Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jaynes Cumming model - sigma minus vs sigma z #3

Open
mklilley opened this issue Jan 9, 2020 · 4 comments
Open

Jaynes Cumming model - sigma minus vs sigma z #3

mklilley opened this issue Jan 9, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@mklilley
Copy link

mklilley commented Jan 9, 2020

Hi.

I'm very new to Qutip and still in the process of refreshing my quantum physics knowledge so please forgive me if this is a silly question.

In the notebook on the Jaynes Cumming model I cannot understand why the hamiltonian is written with the sm.dag()*sm for the atomic part in the following:

H = wc * a.dag() * a + wa * sm.dag() * sm + g * (a.dag() * sm + a * sm.dag())

When I look at the description of Jaynes Cumming model that you give and also on Wikipedia it seems like we should be using something like sigmaz instead, i.e.

H = wc * a.dag() * a + wa *tensor(qeye(N),sigmaz())+ g * (a.dag() * sm + a * sm.dag())

I wondered whether they might be the same, but they do not appear to be when I calculate them.

Thanks for your time.

Matt

@lukelbro
Copy link

Hi Matt,

Did you get to the bottom of this? I am also confused.

Luke

@mklilley
Copy link
Author

Hey. No one replied to me so never completely got to the bottom of it. I am however pretty confident now that it's just an error in their code.

@lukelbro
Copy link

lukelbro commented Jul 19, 2020

Hi Matt,

I found Chapter 15 of Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics - Leonard Mandel, Emil Wolf very useful for figuring out what was going on.

Our confusion is about the atomic Hamiltonian which is written as either:

A harmonic oscillator:

Where and so that in the excited state = and in the ground state = 0.

Equivalent to a spin 1/2 particle in a magnetic field:

Where , is the inversion operator (which is often written as ). Be careful as this is subtly different to Pauli Z. Your second Hamiltonian should be:

H = wc * a.dag() * a - wa * tensor(qeye(N),sigmaz())+ g * (a.dag() * sm + a * sm.dag())

The reference energy level is usually dropped as a constant does not affect the dynamics. If is in the ground state we can see that , and the hamiltonians are equivalent.

Sorry about the weird \rangles and \langles, I can't figure out why they are rendering like that.

@mklilley
Copy link
Author

Thanks @lukelbro . Forgive me, I can't see the difference between the Hamiltonian you wrote and my second one...maybe I just need some more coffee lol.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants