 𝒜± 𝑒∓𝑖𝛾𝜙(ℋ)𝑡 , ± 2 (5) whose values 𝑞 ± fulfill√𝑞 − 𝑞 + = ∣𝑞 ∣ = ℰ −𝜖, ℰ being the total energy of the system. Thus, making 𝑞 ± = ℰ − 𝜖𝑒±𝑖𝜑0 , the phase space trajectories can be written in Factorization Method and the Position-dependent Mass Problem terms of two parameters (ℰ, 𝜑0 ) as (√ ) ℰ −𝜖 −1 𝑥(𝑡) = 𝒲 cos (𝛾𝜙(ℋ)𝑡 + 𝜑0 ) , 𝜙(ℋ) 1 √ 2 (ℰ − 𝜖) 𝑚(𝑥) sin (𝛾𝜙(ℋ)𝑡 + 𝜑0 ) . 𝑝(𝑡) = − 𝑓 (𝑥) 231 (6) (7) As an example, let us consider the harmonic oscillator of frequency 𝜔. One can find that for this simple system 𝑓 (𝑥) = 1, 𝜙(ℋ) = 1 and 𝛾 = 𝜔, leading to √ (∫ )2 ∫ 𝑚0 𝜔 2 𝑚0 𝜔 2 𝒲(𝑥) = 𝐽(𝑥)𝑑𝑥, 𝒱(𝑥) = 𝐽(𝑥)𝑑𝑥 + 𝜖 (8) 2 2 √ with 𝐽(𝑥) = 𝑚(𝑥)/𝑚0 and 𝑚0 a constant with dimensions of mass. Hence, under the transformation ∫ 𝒫(𝑥, 𝑝) = 𝑝/𝐽(𝑥), 𝒳 (𝑥) = 𝐽(𝑥)𝑑𝑥 (9) the Hamiltonian takes the form of a CM harmonic oscillator of position 𝒳 and momentum 𝒫. Note, however, that for some choices of 𝑚(𝑥) the transformation (9) may not map 𝒟(ℋ) onto the whole real line as required if 𝒳 should represent the position of the CM oscillator [16], meaning that there are important differences between PDM and CM problems for those cases. Below, we will consider two mass functions in order to illustrate this approach. In the first place consider the regular mass 𝑚1 leading to the potential 𝒱1 𝑚1 (𝑥) = 𝑚0 , 1 + (𝑘𝑥)2 𝒱1 (𝑥) = 𝑚0 𝜔 2 arcsinh2 𝑘𝑥 2𝑘 2 (10) with 𝑘 a constant in inverse position units (observe that the case of constant mass is recovered in the limit 𝑘 → 0). In this case we have ⎡√ ⎤ 2(ℰ − 𝜖) 𝑘 1 cos (𝜔𝑡 + 𝜑0 )⎦ (11) 𝑥1 (𝑡) = sinh ⎣ 𝑘 𝑚0 𝜔 √ 2𝑚0 (ℰ − 𝜖) 𝑝1 (𝑡)− = sin (𝜔𝑡 + 𝜑0 ) . (12) 1 + (𝑘𝑥(𝑡))2 Figure 1 shows the potential 𝒱1 and some phase trajectories for different values of the total energy of the system. One can note that they are soft deformations of that of the CM oscillator, with the position and momentum taking, in principle, arbitrary values. Next, we consider the singular mass 𝑚2 with potential 𝒱2 𝑚2 (𝑥) = 𝑚0 , (𝑘𝑥)2 𝒱2 (𝑥) = 𝑚0 𝜔 2 2 ln 𝑘𝑥 2𝑘 2 (13) 232 S. Cruz y Cruz Figure 1. The potential and phase space trajectories for 𝑚1 with ℰ = 0.1, 0.3, 0.5 and 𝑚2 for ℰ = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3. In these graphics 𝑚0 = 2, 𝑘 = 2, 𝜔 = 0.8, 𝜖 = 0.5 and 𝜙 = 𝜋. Inner curves correspond to lower energies. for which ⎡√ ⎤ 2(ℰ − 𝜖) 𝑘 1 exp ⎣ cos (𝜔𝑡 + 𝜑0 )⎦ 𝑘 𝑚0 𝜔 √ 2𝑚0 (ℰ − 𝜖) sin (𝜔𝑡 + 𝜙0 ) . 𝑝2 (𝑥) = − 𝑘𝑥(𝑡) 𝑥2 (𝑡) = (14) (15) Figure 1 shows the potential and phase trajectories for 𝑚2 . In contrast to the previous case, it is evident the presence of a singularity, confining the motion of the system to a region given by the domain of definition of 𝑚(𝑥). It is worthwhile to mention that, even the unusual form of the mass, the behavior of the phase space variables is quite regular. The presence of a divergence in the mass function appears as a potential barrier suggesting that one can define oscillators in bounded domains by introducing masses with singularities. 3. Quantum position-dependent mass systems In the quantum mechanical regime, it is well known that the canonical variables 𝑥, 𝑝 do not commute and an ambiguity ordering appears in expressions containing products of these variables. A general hermitian Hamiltonian in this case can be defined as 1 1 𝐻𝑎 = 𝑚𝑎 𝑝 𝑚2𝑏 𝑝 𝑚𝑎 + 𝑉𝑎 (𝑥), (16) 𝑎+𝑏=− , 2 2 with 𝑎 the ordering parameter (𝑏 = −𝑎 − 1/2). As mentioned before, the choice of this parameter has been addressed in several ways [8, 16, 19]. In this work it is kept arbitrary, with no more assumptions on a particular ordering of 𝑝 and 𝑚. Similar to the classical case, the form of the potential is found from the algebraic structure underlying the system. Therefore, the eigenvalue equation 𝐻𝑎 𝜓(𝑥) = 𝐸𝜓(𝑥) (17) for which the spectrum is well known, can be studied by means of the factorization method. Factorization Method and the Position-dependent Mass Problem 233 Suppose then that 𝐻𝑎 can be factorized in terms of two linear operators 𝑖 𝑎 𝑖 𝑏 𝑏 𝑎 𝐴+ 𝐴− 𝑎 = − √ 𝑚 𝑝 𝑚 + 𝑊𝑎 (𝑥), 𝑎 = √ 𝑚 𝑝 𝑚 + 𝑊𝑎 (𝑥) 2 2 in the form − 𝐻𝑎 = 𝐴+ 𝑎 𝐴𝑎 + 𝜖. In the position representation 𝑝 = −𝑖ℏ𝑑/𝑑𝑥; hence, defining the differential ator 𝑑 1 , D= √ 𝑚(𝑥) 𝑑𝑥 one may write ( ) √ ℏ 1 √ 𝐴+ D + = − 2ℏ 𝑎 + D (ln 𝐽(𝑥)) + 𝑊𝑎 (𝑥) 𝑎 2 2 √ ℏ 𝐴− 2ℏ𝑎D (ln 𝐽(𝑥)) + 𝑊𝑎 (𝑥). 𝑎 = √ D+ 2 (18) (19) oper(20) (21) (22) It is not difficult to show that the function 𝑊𝑎 (𝑥) must satisfy the Riccati equation ( ) √ 1 ℏ (23) − √ D𝑊𝑎 + 2 2ℏ 𝑎 + (D ln 𝐽) 𝑊𝑎 + 𝑊𝑎2 = 𝑉𝑎 − 𝜖 4 2 while ( ) 1 = 2ℏD𝑊𝑎 + 2ℏ 𝑎 + (24) D2 ln 𝐽. 4 For the case in which the factorizing operators close the harmonic oscillator alge+ bra, i.e., [𝐴− 𝑎 , 𝐴𝑎 ] = ℏ𝜔, we have √ ( ) ∫ √ 𝑚0 𝜔 2 1 𝑊𝑎 (𝑥) = 𝐽(𝑥)𝑑𝑥 − 2ℏ 𝑎 + D ln 𝐽(𝑥), (25) 2 4 [ + 𝐴− 𝑎 , 𝐴𝑎 ] fixing 𝑉𝑎 (𝑥) as √ 2 ( )2 ) 1 2 𝐽(𝑥)𝑑𝑥 + ℏ 𝑎 + D2 ln 𝐽(𝑥) 4 ( )2 1 − 2ℏ2 𝑎 + (D ln 𝐽(𝑥))2 , (26) 4 ) } { ( which is isospectral to the CM harmonic oscillator: 𝑆𝑝(𝐻𝑎 ) = 𝐸𝑛 = 𝑛 + 12 ℏ𝜔 , and lead to wave functions 𝜓𝑛 (𝑥) given by 1 ( + )𝑛 𝐴𝑎 𝜓0 (𝑥) (27) 𝜓𝑛 (𝑥) = √ 𝑛! 𝑚0 𝜔 2 𝑉𝑎 (𝑥) = 2 (∫ where 𝜓0 (𝑥) is the ground state defined by 𝐴− 𝑎 𝜓0 (𝑥) = 0. At this point, it is important to stress that the subscript 𝑎 in 𝑉𝑎 distinguishes different potentials for different orderings of the kinetic term. However, the Hamiltonian 𝐻𝑎 is the same for any value of 𝑎, and the subscript only labels different 234 S. Cruz y Cruz orderings of 𝑝 and 𝑚. Therefore, neither the spectrum, nor the eigenfunctions of 𝐻𝑎 should depend on 𝑎. Indeed, the substitution of (25) into (18) gives √ ∫ 𝑚0 𝜔 2 ℏ ℏ ± ± 𝐽𝑑𝑥 (28) 𝐴𝑎 = 𝐴 = ∓ √ D ± √ (D ln 𝐽) + 2 2 2 2 which are actually independent of the ordering parameter (see [17]). Note also that ) ( √ ∫ 𝑚0 𝜔 2 ℏ ± 1/2 1/2 𝐴 𝐽 𝐽𝑑𝑥 = 𝐽 1/2 a± , ∓√ D + =𝐽 (29) 2 2 of the CM harmonic oscillator where we can identify to a± as the ∫ ladder operators √ 𝑑 by making the correspondence 𝐽𝑑𝑥 → 𝑦(𝑥), 𝑚0 D → 𝑑𝑦 . √ In this way, if 𝜓0 (𝑥) = 𝐽(𝑥)𝜙0 (𝑦(𝑥)), then 𝜙0 (𝑦) must satisfy ( ) √ ℏ 𝑑 𝑚0 𝜔 2 √ + 𝑦 𝜙0 (𝑦) = 0 (30) 2 2𝑚0 𝑑𝑦 which is nothing but the equation defining the ground state of the CM harmonic oscillator. The whole set of wave functions 𝜓𝑛 (𝑥) are hence constructed as (∫ ) 1/2 𝜓𝑛 (𝑥) = 𝐽 (𝑥)𝜙𝑛 𝐽(𝑥)𝑑𝑥 , (31) with 𝜙𝑛 (𝑦) the wave functions of the constant mass harmonic oscillator, consistently with the point canonical transformation [9]. Some plots of potential and corresponding wave functions are presented in Figure 2. Figure 2. Position-dependent mass potentials and its corresponding first 4 wave functions for masses 𝑚1 (left) and 𝑚2 (right). Observe that the potentials depend on the ordering parameter 𝑎, upper curves correspond to smaller values of 𝑎. Note though, that the wave functions are the same for any value of 𝑎. Here we have used 𝑚0 = 2, 𝑘 = 2, 𝜔 = 0.8 and 𝑎 = 0, 0.25, 0.35, 0.5. Observe that the PDM harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian 𝐻𝑎 can be also factorized as ℏ𝜔 . (32) 𝐻𝑎 = 𝐴− 𝐴+ − 2 Factorization Method and the Position-dependent Mass Problem 235 It is well known, for the CM case, that the operators 𝐴± are not unique [20]. It is not difficult to prove this fact also for the PDM potentials, indeed, 𝑊𝑎 (𝑥) fulfills the Riccati equation ( ( ) ) √ ℏ 1 ℏ𝜔 1 2 2 √ D𝑊𝑎 + 2 2ℏ 𝑎 + (33) (Dln𝐽)𝑊𝑎 + 𝑊𝑎 = 𝑉𝑎 − 2ℏ 𝑎 + D2 ln𝐽 + 4 4 2 2 with the general solution √ ( ) ∫ √ 𝑚0 𝜔 2 1 𝑊𝑎 (𝑥, Γ) = 𝐽(𝑥)𝑑𝑥 − 2ℏ 𝑎 + D ln 𝐽(𝑥) 2 4 ] [ √ ∫ ∫𝐽𝑑𝑥 𝑚 𝜔 𝑚0 𝜔 ℏ2 − ℏ0 𝑡2 𝑒 𝑑𝑡 , (34) + √ D ln Γ + ℏ 2 0 leading to new (𝑎-independent) operators [ ] √ ∫ ∫𝐽𝑑𝑥 2 𝑚0 𝜔 2 𝑚 𝜔 ℏ 0 𝐵 ± = 𝐴± + √ D ln Γ + 𝑒− ℏ 𝑡 𝑑𝑡 ℏ 2 0 (35) such that 𝐻𝑎 = 𝐵 − 𝐵 + − ℏ𝜔/2. It is clear that these operators do not close the ˜ 𝑎 by apHeisenberg algebra, meaning that we can construct new Hamiltonians 𝐻 plying a Darboux transformation [20] with ˜ 𝑎 (Γ) = 𝐵 + 𝐵 − + ℏ𝜔 = 1 𝑚𝑎 𝑝𝑚2𝑏 𝑝𝑚𝑎 + 𝑉˜𝑎 (𝑥, Γ) 𝐻 2 2 [ 𝑉˜𝑎 (𝑥, Γ) = 𝑉𝑎 (𝑥) − ℏ2 D2 ln Γ + which is non singular whenever ∣Γ∣ > shown below. √ 𝜋 2 . √ 𝑚0 𝜔 ℏ ∫ 0 ∫ 𝐽𝑑𝑥 𝑒 (36) ] 𝑚 𝜔 − ℏ0 𝑡2 𝑑𝑡 , (37) Some plots for the new potentials are Figure 3. Some new PDM potentials isospectral to the harmonic oscillator for different choices of the new parameter Γ. Plots on (a) correspond to 𝑚1 while those in (b) to 𝑚2 . In this graphics 𝑚0 = 2, 𝑘 = 2,𝜔 = 0.8, 𝑎 = 0, Γ = 0.75, 0.8, 1 and Γ → ∞. 236 S. Cruz y Cruz Additionally, both Hamiltonians show the intertwining relations 𝐻𝑎 𝐵 − = ˜ ˜ 𝑎 𝐵 + , and the wave functions 𝜃𝑛 (𝑥) of 𝐻 ˜ 𝑎 can be easily con𝐵 𝐻𝑎 , 𝐵 + 𝐻𝑎 = 𝐻 ± structed by the application of 𝐵 on the wave functions of 𝐻𝑎 : − 𝜃𝑛 (𝑥) = 𝐵 + 𝜓𝑛−1 (𝑥), 𝑛 = 1, 2, 3, . . . (38) corresponding to the spectral values 𝐸𝑛 . There is, though, an isolated eigenvector ˜ 𝑎 , orthonormal to the whole set {𝜃𝑛 (𝑥), 𝑛 = 1, 2, . . .}, but not connected 𝜃0 (𝑥) of 𝐻 to {𝜓𝑛 (𝑥), 𝑛 = 0, 1, 2, . . .} by 𝐵 ± defined as 𝐵 − 𝜃0 (𝑥) = 0, (39) and corresponding to the eigenvalue 𝐸0 [20]. 4. Concluding remarks We have considered the PDM harmonic oscillator from classical and quantum mechanical points of view. In both cases the problem was addressed by means of the factorization method. The technique is consistent with the point canonical transformation. Some examples were presented in order to show the effect of a regular and singular variable mass in the dynamics of the system. In the quantum case, the solution was given for a generalized ordering between 𝑚 and 𝑝. New potentials, isospectral to the CM harmonic oscillators, were obtained from the intertwining relations. The factorization method can be also generalized for different underlying algebraic structure of both, classical and quantum PDM problems [23]. In the quantum case, new PDM supersymmetric partners can be also defined [22,24], and different families of PDM coherent states can be constructed [25]. Results of these generalizations can be found elsewhere [26]. Acknowledgment This work was completed with the support of Projects SIP20113705 and SIP20111061 of IPN-Mexico. The author thanks the Organizers of the XXX Workshop on Geometric Methods in Physics for the invitation to participate in the Conference, and for the kind hospitality at the Bia̷lowieża Forest. References [1] G.H. Wannier, Phys. Rev. 52 (1937), 191 [2] G. Bastard, Wave mechanics apllied to semiconductor heterostructures Les Ulis Editions de Physique, Paris, 1998 [3] M. von Roos, Phys. Rev. B 35 (1983), 5493 [4] A.J. Peter, K. Navaneethakrishnan, Physica E 40 (2008), 2747 [5] J.F. Cariñena, A.M. Perelomov, M.F. Rañada, M. Santander, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 41 (2008), 085301 Factorization Method and the Position-dependent Mass Problem 237 [6] A. Ballesteros, A. Enciso, J.F. Herranz, O. Ragnisco, D. Riglioni, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 50 (2011), 2268 [7] A. Ballesteros, A. Enciso, J.F. Herranz, O. Ragnisco, D. Riglioni, Phys. Lett. A 375 (2011), 1431 [8] J.M. Lévy-Leblond, Phys. Rev. A 52 (1995), 1845 [9] A.D. Alhaidari, Phys. Rev. A 66 (2002), 042116 [10] V. Milanović, Z. Ikonić, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 32 (1999), 7001 [11] A.R. Plastino, A. Rigo, M. Casas, F. Gracias, A. Plastino, Phys. Rev. A 60 (1999), 4318 [12] B. Gönül, B. Gönül, D. Tutcu, O. Özer, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 17 (2002), 2057 [13] B. Bagchi, T. Tanaka, Phys. Lett. A 372 (2008), 5390 [14] C. Quesne, Ann. Phys. 321 (2006), 1221 [15] B. Roy, P. Roy, Phys. Lett. A 340 (2005), 70 [16] S. Cruz y Cruz, J. Negro, L.M. Nieto, Phys. Lett. A 369 (2007), 400 [17] S. Cruz y Cruz, O. Rosas-Ortiz, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 42 (2009), 185205 [18] O. Mustafa, S.H. Mazharimousabi, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 47 (2008), 446 [19] A. Ganguly, Ş Kuru, J. Negro, L.M. Nieto, Phys. Lett A 360 (2006), 228 [20] B. Mielnik, J. Math. Phys. 25 (1984), 3387–3389 [21] A.A. Andrianov, N.V. Borisov, M.V. Ioffe, Theor. Math. Phys. 61 (1984), 1078 [22] B. Mielnik, O. Rosas-Ortiz, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 37 (2004), 10007 [23] Ş Kuru, J. Negro, Ann. Phys. 323 (2008), 413 [24] B. Mielnik, L.M. Nieto, O. Rosas-Ortiz, Phys. Lett. A 269 (2000), 70 [25] D.J. Fernndez, V. Hussin, O. Rosas-Ortiz, J. Phys. Math. Theor. 40 (2007), 6491 [26] S. Cruz y Cruz, O Rosas-Ortiz preprint Cinvestav-UPIITA 2011 Sara Cruz y Cruz SEPI-UPIITA, Instituto Politécnico Nacional Av. Instituto Politécnico Nacional 2580 La Laguna Ticomán, CP 07340 México D.F., Mexico e-mail: [email protected]