text:
# Anisotropic harmonic oscillator in a static electromagnetic fieldpublished in Commun. Theor. Phys. 38 (2002) 667-674.

## I Introduction

The anisotropic harmonic oscillator potential is of physical interest in quantum mechanics, since it may describe the motion of, say, an electron in an anisotropic metal lattice. With external electromagnetic fields imposed on, such models may also be useful in semiconductor physics . For an isotropic harmonic oscillator potential and a homogeneous static magnetic field the Schrödinger equation can be easily solved in the cylindrical coordinates. If the harmonic oscillator potential is anisotropic, the problem is not so easy. Nevertheless, it can be solved analytically because the Hamiltonian is quadratic in the canonical coordinates and momenta. There exists quite general formalisms for solving systems with such quadratic Hamiltonians , and the above problem represents a typical example . In Ref.  only the isotropic case is considered as an example for illustrating the general method. The anisotropic case with a homogeneous static magnetic field was studied in Refs. . In these works the magnetic field was arranged to point in one of the rectangular axis directions. In this paper we will solve the problem in a somewhat easier formalism. A homogeneous static electric field is also included, though its effect is trivial. We will also deal with a case where the magnetic field has a more general direction. This seems not having been considered before. Coherent and squeezed states of these systems will be discussed in some detail. In terms of these concepts the time evolution of some wave packets can be discussed very conveniently.

In the next section we consider a charged harmonic oscillator with arbitrary frequencies $`\omega _x`$, $`\omega _y`$ and $`\omega _z`$ in three rectangular axis directions. A homogeneous static magnetic field in the $`z`$ direction and a homogeneous static electric field in an arbitrary direction are imposed to the system. The problem can be easily reduced to one equivalent to the case without an electric field by making some coordinate transformation. In Sec. III we diagonalize the reduced Hamiltonian and give the energy eigenvalues. Although this has been previously done, the method used here is different and seems more convenient, especially for the subsequent discussions of coherent and squeezed states. The wave functions are explicitly worked out in Sec. IV. In Sec. V we discuss some special cases, some of which may need different handling, or even cannot be solved. In Sec. VI we consider a somewhat different case where $`\omega _z=0`$ and $`E_z=0`$ ($`E_z`$ is the $`z`$ component of the electric field), but the magnetic field has a $`x`$ or $`y`$ component, in addition to the $`z`$ component. To our knowledge, this was not considered before. It is solved analytically by the formalism of Sec. III. In Sec. VII we discuss the coherent and squeezed states and their time evolution in detail. A brief summary is given in Sec. VIII.

## II Reduction of the Hamiltonian

Consider a charged particle with charge $`q`$ and mass $`M`$, moving in an anisotropic harmonic oscillator potential, a homogeneous static magnetic field $`𝐁=B𝐞_z`$, and a homogeneous static electric field $`𝐄=E_x𝐞_x+E_y𝐞_y+E_z𝐞_z`$, where $`𝐞_x`$, $`𝐞_y`$ and $`𝐞_z`$ are unit vectors of the rectangular coordinate system, and $`B`$, $`E_x`$, $`E_y`$ and $`E_z`$ are all constants. The stationary Schrödinger equation is

$$H^\mathrm{T}\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐱)=^\mathrm{T}\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐱),$$
(1)
where the Hamiltonian is

$$H^\mathrm{T}=\frac{1}{2M}\left(𝐩\frac{q}{c}𝐀\right)^2+\frac{1}{2}M(\omega _x^2x^2+\omega _y^2y^2+\omega _z^2z^2)q𝐄𝐱,$$
(2)
where $`𝐄𝐱=E_xx+E_yy+E_zz`$. Since the magnetic field points in the $`z`$ direction, one may take $`A_x`$ and $`A_y`$ independent of $`z`$, and $`A_z=0`$. Then the Hamiltonian can be decomposed as $`H^\mathrm{T}=H^{xy}+H^z`$, where

$$H^{xy}=\frac{1}{2M}\left[\left(p_x\frac{q}{c}A_x\right)^2+\left(p_y\frac{q}{c}A_y\right)^2\right]+\frac{1}{2}M(\omega _x^2x^2+\omega _y^2y^2)q(E_xx+E_yy),$$
(3)
and

$$H^z=\frac{1}{2M}p_z^2+\frac{1}{2}M\omega _z^2z^2qE_zz.$$
(4)
Therefore the total wave function can be factorized as $`\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐱)=\psi (x,y)Z(z)`$, where $`\psi (x,y)`$ and $`Z(z)`$ satisfy the following equations:

$$H^{xy}\psi (x,y)=^{xy}\psi (x,y),$$
(5)
$$H^zZ(z)=^zZ(z),$$
(6)
with $`^{xy}+^z=^\mathrm{T}`$. Obviously, $`H_z`$ can be recast in the form

$$H^z=\frac{1}{2M}p_z^2+\frac{1}{2}M\omega _z^2(zz_0)^2\frac{q^2E_z^2}{2M\omega _z^2}$$
(7)
where $`z_0=qE_z/M\omega _z^2`$, so that Eq. (6) can be easily solved with the following results.

$$_{n_3}^z=\left(n_3+\frac{1}{2}\right)\mathrm{}\omega _z\frac{q^2E_z^2}{2M\omega _z^2},n_3=0,1,2,\mathrm{},$$
(8)
$$Z_{n_3}(z)=\psi _{n_3}^{\omega _z}(zz_0),n_3=0,1,2,\mathrm{},$$
(9)
where we have quoted the standard wave functions for harmonic oscillators:

$$\psi _n^\omega (x)=\left(\frac{\sqrt{M\omega }}{2^nn!\sqrt{\pi \mathrm{}}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{M\omega }{2\mathrm{}}x^2\right)H_n\left(\sqrt{\frac{M\omega }{\mathrm{}}}x\right),n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.$$
(10)
Therefore our main task is to solve Eq. (5). We take the gauge

$$A_x=\frac{1}{2}B\stackrel{~}{y},A_y=\frac{1}{2}B\stackrel{~}{x},$$
(11)
where $`\stackrel{~}{x}=xx_0`$, $`\stackrel{~}{y}=yy_0`$, and $`x_0=qE_x/M\omega _x^2`$, $`y_0=qE_y/M\omega _y^2`$, then $`H^{xy}`$ can be written as

$$H^{xy}=\frac{1}{2M}(p_x^2+p_y^2)+\frac{1}{2}M\omega _1^2\stackrel{~}{x}^2+\frac{1}{2}M\omega _2^2\stackrel{~}{y}^2\omega _B\stackrel{~}{L}_z\frac{q^2E_x^2}{2M\omega _x^2}\frac{q^2E_y^2}{2M\omega _y^2},$$
(12)
where $`\stackrel{~}{L}_z=\stackrel{~}{x}p_y\stackrel{~}{y}p_x`$, $`\omega _B=qB/2Mc`$, and

$$\omega _1=\sqrt{\omega _x^2+\omega _B^2},\omega _2=\sqrt{\omega _y^2+\omega _B^2}.$$
(13)
Note that $`\omega _B`$ may be either positive or negative, depending on the signs of $`q`$ and $`B`$. Now Eq. (5) can be written as

$$H\psi (x,y)=\psi (x,y),$$
(15)
where

$$H=\frac{1}{2M}(p_x^2+p_y^2)+\frac{1}{2}M\omega _1^2\stackrel{~}{x}^2+\frac{1}{2}M\omega _2^2\stackrel{~}{y}^2\omega _B\stackrel{~}{L}_z,$$
(16)
$$=^{xy}+\frac{q^2E_x^2}{2M\omega _x^2}+\frac{q^2E_y^2}{2M\omega _y^2}.$$
(17)
Eq. (13) has the same form as that for an anisotropic harmonic oscillator moving on the $`xy`$ plane under the influence of a homogeneous static magnetic field perpendicular to the plane, except that $`x`$, $`y`$ are replaced by $`\stackrel{~}{x}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{y}`$. The main feature is that the reduced Hamiltonian is quadratic in the canonical variables. Though this equation has been studied by some authors, we will solve it in a somewhat different and simpler way in the next two sections. Here we point out that the calculations below will be simpler if one take the gauge $`A_x=B\stackrel{~}{y}`$, $`A_y=0`$ or $`A_x=0`$, $`A_y=B\stackrel{~}{x}`$. However, we prefer the above gauge (11), since in this gauge it would be convenient to compare the results with known ones when $`\omega _x=\omega _y`$, or $`\omega _1=\omega _2`$.

## III Diagonalization of the reduced Hamiltonian

If $`\omega _x=\omega _y`$, Eq. (13) can be easily solved in the cylindrical coordinates. In the general case this does not work, so other methods are necessary. We define a column vector

$$X=(\stackrel{~}{x},p_x,\stackrel{~}{y},p_y)^\tau ,$$
(18)
where $`\tau `$ denotes matrix transposition, then the reduced Hamiltonian (16) can be written as

$$H=\frac{1}{2}X^\tau X=\frac{1}{2}X^{}X,$$
(19)
where $``$ is a c-number matrix which we take to be symmetric. We do not write down $``$ here since this is easy. If one can diagonalize $``$ then the Hamiltonian would become a sum of two one-dimensional Hamiltonians for harmonic oscillators or something similar (repulsive harmonic oscillators or free particles). However, a crucial point here is to preserve the commutation relation

$$[X_\alpha ,X_\beta ]=\mathrm{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_y)_{\alpha \beta },\alpha ,\beta =1,2,3,4$$
(20)
after the linear transformation that diagonalizes $``$, where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_y=\mathrm{diag}(\sigma _y,\sigma _y)`$, and $`\sigma _y`$ is the second Pauli matrix. Therefore the needed transformations are the so called symplectic ones . Here we will transform the Hamiltonian into a form expressed in terms of raising and lowering operators, so the formalism is somewhat different. Let us proceed as follows.

Because $`H`$ is quadratic in the canonical variables $`X`$, it is easy to show that

$$[\mathrm{i}H,X]=\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }X,$$
(21)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Sigma }_y$$
(22)
is another c-number matrix. As both $``$ and $`i\mathrm{\Sigma }_y`$ are real, so is $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Our first step is to diagonalize $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, so we write down it here.

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 1/M& \omega _B& 0\\ M\omega _1^2& 0& 0& \omega _B\\ \omega _B& 0& 0& 1/M\\ 0& \omega _B& M\omega _2^2& 0\end{array}\right).$$
(23)
The characteristic polynomial for this matrix is

$$det(\lambda I\mathrm{\Omega })=\lambda ^4+b\lambda ^2+c,$$
(25)
where

$$b=\omega _x^2+\omega _y^2+4\omega _B^2,c=\omega _x^2\omega _y^2.$$
(26)
Since

$$\mathrm{\Delta }b^24c=(\omega _x^2\omega _y^2)^2+8\omega _B^2(\omega _x^2+\omega _y^2+2\omega _B^2)0,$$
(27)
we have two real roots for $`\lambda ^2`$. If $`\omega _x=0`$ or $`\omega _y=0`$, one of the two roots is zero, and the following discussions are not valid. We will return to this case latter. Currently we assume that both $`\omega _x`$ and $`\omega _y`$ are nonzero, then $`c>0`$ and $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }}<b`$, and both roots for $`\lambda ^2`$ are negative. Therefore the above characteristic polynomial has four pure imaginary roots:

$$\{\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\lambda _3,\lambda _4\}=\{\mathrm{i}\sigma _1,\mathrm{i}\sigma _1,\mathrm{i}\sigma _2,\mathrm{i}\sigma _2\},$$
(28)
where

$$\sigma _1=\left(\frac{b+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{2}\right)^{1/2},\sigma _2=\left(\frac{b\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{2}\right)^{1/2},$$
(29)
and $`\sigma _1\sigma _2>0`$. The equal sign appears when $`\omega _B=0`$ and $`\omega _x=\omega _y`$.

Because $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is not symmetric, right eigenvectors and left ones are different. We define two left eigenvectors (row vectors) $`u_i`$ corresponding to the eigenvalues $`\mathrm{i}\sigma _i`$ ($`i=1,2`$) by

$$u_i\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{i}\sigma _iu_i,i=1,2,$$
(30)
then the other two are $`u_i^{}`$, corresponding to the eigenvalues $`\mathrm{i}\sigma _i`$ ($`i=1,2`$). Similarly, the right eigenvectors (column vectors) are $`v_i`$ and $`v_i^{}`$ ($`i=1,2`$), satisfying the equations

$$\mathrm{\Omega }v_i=\mathrm{i}\sigma _iv_i,i=1,2$$
(31)
and the complex conjugate ones. From these eigenvalue equations it can be shown that

$$u_i^{}v_j=u_iv_j^{}=0,i,j=1,2,$$
(33)
and $`u_iv_j=u_i^{}v_j^{}=0`$ for $`\sigma _i\sigma _j`$ (this should be checked individually when $`\sigma _1=\sigma _2`$, see below). By appropriately choosing the normalization constants we have

$$u_iv_j=u_i^{}v_j^{}=\delta _{ij},i,j=1,2.$$
(34)
The specific expression for the above eigenvectors are not necessary in this section. However, a relation between the left and right eigenvectors is very useful in the following. Using Eqs. (22), (30) and (31), it is easy to show that $`v_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_yu_i^{}`$, so we choose

$$v_i=\mathrm{\Sigma }_yu_i^{},i=1,2.$$
(35)
Note that the condition (34) only determine the product of the normalization constants in $`u_i`$ and $`v_i`$. With this relation both constants are fixed (up to a phase factor). Also note that Eqs. (34) and (35) lead to $`u_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_yu_i^{}=1`$ (no summation over $`i`$ on the left-hand side). The left-hand side of this equation is real (which can be easily shown), but not necessarily positive. Actually it can be shown by using the eigenvalue equation that $`u_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_yu_i^{}=(u_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_y)(u_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_y)^{}/\sigma _i`$. Thus the sign of this quantity depends on the matrix $``$, and in general Eq. (35) should be replaced by $`v_i=ϵ_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_yu_i^{}`$ where $`ϵ_i=\pm 1`$. For the present case, however, Eq. (35) is sound.

Now we define a $`4\times 4`$ matrix $`Q`$ by arranging the column vectors in the following order:

$$Q=(v_1,v_1^{},v_2,v_2^{}).$$
(36)
Using Eq. (31) it is easy to show that

$$Q^1=(u_1^\tau ,u_1^\tau ,u_2^\tau ,u_2^\tau )^\tau .$$
(37)
With the help of the eigenvalue equations (30) and (31), we have

$$Q^1\mathrm{\Omega }Q=\mathrm{diag}(\mathrm{i}\sigma _1,\mathrm{i}\sigma _1,\mathrm{i}\sigma _2,\mathrm{i}\sigma _2).$$
(38)
Therefore the matrix $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is diagonalized. Using the relation (35), it is not difficult to show that

$$Q^{}=\mathrm{\Sigma }_zQ^1\mathrm{\Sigma }_y,$$
(39)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_z=\mathrm{diag}(\sigma _z,\sigma _z)`$, and $`\sigma _z`$ is the third Pauli matrix. This relation is very useful in the following.

Next we will diagonalize the Hamiltonian. With the above results this is easy. We define two operators

$$a_i=u_iX/\sqrt{\mathrm{}},i=1,2.$$
(41)
Their hermitian conjugates are

$$a_i^{}=u_i^{}X/\sqrt{\mathrm{}},i=1,2.$$
(42)
Using Eqs. (20), (31) and (35) it is easy to show that the nonvanishing commutators among these operators are

$$[a_i,a_j^{}]=\delta _{ij},i,j=1,2.$$
(43)
Therefore they are similar to the raising and lowering operators for harmonic oscillators. We define a column vector

$$A=(a_1,a_1^{},a_2,a_2^{})^\tau ,$$
(44)
then Eq. (III) can be written in the matrix form

$$A=Q^1X/\sqrt{\mathrm{}}.$$
(45)
The inverse is

$$X=\sqrt{\mathrm{}}QA,$$
(46)
and thus

$$X^\tau =X^{}=\sqrt{\mathrm{}}A^{}Q^{}.$$
(47)
Substituting these into Eq. (19), and using Eqs. (22), (38) and (39), it is rather easy to show that

$$H=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}A^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }A,$$
(48)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{diag}(\sigma _1,\sigma _1,\sigma _2,\sigma _2)`$. Using the commutation relations (43) this becomes

$$H=\mathrm{}\sigma _1(a_1^{}a_1+\frac{1}{2})+\mathrm{}\sigma _2(a_2^{}a_2+\frac{1}{2}).$$
(49)
Therefore the Hamiltonian is diagonalized. More specifically, it becomes the sum of two one-dimensional harmonic oscillator Hamiltonians. The energy levels are readily available:

$$_{n_1n_2}=\mathrm{}\sigma _1(n_1+\frac{1}{2})+\mathrm{}\sigma _2(n_2+\frac{1}{2}),n_1,n_2=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.$$
(50)
When $`\omega _B=0`$, we have $`\sigma _1=\mathrm{max}(\omega _x,\omega _y)`$ and $`\sigma _2=\mathrm{min}(\omega _x,\omega _y)`$, and these energy levels reduce to known results, as expected. Substituting these into Eq. (17) we obtain the energy levels for the motion on the $`xy`$ plane:

$$_{n_1n_2}^{xy}=\mathrm{}\sigma _1\left(n_1+\frac{1}{2}\right)+\mathrm{}\sigma _2\left(n_2+\frac{1}{2}\right)\frac{q^2E_x^2}{2M\omega _x^2}\frac{q^2E_y^2}{2M\omega _y^2},n_1,n_2=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.$$
(51)
The total energy is the sum of $`_{n_1n_2}^{xy}`$ and $`_{n_3}^z`$ given by Eq. (8). The wave functions on the $`xy`$ plane will be worked out in the next section.

The method employed in this section is similar to that used in Ref.  which dealt with a charged particle moving in a rotating magnetic field (also studied in Refs.  and ). However, we present here a relation between the right and left eigenvectors, which leads to the very useful relation (39), so that the calculations here seems more straightforward and easier. The method can be easily extended to systems with more degrees of freedom.

## IV The wave functions in the coordinate representation

The eigenstates of the Hamiltonian (49) corresponding to the eigenvalues (50) are

$$|n_1n_2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{n_1!n_2!}}(a_1^{})^{n_1}(a_2^{})^{n_2}|00,n_1,n_2=0,1,2,\mathrm{},$$
(52)
where $`|00`$ is the ground state satisfying

$$a_1|00=a_2|00=0.$$
(53)
The task of this section is to work out these states in the coordinate representation, that is, the wave functions

$$\psi _{n_1n_2}(x,y)=xy|n_1n_2.$$
(54)
For this purpose the left eigenvectors are necessary. These are given by

$$u_i=K_i\mathbf{(}\mathrm{i}M\sigma _i(\sigma _i^2\omega _y^22\omega _B^2),\sigma _i^2\omega _y^2,M\omega _B(\sigma _i^2+\omega _y^2),\mathrm{i2}\omega _B\sigma _i\mathbf{)},i=1,2$$
(56)
and their complex conjugates, where the normalization constants are

$$K_i=\{2M\sigma _i[(\sigma _i^2\omega _y^2)^2+4\omega _B^2\omega _y^2]\}^{1/2}.$$
(57)
When $`\omega _B=0`$, $`\{\sigma _i|i=1,2\}=\{\omega _x,\omega _y\}`$. For $`\omega _x`$, the last two components of $`u_i`$ vanish. For $`\omega _y`$, the first two components of $`u_i`$ vanish. Thus the orthogonality is ensured. If the further condition $`\omega _x=\omega _y`$ holds (which yields $`\sigma _1=\sigma _2`$), one may take the limit $`\omega _y\omega _x`$ after everything is worked out.

First we should work out the ground state. In the coordinate representation, Eq. (53) takes the form

$$(\xi _{ij}\stackrel{~}{x}_j\mathrm{i}\mathrm{}\eta _{ij}_j)\psi _{00}(x,y)=0,i=1,2,$$
(58)
where $`x_1=x`$, $`x_2=y`$ and similarly for $`\stackrel{~}{x}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{x}_2`$, $`_j=/x_j=/\stackrel{~}{x}_j`$, and we have defined two $`2\times 2`$ matrices

$$\xi =(\xi _{ij})=\left(\begin{array}{cc}u_{11}& u_{13}\\ u_{21}& u_{23}\end{array}\right),\eta =(\eta _{ij})=\left(\begin{array}{cc}u_{12}& u_{14}\\ u_{22}& u_{24}\end{array}\right),$$
(59)
where $`u_{i\beta }`$ ($`i=1,2`$; $`\beta =1,2,3,4`$) is the $`\beta `$th component of $`u_i`$. Suppose that

$$\psi _{00}(x,y)=N_0\mathrm{exp}[s(x,y)],s(x,y)=\stackrel{~}{x}_i\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ij}\stackrel{~}{x}_j/2\mathrm{},$$
(60)
where $`S`$ is a $`2\times 2`$ symmetric matrix whose elements are complex numbers, and $`N_0`$ is a normalization constant. Substituting this into Eq. (58) we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{i}\eta ^1\xi .$$
(61)
This can be easily worked out. The elements are

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{11}=\frac{M\omega _x(\sigma _1+\sigma _2)}{\omega _x+\omega _y}\mathrm{}\lambda _x^2,$$
(63)
$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{22}=\frac{M\omega _y(\sigma _1+\sigma _2)}{\omega _x+\omega _y}\mathrm{}\lambda _y^2,$$
(64)
$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{12}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{21}=\frac{\mathrm{i}M\omega _B(\omega _x\omega _y)}{\omega _x+\omega _y}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{}\lambda _{xy},$$
(65)
where the relation $`\sigma _1\sigma _2=\omega _x\omega _y`$ has been used. Therefore the ground-state wave function is

$$\psi _{00}(x,y)=N_0\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{2}\lambda _x^2\stackrel{~}{x}^2\frac{1}{2}\lambda _y^2\stackrel{~}{y}^2\mathrm{i}\lambda _{xy}\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{y}),$$
(67)
where the normalization constant is

$$N_0=\sqrt{\frac{\lambda _x\lambda _y}{\pi }}=\left[\frac{M(\sigma _1+\sigma _2)\sqrt{\omega _x\omega _y}}{\pi \mathrm{}(\omega _x+\omega _y)}\right]^{1/2}.$$
(68)
When $`\omega _B=0`$, we have $`\lambda _x=\sqrt{M\omega _x/\mathrm{}}`$, $`\lambda _y=\sqrt{M\omega _y/\mathrm{}}`$, and $`\lambda _{xy}=0`$. On the other hand, if $`\omega _x=\omega _y`$, we have $`\omega _1=\omega _2`$, $`\sigma _1=\omega _1+|\omega _B|`$, $`\sigma _2=\omega _1|\omega _B|`$, and $`\lambda _x=\lambda _y=\sqrt{M\omega _1/\mathrm{}}`$, $`\lambda _{xy}=0`$. These are all expected results.

It is remarkable that the uncertainty relation for the above ground state is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }x\mathrm{\Delta }p_x=\mathrm{\Delta }y\mathrm{\Delta }p_y=\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}\left(1+\frac{\lambda _{xy}^2}{\lambda _x^2\lambda _y^2}\right)^{1/2}\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}.$$
(69)
The equal sign holds only when $`B=0`$ or $`\omega _x=\omega _y`$. Therefore the ground state is in general not a minimum wave packet, though it is of the Gaussian type. It seems that this is not noticed in the previous literature.

For any function $`F(x,y)`$, it is easy to show that

$$(\xi _{ij}^{}\stackrel{~}{x}_j\mathrm{i}\mathrm{}\eta _{ij}^{}_j)F(x,y)=\mathrm{i}\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}[s^{}(x,y)]\eta _{ij}^{}_j\{\mathrm{exp}[s^{}(x,y)]F(x,y)\},i=1,2.$$
(70)
According to Eq. (52), and using the above relation we obtain

$`\psi _{n_1n_2}(x,y)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{i}\sqrt{\mathrm{}})^{n_1+n_2}}{\sqrt{n_1!n_2!}}}N_0K_1^{n_1}K_2^{n_2}\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{2}\lambda _x^2\stackrel{~}{x}^2+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _y^2\stackrel{~}{y}^2\mathrm{i}\lambda _{xy}\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{y})`$ (72)
$`[(\sigma _1^2\omega _y^2)_x\mathrm{i2}\omega _B\sigma _1_y]^{n_1}[(\sigma _2^2\omega _y^2)_x\mathrm{i2}\omega _B\sigma _2_y]^{n_2}\mathrm{exp}(\lambda _x^2\stackrel{~}{x}^2\lambda _y^2\stackrel{~}{y}^2).`$
## V Some special cases

In this section we discuss some special cases where some of the parameters are zero.

1. If $`\omega _z=0`$ and $`E_z=0`$, the motion in the $`z`$ direction is free, and $`_z0`$ is continuous.

2. If $`\omega _z=0`$ but $`E_z0`$, the motion in the $`z`$ direction is that in a homogeneous electric field, which is also well known, and $`_z`$ is also continuous, and can take on any real value .

3. In the preceding sections we have assumed that both $`\omega _x`$ and $`\omega _y`$ are nonzero. In this case, if any one of $`E_x`$ or $`E_y`$ is zero, it can be substituted into the above results directly and no modification to the formalism is needed. However, if one of $`\omega _x`$ and $`\omega _y`$ is zero, the situation is different. We would deal with $`\omega _y=0`$ in the following. The other case could be discussed in a similar way.

4. If $`\omega _y=0`$ but $`E_y0`$, the Hamiltonian could not be reduced to a quadratic form, and to our knowledge the problem could not be solved analytically.

5. If $`\omega _y=0`$ and $`E_y=0`$, we choose the gauge $`A_x=0`$, $`A_y=Bx`$, and let

$$\psi (x,y)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}ky)\varphi (x),$$
(73)
then $`\varphi (x)`$ satisfies the equation

$$\left[\frac{1}{2M}p_x^2+\frac{1}{2}M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2(xx_k)^2\right]\varphi (x)=^x\varphi (x),$$
(74)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1=\sqrt{\omega _x^2+4\omega _B^2},x_k=\frac{qE_x+2k\mathrm{}\omega _B}{M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2},$$
(75)
and

$$^x=^{xy}+\frac{(qE_x+2k\mathrm{}\omega _B)^2}{2M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2}\frac{\mathrm{}^2k^2}{2M}.$$
(76)
The energy levels and wave functions for Eq. (74) are readily available, so the final results are

$$_{n_1k}^{xy}=\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1\left(n_1+\frac{1}{2}\right)\frac{(qE_x+2k\mathrm{}\omega _B)^2}{2M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2}+\frac{\mathrm{}^2k^2}{2M},n_1=0,1,2,\mathrm{},k(\mathrm{},+\mathrm{}),$$
(77)
and the corresponding wave functions are

$$\psi _{n_1k}(x,y)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}ky)\psi _{n_1}^{\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1}(xx_k).$$
(78)
If further $`\omega _x`$ or $`E_x`$ or both are zero, the results can be obtained from the above ones directly.

6. Finally, if both $`\omega _x`$ and $`\omega _y`$ are zero, one can appropriately choose the coordinate axes of the $`xy`$ plane such that $`E_y=0`$. Thus it is a special case of the above case 5.

## VI A more general magnetic field

In this section we set $`\omega _z=0`$ and $`E_z=0`$, and consider a magnetic field with an $`x`$ or $`y`$ component (but not both) in addition to the $`z`$ component. To our knowledge this was not considered previously. Without loss of generality we take

$$𝐁=B^{}𝐞_x+B𝐞_z.$$
(79)
The gauge convenient for the present case might be

$$A_x=0,A_y=B\stackrel{~}{x}=B(xx_0),A_z=B^{}y,$$
(80)
where $`x_0`$ is the same as defined before. In this gauge the total Hamiltonian takes the form

$$H^\mathrm{T}=\frac{1}{2M}(p_x^2+p_y^2)+\frac{1}{2M}(p_z2M\omega _B^{}y)^2+\frac{1}{2}M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2\stackrel{~}{x}^2+\frac{1}{2}M\omega _y^2y^2qE_yy2\omega _B\stackrel{~}{x}p_y\frac{q^2E_x^2}{2M\omega _x^2},$$
(81)
where $`\omega _B`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1`$ are the same as defined before, and $`\omega _B^{}=qB^{}/2Mc`$. $`p_z`$ is obviously a conserved quantity, so we make the factorization

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(𝐱)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}kz)\psi (x,y).$$
(82)
The Schrödinger equation (1) is then reduced to the form (15) where now

$$H=\frac{1}{2M}(p_x^2+p_y^2)+\frac{1}{2}M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_1^2\stackrel{~}{x}^2+\frac{1}{2}M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2^2\stackrel{~}{y}^22\omega _B\stackrel{~}{x}p_y,$$
(83)
and

$$=^\mathrm{T}+\frac{q^2E_x^2}{2M\omega _x^2}+\frac{(qE_y+2k\mathrm{}\omega _B^{})^2}{2M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2^2}\frac{\mathrm{}^2k^2}{2M}.$$
(84)
In these equations $`\stackrel{~}{y}=yy_k`$ which is different from the previous one, and

$$\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2=\sqrt{\omega _y^2+4\omega _B^2},y_k=\frac{qE_y+2k\mathrm{}\omega _B^{}}{M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2^2}.$$
(85)
Now the reduced Hamiltonian $`H`$ is quadratic, and different from Eq. (16) only in the last term. Thus the problem can be solved in much the same way as before. We only give the results here. The energy levels are

$`_{n_1n_2k}^\mathrm{T}=`$ $`\mathrm{}\sigma _1\left(n_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)+\mathrm{}\sigma _2\left(n_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{q^2E_x^2}{2M\omega _x^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(qE_y+2k\mathrm{}\omega _B^{})^2}{2M\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2k^2}{2M}},`$ (87)
$`n_1,n_2=0,1,2,\mathrm{},k(\mathrm{},+\mathrm{}),`$
where $`\sigma _1`$ and $`\sigma _2`$ are given by Eqs. (29), (26) and (27), but with $`\omega _y`$ replaced by $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2`$. The wave functions are given by

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{n_1n_2k}(𝐱)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}kz)\psi _{n_1n_2k}(x,y),$$
(88)
where $`\psi _{n_1n_2k}(x,y)`$ has the same form as Eq. (72), with $`\omega _y`$ replaced by $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2`$ everywhere, including in the expressions for $`\lambda _x`$, $`\lambda _y`$, $`K_1`$ and $`K_2`$, but here

$$\lambda _{xy}=\frac{2M\omega _B\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2}{\mathrm{}(\omega _x+\stackrel{~}{\omega }_2)}.$$
(89)
Also note that $`\stackrel{~}{y}`$ depends on $`k`$, which is the reason why $`\psi _{n_1n_2k}(x,y)`$ has the subscript $`k`$. The orthonormal relation is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{n_1^{}n_2^{}k^{}}^{}(𝐱)\mathrm{\Psi }_{n_1n_2k}(𝐱)𝑑𝐱=\delta (kk^{})\delta _{n_1n_1^{}}\delta _{n_2n_2^{}}.$$
(90)
By the way, the wave functions (78) satisfy a similar orthonormal relation.

As before, the ground state obtained here, though being of the Gaussian type, is not a minimum wave packet, except when $`B=0`$ (then $`𝐁=B^{}𝐞_x`$).

## VII Coherent and squeezed states

Coherent and squeezed states are useful objects in quantum mechanics and quantum optics. These are widely discussed in the literature. In the presence of magnetic fields, some discussions can be found in Ref. . There are also examples on other applications of such states . However, such states for anisotropic harmonic oscillators in the presence of magnetic fields are not discussed previously, to the best of our knowledge. In this section we will discuss the definition, the properties and the time evolution of such states for the case treated in Sec. III and IV. The discussions can be easily extended to the case of Sec. VI.

Since the motion in the $`z`$ direction is separable and is essentially that of a usual harmonic oscillator, we only discuss the coherent and squeezed states on the $`\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{y}`$ plane (which is a simple translation of the $`xy`$ plane), and their time evolution as governed by the Hamiltonian $`H`$ given by Eq. (15) or (49) (the additional constants in $`H^{xy}`$ has only trivial consequence for the time evolution). The definitions used below are natural generalizations of those for a single harmonic oscillator .

We define a unitary displacement operator $`D(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=D_1(\alpha _1)D_2(\alpha _2)`$ where

$$D_i(\alpha _i)=\mathrm{exp}(\alpha _ia_i^{}\alpha _i^{}a_i),i=1,2$$
(91)
and the $`\alpha _i`$’s are complex numbers. For an arbitrary state $`|\phi `$ one can define a corresponding displaced state

$$|\phi ,\alpha _1\alpha _2_D=D(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)|\phi =D_1(\alpha _1)D_2(\alpha _2)|\phi .$$
(92)
It is easy to show that

$$D^{}(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)a_iD(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=a_i+\alpha _i,i=1,2,$$
(93)
so if $`|\phi =|00`$ is the ground state we have

$$a_i|00,\alpha _1\alpha _2_D=\alpha _i|00,\alpha _1\alpha _2_D,i=1,2.$$
(94)
Thus the coherent states may be defined as the displaced ground state $`|00,\alpha _1\alpha _2_D`$. In terms of the original variables the displacement operator takes the form

$$D(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2\mathrm{}}x_i^Dp_i^D\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mathrm{i}}{\mathrm{}}p_i^D\stackrel{~}{x}_i\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mathrm{i}}{\mathrm{}}x_i^Dp_i\right),$$
(95)
where

$$x_i^D=\mathrm{i}\sqrt{\mathrm{}}(\alpha _j\eta _{ji}^{}\mathrm{c}.c.),p_i^D=\mathrm{i}\sqrt{\mathrm{}}(\alpha _j\xi _{ji}^{}\mathrm{c}.c.).$$
(96)
If the wave function for the state $`|\phi `$ is $`\phi (\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})`$, then the one for the displaced state $`|\phi ,\alpha _1\alpha _2_D`$ is

$$\phi _{\alpha _1\alpha _2}^D(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2\mathrm{}}x_i^Dp_i^D\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mathrm{i}}{\mathrm{}}p_i^D\stackrel{~}{x}_i\right)\phi (\stackrel{~}{x}x^D,\stackrel{~}{y}y^D).$$
(97)
Thus we see the reason why the operator $`D(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ is called a displacement operator. From this and Eq. (65) it is easy to obtain the wave function for the coherent states. Obviously the displaced state and the original one have the same shape in the configuration space, thus the uncertainty $`\mathrm{\Delta }X_\alpha `$ in $`|\phi ,\alpha _1\alpha _2_D`$ is the same as that in $`|\phi `$. This can also be easily shown by using Eqs. (46) and (93).

Now consider the time evolution of the displaced states. It is easy to show that

$$\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}Ht/\mathrm{}}a_i\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}Ht/\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}\sigma _it)a_i,i=1,2.$$
(98)
If the state at the initial time $`t=0`$ is $`|\psi (0)=|\phi ,\alpha _1\alpha _2_D`$, then the state at the time $`t`$ is

$$|\psi (t)=|\phi (t),\alpha _{1t}\alpha _{2t}_D=D_1(\alpha _{1t})D_2(\alpha _{2t})|\phi (t),$$
(99)
where $`\alpha _{it}=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}\sigma _it)\alpha _i`$ and $`|\phi (t)=\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}Ht/\mathrm{}}|\phi .`$ Therefore if $`|\phi (t)`$ is known, $`|\psi (t)`$ can be obtained by a time-dependent displacement. A simple special case is $`|\phi =|n_1n_2`$, that is

$$|\psi (0)=|n_1n_2,\alpha _1\alpha _2_D,$$
(100)
a displaced number state. In this case $`|\phi (t)=\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{i}(n_1+\frac{1}{2})\sigma _1t\mathrm{i}(n_2+\frac{1}{2})\sigma _2t]|n_1n_2`$, and

$$|\psi (t)=\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{i}(n_1+\frac{1}{2})\sigma _1t\mathrm{i}(n_2+\frac{1}{2})\sigma _2t]|n_1n_2,\alpha _{1t}\alpha _{2t}_D.$$
(101)
This means that $`|\psi (t)`$ is also a displaced number state, except that the displacement parameters are time dependent, and a time-dependent phase factor is gained. The position and velocity of the wave packet $`\psi (t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})=\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{y}|\psi (t)`$ is characterized by the expectation values $`x_\alpha ^\mathrm{c}(t)=\psi (t)|X_\alpha |\psi (t)`$. Using Eq. (46) it is easy to show that

$$x_\alpha ^\mathrm{c}(t)=\sqrt{\mathrm{}}[\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}\sigma _jt)\alpha _jv_{j\alpha }+\mathrm{c}.c.].$$
(102)
By straightforward calculations one can show that they satisfy the following equation

$$\dot{x}_\alpha ^\mathrm{c}(t)=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\alpha \beta }x_\beta ^\mathrm{c}(t),$$
(103)
where the eigenvalue equation (31) has been used, and at $`t=0`$ they give the same results as those obtained by using Eqs. (96) and (97). On the other hand, the equations of motion for $`X_\alpha `$ governed by the Hamiltonian $`H`$ according to classical mechanics are

$$\dot{X}_\alpha =\{X_\alpha ,H\}_{\mathrm{P}B}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\alpha \beta }X_\beta ,$$
(104)
where the Poisson bracket $`\{X_\alpha ,H\}_{\mathrm{P}B}`$ turns out to be of the same form as the commutator $`[X_\alpha ,H]/\mathrm{i}\mathrm{}`$ because $`H`$ is quadratic in $`X_\alpha `$. The above two equations mean that the center of the wave packet moves like a classical particle. In fact, it can be shown that this holds for any wave packet in any quadratic system. For the displaced number states, some more specific properties should be emphasized. First, the shape of the wave packet keep unchanged with time. Second, the center of the wave packet is oscillating, but the motion is in general not periodic except when $`\sigma _2/\sigma _1`$ is a rational number.

Next we discuss the squeezed states. We define a unitary squeeze operator $`S(\zeta _1,\zeta _2)=S_1(\zeta _1)S_2(\zeta _2)`$ where

$$S_i(\zeta _i)=\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{2}\zeta _ia_i^{}a_i^{}\frac{1}{2}\zeta _i^{}a_ia_i),i=1,2,$$
(105)
and the $`\zeta _i`$’s are complex numbers. For an arbitrary state $`|\phi `$ the corresponding squeezed state may be defined as

$$|\phi ,\zeta _1\zeta _2_S=S(\zeta _1,\zeta _2)|\phi =S_1(\zeta _1)S_2(\zeta _2)|\phi .$$
(106)
The following equation is useful for subsequent calculations.

$$S^{}(\zeta _1,\zeta _2)a_iS(\zeta _1,\zeta _2)=a_i\mathrm{cosh}\rho _i+a_i^{}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\varphi _i}\mathrm{sinh}\rho _i,i=1,2,$$
(107)
where $`\rho _i=|\zeta _i|`$ and $`\varphi _i=\mathrm{arg}\zeta _i`$.

Unlike the displaced state, it is difficult to obtain the explicit wave function for the squeezed state in terms of the wave function for the original one. However, in the squeezed number state $`|n_1n_2,\zeta _1\zeta _2_S`$, it can be shown by using Eq. (107) that

$$X_\alpha =0,$$
(108)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }X_\alpha =\{\mathrm{}(2n_j+1)[|v_{j\alpha }|^2\mathrm{cosh}2\rho _j+\mathrm{R}e(v_{j\alpha }^2\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\varphi _j})\mathrm{sinh}2\rho _j]\}^{1/2}.$$
(109)
Compared with the results for $`\zeta _1=\zeta _2=0`$, we see that the center of the squeezed state is the same as that of the original one, but the uncertainties are different. Thus the states are indeed “squeezed”.

Now consider the time evolution of the squeezed states. If the state at the initial time $`t=0`$ is $`|\psi (0)=|\phi ,\zeta _1\zeta _2_S`$, then the state at the time $`t`$ is

$$|\psi (t)=|\phi (t),\zeta _{1t}\zeta _{2t}_S=S_1(\zeta _{1t})S_2(\zeta _{2t})|\phi (t),$$
(110)
where $`\zeta _{it}=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i2}\sigma _it)\zeta _i`$ and $`|\phi (t)=\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}Ht/\mathrm{}}|\phi .`$ Therefore if $`|\phi (t)`$ is known, $`|\psi (t)`$ can be obtained by a time-dependent squeeze. A simple special case is $`|\phi =|n_1n_2`$, that is

$$|\psi (0)=|n_1n_2,\zeta _1\zeta _2_S,$$
(111)
a squeezed number state. In this case $`|\phi (t)=\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{i}(n_1+\frac{1}{2})\sigma _1t\mathrm{i}(n_2+\frac{1}{2})\sigma _2t]|n_1n_2`$, and

$$|\psi (t)=\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{i}(n_1+\frac{1}{2})\sigma _1t\mathrm{i}(n_2+\frac{1}{2})\sigma _2t]|n_1n_2,\zeta _{1t}\zeta _{2t}_S.$$
(112)
This means that $`|\psi (t)`$ is also a squeezed number state, except that the squeeze parameters are time dependent, and a time-dependent phase factor is gained. Though it is difficult to obtain the wave function $`\psi (t,\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})=\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{y}|\psi (t)`$ explicitly, in these states it can be shown that

$$X_\alpha _t=0,$$
(113)
and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_tX_\alpha =\{\mathrm{}(2n_j+1)[|v_{j\alpha }|^2\mathrm{cosh}2\rho _j+\mathrm{R}e(v_{j\alpha }^2\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\varphi _j\mathrm{i2}\sigma _jt})\mathrm{sinh}2\rho _j]\}^{1/2}.$$
(114)
These results mean that the center of the wave packet is at rest, but the uncertainties are oscillating. Thus the shape of the wave packet changes with time apparently. As before, the motion is in general not periodic except when $`\sigma _2/\sigma _1`$ is a rational number.

## VIII Summary

In this paper we have studied a charged anisotropic harmonic oscillator moving in a homogeneous static electromagnetic field. Several configurations of the electromagnetic field are considered. One of these configurations has been studied in the literature. However, the formalism used here seems more convenient. We have studied the coherent and squeezed states of these systems in some detail. In terms of these concepts the time evolution of some wave packets can be discussed very conveniently.

## Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of the People’s Republic of China, and by the Foundation of the Advanced Research Center of Sun Yat-Sen University.

## Note added after publication

After this paper had been published we became aware of some more previous works dealing with the same problem . In Ref.  the energy spectrum was worked out by an algebraic approach. In Ref.  the propagator was calculated by a different method from that of Refs. . We thank Prof. J. M. Cervero for pointing out these papers to us.


format: text

text:
# Dissipative spin-boson model and Kondo effect in low dimensional quantum gases

## Abstract

We show that ultracold atoms confined in a quasi-1d trap can be used to study the dissipative spin-boson model with tunable tunneling splitting and strength of dissipation. It is shown that with realistic parameters this system allows to study the crossover from coherent Rabi dynamics to incoherent tunneling.

An effective two state system (spin 1/2) coupled to a bath of harmonic oscillators is one of the most important models to describe the effect of dissipation in quantum mechanics . The associated spin-Boson Hamiltonian was extensively studied for a wide range of problems, most notably the issue of decoherence for superpositions of macroscopically distinct states  or various condensed matter realizations like the tunneling of interstitials in solids which are coupled to phonons or to electron-hole excitations in a metal . In spite of its apparent simplicity, the spin-Boson model exhibits a very rich behavior, which crucially depends on the low frequency weight of the effective environment spectrum. It ranges from a simple damped oscillation described by the phenomenological Bloch equations well known e.g. from NMR to complete localization in the so called ohmic dissipation case . The latter is in fact closely related to a generalized Kondo-Hamiltonian, a paradigmatic model for quantum impurity problems.

In most of these applications, the precise strength and frequency spectrum of the environment depends on microscopic details and cannot be changed externally. This is the case e.g. in the context of macroscopic quantum coherence, where the final observation of coherent superpositions of counter-propagating currents in a SQUID  requires extremely low dissipation whose origin is still not completely understood on a microscopic level. Similarly, charged impurities in a metal are subject to ohmic dissipation through electron-hole excitations, however their strength is typically very small, depending on the precise scattering phase shifts at the Fermi energy.

Taking advantage of recent experimental progress in cooling and trapping of low dimensional quantum gases , we show that cold atoms can be used to realize an ohmic spin-Boson model with a tunable strength of both the interaction and the effective tunneling amplitude. This allows to study the complete range of dynamics from coherent oscillations to incoherent dynamics in the Kondo regime and finally to localization. The oscillator bath in this case arises from the coupling to the low energy excitations of a Bose condensate, which produces an ohmic spectrum in the one-dimensional case, where gapless quantum liquids exhibit universal low energy properties.

The spin-boson model describes a two-level system (a spin-$`1/2`$, characterized by the Pauli matrix operators $`\sigma `$), interacting with a bath of harmonic oscillators (phonons) according to the following Hamiltonian:

$$H=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2}\sigma _x+\underset{q}{}\omega _qb_q^{}b_q+\frac{\sigma _z}{2}\underset{q}{}\lambda _q(b_q+b_q^{}),$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the “tunneling” amplitude (the Rabi frequency in the case of a “free” two-level system), $`b_q`$ and $`b_q^{}`$ are the annihilation and creation operators of the phonon modes characterized by a momentum $`q`$ and the dispersion relation $`\omega _q=uq`$, where $`u`$ is the velocity of sound. Formally eliminating the oscillator part of the Hamiltonian, it can be shown that the reduced dynamics of the spin is completely determined by the effective density of states

$`J(\omega )={\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}\lambda _q^2\delta (\omega \omega _q)\omega ^s`$

for sufficiently small values of $`\omega `$. Depending on the value of the exponent $`s`$ there are several different regimes. The most interesting situations arises in the so called ohmic case $`s=1`$. The latter is is equivalent to $`1/r^2`$-Ising model, which is known to have a phase transition even in 1d .

The spin-boson Hamiltonian (1) can be implemented in a setup involving a sample of trapped cold atoms. Consider the two distinct hyperfine states (let us call them the state $`a`$ and $`b`$ respectively) of the same atom confined within a quasi-1d trap (see the Fig. 1). The atoms of the two bosonic species are trapped by the two different external potentials, $`V_a(x)`$ and $`V_b(x)`$, respectively. Both potentials are assumed to have a high frequency of the radial motion, so that the motion of the particles can be considered as quasi-1d (this implies that both the temperature $`T`$ and the characteristic interparticle interaction do not exceed the characteristic frequency of the transverse confinement, $`\omega _{}`$). Most of the atoms are in the state $`a`$ and form a dense quantum liquid (the number of atoms in the state $`a`$ is large $`N_a1`$). The potential $`V_b`$ is assumed to have the form of an optical lattice with very well separated and tightly confining potential wells. Both potentials should spatially overlap to allow the interaction between the atomic species. The optical lattice should have fairly low filling: $`N_bN_a`$, so that the wavepackets of atoms $`b`$ do not overlap with each other and hence have no cooperative interactions with the quantum liquid. At the same time, $`N_b`$ should be sufficiently large, to facilitate (ideally non-destructive) measurement.

The interatomic interaction is described by the three interaction constants $`g_{\beta \beta ^{}}`$, with $`\beta ,\beta ^{}=a,b`$ characterizing the interaction between the atoms $`a`$, $`b`$ and between the atoms $`a`$ and $`b`$. All the interactions are assumed to be short-range. The values of coupling constants are then related to the 3d scattering amplitude in a fairly complicated way and may contain resonances. In the simplest case, when the scattering length, corresponding to the scattering of the components $`\beta `$ and $`\beta ^{}`$, $`a_{\beta \beta ^{}}`$, is much smaller than the radial ground state size $`l_{}\omega _{}^{1/2}`$ (hereafter we use units such that $`\mathrm{}=m=1,`$ where $`m`$ is the mass of an atom), the effective 1d “scattering length” is given by a simple relation: $`g_{\beta \beta ^{}}=2\pi a_{\beta \beta ^{}}/l_{}^2`$. The value and even the sign of the interaction constants $`g_{\beta \beta ^{}}`$ may also be changed by applying external magnetic field (Feshbach resonances, see  and references therein), or simply by changing the trap aspect ratio (i.e. by varying $`\omega _{}`$, see ).

The on-site repulsion between the atoms $`b`$ is $`U_{bb}g_{bb}/l_b`$, where $`l_b`$ is the characteristic size of the ground state wavefunction $`\psi _b(x)`$ localized within a single potential well of potential $`V_b`$. The value of $`U_{bb}`$ should be large compared with the characteristic energy of interaction within and with the Bose-liquid of atoms $`a`$: $`g_{aa}\rho ,|g_{ab}\rho |U_{bb}`$ (but still $`U_{bb}\omega _{}`$). Then, only one atom of the type $`b`$ can be trapped on the same lattice site at the same time. Accordingly, any state of the atoms $`b`$ can be modeled by the corresponding state of a spin-$`1/2`$ system, namely: the spin-up state corresponding to, say, the state with a single atom $`b`$, whereas the spin-down state corresponds to the situation with no atoms $`b`$ on a certain site.

To model the exchange interaction we suggest to put the atomic system into the far-detuned laser light, providing a transition between the internal states $`a`$ and $`b`$. The amplitude of the Rabi flip $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ can, in principle, be spatially inhomogeneous. The part of the Hamiltonian describing the interaction of atoms $`b`$ with the Bose-liquid can be presented in the form of the following spin Hamiltonian:

$$H_b=\frac{g_{ab}}{2}(1+\sigma _z)dx\psi _b^2\rho _a+dx\mathrm{\Omega }(\mathrm{\Psi }_a\psi _b\sigma _++h.c.),$$
(2)
where $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_a(x)`$ is the annihilation operator valued-field of an atom $`a`$ at the point $`x`$, $`\rho _a=\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_a^{}\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_a`$ is the liquid density operator. We note, that in order to ensure a single occupancy of the lattice site the interaction between the atoms $`b`$ should be repulsive, $`g_{bb}>0`$ and sufficiently large. At the same time, the interaction of the atoms $`a`$ and $`b`$ can have arbitrary sign (provided that the number of atoms $`b`$ is sufficiently small). The first term of (2) contains a time-independent phonon displacement operator (the identity part of $`1+\sigma _z`$ operator), which can be always integrated out from the system’s action and only shifts the effective Hamiltonian by an additive constant.

Now we turn to the description of the atoms $`a`$. To implement the Hamiltonian (1) we need to exploit a situation when the dispersion relation for the low energy excitations of the Bose liquid of atoms $`a`$ is linear in momentum, i.e. has no gap. In the long wavelength limit a Bose-gas is a Luttinger Liquid (LL), and is described by the Haldane hydrodynamics Hamiltonian :

$$H=\frac{1}{2\pi }𝑑x(v_J\varphi ^2+v_N(\theta \pi \rho _a)^2),$$
(3)
where $`\rho _a`$ is the equilibrium liquid density, $`v_J=\pi \rho _a`$ and $`v_N=\kappa /\pi \rho _a^2`$ where $`\kappa `$ is the compressibility of the liquid. The fields $`\varphi `$ and $`\theta `$ describe the superfluid velocity and the density fluctuations, respectively.

The LL model (3) can be diagonalized by the following transformation:

$$\varphi (x)=i\underset{q}{}\left|\frac{2\pi }{qLK}\right|^{1/2}e^{iqx}(b_qb_q^{})$$
(4)
$$\theta (x)=i\underset{q}{}\left|\frac{2\pi K}{qL}\right|^{1/2}sign(q)e^{iqx}(b_q+b_q^{}),$$
(5)
where $`L`$ is the sample length. Accordingly, the Hamiltonian (3) takes the form:

$$H_{LL}=v_s\underset{q}{}|q|b_q^{}b_q,$$
(6)
where: $`v_s=(v_Nv_J)^{1/2}=(\kappa /\rho _a)^{1/2}`$. As expected, the spectrum of the lowest energy excitations is characterized by a single sound velocity $`u=v_s`$ (cf. Eq.(1)).

The actual values of the phenomenological parameters $`v_s`$ and $`K=(v_J/v_N)^{1/2}`$ in the LL Hamiltonian (3) depend on $`\rho _a`$, the interaction $`g_{aa}`$, and on the parameters of the external potential $`V_a`$. The requirement of the absence of a gap in the excitation spectrum sets a number of restrictions. First of all, the interparticle interaction has to be repulsive ($`g_{aa}>0`$). Second, the trapping potential should not allow the formation of the so-called Mott-insulator state. The Bose-field operator can be expressed as

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_a\left(\rho _a+\frac{\theta }{\pi }\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}(i\varphi )\underset{m=even}{}\mathrm{exp}(im\theta ),$$
(7)
where the dimensionless proportionality coefficient depends on non-universal short interparticle separation properties of the Bose-liquid. On the contrary, the expression for the density in terms of the field $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ does not have this ambiguity:

$$\rho _a(x)=(\rho _a+\mathrm{\Pi }(x))\underset{m=even}{}\mathrm{exp}(i2m\theta (x)).$$
(8)
In the case of a trapped Bose-gas, the Luttinger parameter $`K`$ depends on the interaction in the combination $`\gamma =g_{aa}/\rho _a`$ . In particular, for weak interactions ($`\gamma 0`$) $`K(\gamma )\pi /\gamma ^{1/2}`$ and thus can be very large. In the other limit, i.e. when the interaction is strong, $`\gamma \mathrm{}`$, $`K(\gamma )1`$ (Tonks gas limit, ).

Eqs.(7) and (8) for the Bose-field operator and the particle density can be used to rewrite the interaction Hamiltonian (2). The role of the terms with various values of $`m`$ is quite different. Since the phase $`\theta `$ contains a quickly oscillating term $`\pi \rho _ax`$, all the contribution containing $`\mathrm{exp}(im\theta )`$ with $`m0`$ average out under the integral sign in Eq.(2), provided that the localization length $`l_b`$ of the wavefunction $`\psi _b`$ is sufficiently large: $`\pi \rho _al_b1`$. Then, in the limit $`q0`$ we can put $`qx0`$ everywhere in Eqs.(4) and (5). Finally, keeping only the terms with $`m=0`$ in Eqs.(7) and (8) we can derive the following representation of the Hamiltonian (2):

$`H_b={\displaystyle \frac{g_{ab}}{2\pi }}\sigma _z{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi K}{L}}q\right|^{1/2}(b_q+b_q^{})+`$

$$+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\rho _a^{1/2}l_b^{1/2}(\sigma _+\mathrm{exp}(i\varphi (0))+h.c.),$$
(9)
where

$`i\varphi (0)={\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{qLK}}\right|^{1/2}(b_qb_q^{}),`$

and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (the unknown numerical coefficient is the combination of the two factors: explicit dependence of the result on the wavefunction $`\psi _b`$ and the unknown factor in Eq.(7)).

To prove the equivalence of the Hamiltonians (1) and (9) we follow the unitary transformation: $`H^{}=S^1(H_{LL}+H_b)S`$ with $`S=\mathrm{exp}(\sigma _zi\varphi (0)/2)`$ and identify $`u=v_s`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}(\rho _al_b)^{1/2}`$, and

$$\lambda _q=u\left|\frac{\pi q}{L}\right|^{1/2}\left(\frac{g_{ab}}{2\pi u}(2K)^{1/2}\frac{1}{(2K)^{1/2}}\right).$$
(10)
We note though, that the equivalence of the initial spin-boson Hamiltonian (1) and its quantum gases version (9), (6) can only be justified if for $`ql_b1`$. For larger values of $`q`$ the interaction becomes more sophisticated, but also decreases as soon as $`ql_b1`$. One can still use Eq.(9), assuming that the summation over $`q`$ is restricted by the condition $`\omega (q)\omega _c`$, where the quantity $`\omega _cu/l_b`$ plays the role of the high-frequency cutoff.

The spin-boson Hamiltonian (1) can also describe an isolated spin-$`1/2`$ impurity dynamics in a 3d Fermi system (the so called Kondo model). A slightly generalized (anisotropic) version of the model can be formulated with the help of the following Hamiltonian:

$$H=\underset{q,\sigma }{}ϵ(q)c_{\sigma q}^{}c_{\sigma q}+J_{}S_zs_z(0)+J_{}S_{}s_{}(0),$$
(11)
where $`c_{\sigma q}`$ is the annihilation of a fermion with (now 3d) momentum $`q`$ and the spin projection $`\sigma `$, $`𝐒`$ is the spin of the impurity, $`𝐬`$ is the total spin of the electrons at a given point. The exchange couplings $`J_{}`$and $`J_{}`$ describe the interaction of the different spin components ($`S_{}s_{}=S_xs_x+S_ys_y`$). The exact solution of the model is given in . Mapping of the Hamiltonian (11) to the spin-boson model Hamiltonian (1) is described in every detail in , and is based on the fact that the spin density excitations of a free Fermi gas can serve as an oscillator bath. This leads to the identifications $`\mathrm{\Delta }J_{}`$, $`u=v_F`$ with $`v_F`$ being the Fermi velocity of the Fermi gas, and

$$\lambda _q=u\left(\frac{\pi q}{L}\right)^{1/2}\left(1\frac{J_{}}{4\pi u}\right).$$
(12)
The behavior of the system (the character of the impurity spin dynamics) depends strongly on the sign of the coupling $`J_{}`$: the situations with $`J_{}<0`$ and $`J_{}>0`$ are commonly referred to as the ferromagnetic and anti-ferromagnetic cases respectively.

The analysis above shows, that the spin-boson model (1) can describe both the Kondo and our quasi-1d Bose gas with an impurity. On the other hand, this also means that the cold atoms version of the spin-boson model can, among other things, be used to model the Kondo Hamiltonian and the related phenomena, provided that the values of the independent parameters $`g_{ab}`$ and $`K`$ in (10) are selected accordingly, i.e. the couplings (10) and (12) match each other. Both systems are characterized by $`J(\omega )=2\alpha \omega `$ in the $`\omega 0`$ limit, where

$$\alpha =\frac{1}{2K}\left(\frac{g_{ab}K^2}{\pi ^2\rho _a}1\right)^2.$$
(13)
In the Kondo language, $`\alpha >1`$ and $`\alpha <1`$ correspond to the antiferromagnetic and ferromagnetic cases, respectively. We note, that since both $`K`$ and $`g_{ab}`$ are independent and practically unrestricted ($`g_{ab}`$ can have arbitrary sign and practically any value, whereas $`1<K<\mathrm{}`$), the parameter $`\alpha `$ can take arbitrary values, both small and large. For realistic values $`g_{ab}\rho _a`$ $`\alpha 1/2K`$ and is small. For example, for a potassium condensate of $`N_a=10^4`$ particles the interaction parameter $`g_{ab}/n_a10^2`$, and $`K30`$, which means that $`\alpha 0.02`$ and can be made larger by a Feshbach resonance.

The dynamics of the “spin impurities” in our proposal can be observed by following the population dynamics of the atoms $`b`$ in the presence of the laser light $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. In the absence of interaction between the “impurity” $`b`$ and the LL of atoms $`a`$, the atom of impurity should undergo familiar undamped Rabi oscillations with the laser field. The actual damping is determined by the width of the involved atomic levels and will be neglected here. On the other hand, the interaction between the atoms $`a`$ collectivize the Rabi oscillations of the “spin” and the collective degrees of the LL of atoms $`a`$.

A particular interesting regime of the ohmic two-state system is the low $`T`$ and $`\alpha <1/2`$ weak damping case. In this limit the occupation $`P(t)`$ of, say, the state ”$`b`$” exhibits damped Rabi oscillations

$$P(t)=\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_rt\mathrm{cos}(\eta )\right)\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Delta }_rt\mathrm{sin}(\eta )),$$

where $`\eta =\pi \alpha /(2(1\alpha ))`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r=\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Delta }/\omega _c)^{\alpha /(\alpha 1)}`$ (see Fig. 2). This result holds as long as $`\alpha T\mathrm{\Delta }_r`$. At higher $`T`$ the dynamics is incoherent (no oscillations should be visible).

For $`1/2<\alpha <1`$ the system shows no oscillations and $`P(t)`$ is a sum of exponentials . This is the regime which is directly relevant for the Kondo model. The detailed description of the model dynamics is still unsolved.

The situation becomes simpler again for $`\alpha >1`$, which is the ferromagnetic analogue of the Kondo problem. At $`T=0`$ the spin is localized, whereas at larger $`T`$ there are incoherent transitions between the states at a rate $`T^{2\alpha 1}`$. This peculiar behavior was in fact observed in SQUIDs experiments  (see the Fig.2).

In fact the suggested experimental scheme is not confined to a case of a single spin impurity in a quantum liquid. If the $`N_b`$ is sufficiently large, the pseudo-spins can interact with ”host” liquid in a collective manner. This situation is described by Anderson model and is characteristic to a number of important solid state systems, like heavy fermionic compounds (see e.g. ). The spin-boson model is also a paradigmatic model for qubits damped by an environment. Understanding how such a system reacts under tunable conditions, is obviously important for all those interested in quantum computation.

Discussions with U. R. Fischer, J.I. Cirac, M. Cazalilla, D. Jaksch are gratefully acknowledged. Work at Innsbruck supported in part by the A.S.F., EU Networks, and the Institute for Quantum Information. P.Z. thanks the Alexander von Humboldt Award for support. A.R. has been supported by the European Commission Project Cold Quantum Gases RTN Network Contract No. HPRN-CT-2000-00125.