Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
References
All Topics
Physics
Quantum Mechanics

Chaos and Quantum Mechanics

Profile image of Benjamin GreenbaumBenjamin GreenbaumProfile image of Tanmoy BhattacharyaTanmoy Bhattacharya

2005

Abstract

The relationship between chaos and quantum mechanics has been somewhat uneasy -even stormy, in the minds of some people. However, much of the confusion may stem from inappropriate comparisons using formal analyses. In contrast, our starting point here is that a complete dynamical description requires a full understanding of the evolution of measured systems, necessary to explain actual experimental results. This is of course true, both classically and quantum mechanically. Because the evolution of the physical state is now conditioned on measurement results, the dynamics of such systems is intrinsically nonlinear even at the level of distribution functions. Due to this feature, the physically more complete treatment reveals the existence of dynamical regimes -such as chaos -that have no direct counterpart in the linear (unobserved) case. Moreover, this treatment allows for understanding how an effective classical behavior can result from the dynamics of an observed quantum system, both at the level of trajectories as well as distribution functions. Finally, we have the striking prediction that time-series from measured quantum systems can be chaotic far from the classical regime, with Lyapunov exponents differing from their classical values. These predictions can be tested in next-generation experiments.

Related papers

Chaos and quantum-nondemolition measurements
Stefan Weigert

Physical Review A, 1991

The problem of chaotic behavior in quantum mechanics is investigated against the background of the theory of quantum-nondemolition (QND) measurements. The analysis is based on two relevant features: The outcomes of a sequence of QND measurements are unambiguously predictable, and these measurements actually can be performed on one single system without perturbating its time evolution. Consequently, QND measurements represent an appropriate framework to analyze the conditions for the occurrence of "deterministic randomness" in quantum systems. The general arguments are illustrated by a discussion of a quantum system with a time evolution that possesses nonvanishing algorithmic complexity.

View PDFchevron_right
"The Study Of Classical Chaos Using Quantum Mechanical Approach "
IOSR Journals

IOSR Journals , 2019

The word chaos is the science of surprises of the nonlinear and unpredictable. It teaches us to expect the unexpected. In this chaos theory using mathematical equations we study the behaviour of dynamical system that are highly sensitive to initial condition. To study non linear behaviour of quantum H.H. Oscillator, equation of continuity and Euler equation can be used. The evolution of shanon entropy, density and amplitude correlations and kinetic energy exhibit non linear oscillations.Charge density and velocity potential can be used to study of nonlinear features.

View PDFchevron_right
Quantum Signatures of Chaos or Quantum Chaos? 1. PROBLEMS OF CHAOS IN CLASSICAL MECHANICS
V a d i m E Bunakov

—A critical analysis of the present-day concept of chaos in quantum systems as nothing but a " quantum signature " of chaos in classical mechanics is given. In contrast to the existing semi-intuitive guesses, a definition of classical and quantum chaos is proposed on the basis of the Liouville–Arnold theorem: a quantum chaotic system featuring N degrees of freedom should have M < N independent first integrals of motion (good quantum numbers) specified by the symmetry of the Hamiltonian of the system. Quantitative measures of quantum chaos that, in the classical limit, go over to the Lyapunov exponent and the classical stability parameter are proposed. The proposed criteria of quantum chaos are applied to solving standard problems of modern dynamical chaos theory.

View PDFchevron_right
Classical and quantum mechanics with chaos
Sharry Borgan

1999

This thesis is concerned with the study, classically and quantum mechanically, of the square billiard with particular attention to chaos in both cases. Classically, we show that the rotating square billiard has two regular limits with a mixture of order and chaos between, depending on an energy parameter, E. This parameter ranges from -2a;^ to oo, where u is the angular rotation, corresponding to the two integrable limits. The rotating square billiard has simple enough geometry to permit us to elucidate that the mechanism for chaos with rotation or curved trajectories is not flyaway, as previously suggested, but rather the accumulation of angular dispersion from a rotating line. Furthermore, we find periodic cycles which have asymmetric trajectories, below the value of E at which phase space becomes disjointed. These trajectories exhibit both left and right hand curvatures due to the fine balance between Centrifugal and Coriolis forces. Quantum mechanically, we compare the spectral analysis results for the square billiard with three different theoretical distribution functions. A new feature in the study is the correspondence we find, by utilising the Berry-Robnik parameter q, between classical E and a quantum rotation parameter cu. The parameter q gives the ratio of chaotic quantum phase volume which we can link to the ratio of chaotic phase volume found classically for varying values of E. We find good correspondence, in particular, the different values of ^ as a; is varied refiect the births and subsequent destructions of the different periodic cycles. We also study wave packet dynamics, necessitating the adaptation of a one dimensional unitary integration method to the two dimensional square billiard. In concluding we suggest how this work may be used, with the aid of the chaotic phase volumes calculated, in future directions for research work. n Declaration

View PDFchevron_right
Introduction to quantum chaos
Katsuhiro Nakamura

Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 1995

View PDFchevron_right
Decoherence, Chaos, and the Correspondence Principle
Salman Habib

Physical Review Letters, 1998

We present evidence that decoherence can produce a smooth quantum-to-classical transition in nonlinear dynamical systems. High-resolution tracking of quantum and classical evolutions reveals differences in expectation values of corresponding observables. Solutions of master equations demonstrate that decoherence destroys quantum interference in Wigner distributions and washes out fine structure in classical distributions bringing the two closer together. Correspondence between quantum and classical expectation values is also re-established.

View PDFchevron_right
Quantum chaos, classical randomness, and Bohmian mechanics
Sheldon Goldstein

Journal of Statistical Physics, 1992

It is argued that dynamical chaos in quantum mechanics arises solely from the collapse rule applied in measurements. As such it is quite distinct from classical (deterministic) chaos, which arises from the dynamical law itself. It is shown, however, that if the particles of a quantum system are regarded as "real," i.e., if their positions are made part of the state description, one obtains a formulation of quantum theory, Bohmian mechanics, in which "quantum chaos" also arises solely from the dynamical law. Moreover, this occurs in a manner far simpler than in the classical case.

View PDFchevron_right
About the Concept of Quantum Chaos
Olimpia Lombardi

Entropy, 2017

The research on quantum chaos finds its roots in the study of the spectrum of complex nuclei in the 1950s and the pioneering experiments in microwave billiards in the 1970s. Since then, a large number of new results was produced. Nevertheless, the work on the subject is, even at present, a superposition of several approaches expressed in different mathematical formalisms and weakly linked to each other. The purpose of this paper is to supply a unified framework for describing quantum chaos using the quantum ergodic hierarchy. Using the factorization property of this framework, we characterize the dynamical aspects of quantum chaos by obtaining the Ehrenfest time. We also outline a generalization of the quantum mixing level of the kicked rotator in the context of the impulsive differential equations.

View PDFchevron_right
Quantum Chaos and Dynamical Entropy
FABIO BENATTI

Communications in Mathematical Physics, 1998

We review the notion of dynamical entropy by Connes, Narnhofer and Thirring and relate it to Quantum Chaos. A particle in a periodic potential is used as an example. This is worked out in the classical and the quantum mechanical framework, for the single particle as well as for the corresponding gas. The comparison does not only support the general assertion that quantum mechanics is qualitatively less chaotic than classical mechanics. More speci cally, the same dynamical mechanism by which a periodic potential leads to a positive dynamical entropy of the classical particle may reduce the dynamical entropy of the quantum gas in comparison to free motion.

View PDFchevron_right
Does quantum chaos exist? (A quantum Lyapunov exponents approach.)
Wladyslaw Majewski

1998

We shortly review the progress in the domain of deterministic chaos for quantum dynamical systems. With the appropriately extended definition of quantum Lyapunov exponent we analyze various quantum dynamical maps. It is argued that, within Quantum Mechanics, irregular evolution for properly chosen observables can coexist with regular and predictable evolution of states.

View PDFchevron_right

References (70)

  1. R. Kosloff and S.A. Rice, J. Chem. Phys. 74, 1340 (1981);
  2. J. Manz, J. Chem. Phys. 91, 2190 (1989).
  3. P. Bocchieri and A. Loinger, Phys. Rev. 107, 337 (1957);
  4. T. Hogg and B.A. Huberman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 711 (1982).
  5. J.S. Bell, Phys. World, 8, 33 (1990).
  6. B.O. Koopman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 17, 31 (1931).
  7. A. Peres, Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods (Kluwer, Boston, 1993).
  8. P.S. Maybeck, Stochastic Models, Estimation and Control (Academic Press, New York, 1982);
  9. O.L.R. Jacobs, Introduction to Control Theory (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1993).
  10. H. Mabuchi and A.C. Doherty, Science 298, 1372 (2002);
  11. M.D. LaHaye, O. Buu, B. Camarota, and K.C. Schwab, Science 304, 74 (2004).
  12. See, e.g., J.S. Bell, Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics (Cambridge Uni- versity Press, New York, 1988).
  13. L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Quantum Mechanics: Non-Relativistic Theory (Perga- mon Press, New York, 1965).
  14. L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Statistical Physics (Pergamon Press, New York, 1980).
  15. K. Hepp, Helv. Phys. Acta 45, 237 (1972);
  16. W.H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. D 24, 1516 (1981); ibid 26, 1862 (1982);
  17. E. Joos and H.D. Zeh, Z. Phys. B 59, 223 (1985).
  18. S. Habib, K. Jacobs, H. Mabuchi, R. Ryne, K. Shizume and B. Sundaram, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 040402 (2002).
  19. E.P. Wigner, Phys. Rev. 40, 749 (1932);
  20. V.I. Tatarskii, Usp. Fiz. Nauk 139, 587 (1983) [Sov. Phys. Uspekhi 26, 311 (1983)];
  21. M. Hillery, R.F. O'Connell, M.O. Scully, and E.P. Wigner, Phys. Rep. 106, 121 (1984).
  22. S. Habib, Phys. Rev. D 42, 2566 (1990).
  23. L.P. Kadanoff and G. Baym, Quantum Statistical Mechanics (Addison-Wesley, Redwood City, 1989);
  24. R. Zwanzig, Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics (Oxford University Press, New York, 2001);
  25. K. Blum, Density Matrix Theory and Applications (Plenum Press, New York, 1996).
  26. L. Diosi, Phys. Lett. 129A, 419 (1988);
  27. V.P. Belavkin and P. Staszewski, Phys. Lett. 140A, 359 (1989);
  28. Y. Salama and N. Gisin, Phys. Lett. 181A, 269 (1993);
  29. C.M. Caves and G.J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. A 36, 5543 (1987);
  30. H.M. Wiseman and G.J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. A 47, 642(1993);
  31. H.J. Carmichael, An Open Systems Approach to Quantum Optics (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993);
  32. G.J. Milburn, Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 8, 269 (1996);
  33. T.A. Brun, Am. J. Phys. 70, 719 (2002);
  34. P. Warszawski and H.M. Wiseman, J. Opt. B 5, 1 (2003).
  35. A.C. Doherty, K. Jacobs, and G. Jungman, Phys. Rev. A 63, 062306 (2001).
  36. D.T. Gillespie, Am. J. Phys. 64, 225 (1996).
  37. See, e.g., D. Mozyrsky and I. Martin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 018301 (2002).
  38. T.P. McGarty, Stochastic Systems and State Estimation (Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1974).
  39. T. Bhattacharya, S. Habib and K. Jacobs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4852 (2000);
  40. Phys. Rev. A 67, 042103 (2003). See also, S. Ghose, P. Alsing, I. Deutsch, T. Bhattacharya, and S. Habib, Phys. Rev. A 69, 052116 (2004).
  41. See, e.g., S. Habib, quant-ph/0406011
  42. B.V. Chirikov, Chaos 1, 95 (1991).
  43. W.A. Lin and L.E. Ballentine, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2927 (1990).
  44. S. Habib, K. Shizume, and W.H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4361 (1998).
  45. B.D. Greenbaum, S. Habib, K. Shizume, and B. Sundaram, Chaos (in press); quant- ph/0401174
  46. G. Lindblad, Comm. Math. Phys. 48, 199 (1976);
  47. V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E.C.G. Sudarshan, J. Math. Phys. 17, 821 (1976).
  48. A.O. Caldeira and A.J. Leggett, Phys. Rev. A 31, 1059 (1985).
  49. M.V. Berry, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A 287, 237 (1977);
  50. E.J. Heller, J. Chem. Phys. 67, 3339 (1977).
  51. A.R. Kolovsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 340 (1996).
  52. V.P. Maslov and M.V. Fedoriuk, Semi-Classical Approximation in Quantum Mechanics (Reidel, Holland, 1981).
  53. M.V. Berry and N.L. Balazs, J. Phys. A 12, 625 (1979).
  54. E.J. Heller and S. Tomsovic, Phys. Today 7, 38 (1993);
  55. Phys. Rev. E 47, 282 (1993).
  56. J. Guckenheimer and P. Holmes, Nonlinear Oscillations, Dynamical Systems, and Bifur- cations of Vector Fields (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986).
  57. V.P. Belavkin, Comm. Math. Phys. 146, 611 (1992);
  58. V.P. Belavkin, Rep. Math. Phys. 43, 405 (1999);
  59. A.C. Doherty and K. Jacobs, Phys. Rev. A 60, 2700 (1999);
  60. A.C. Doherty, S. Habib, K. Jacobs, H. Mabuchi, and S.-M. Tan, Phys. Rev. A 62, 012105 (2000).
  61. H.M. Wiseman and G.J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 548 (1993).
  62. See, e.g., H.M. Wiseman, S. Mancini, and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. A 66, 013807 (2002);
  63. R. Ruskov and A.N. Korotkov, Phys. Rev. B 66, 041401(R) (2002);
  64. A. Hopkins, K. Ja- cobs, S. Habib, and K. Schwab, Phys. Rev. B 68, 235328 (2003);
  65. D.A. Steck, K. Jacobs, H. Mabuchi, T. Bhattacharya, and S. Habib, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 223004 (2004).
  66. S. Habib, K. Jacobs, and K. Shizume, quant-ph/0412159
  67. J.-P. Eckmann and D. Ruelle, Rev. Mod. Phys. 57, 617 (1985).
  68. S. Habib, K. Jacobs, and K. Shizume, in preparation.
  69. A. Wolf, J.B. Swift, H.L. Swinney and J.A. Vastano, Physica 16D, 285 (1985).
  70. S. Habib and R.D. Ryne, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 70 (1995).

Related papers

The Quantum Emergence of Chaos
Salman Habib

Phys Rev Lett, 2004

The dynamical status of isolated quantum systems, partly due to the linearity of the Schrodinger equation is unclear: Conventional measures fail to detect chaos in such systems. However, when quantum systems are subjected to observation -- as all experimental systems must be -- their dynamics is no longer linear and, in the appropriate limit(s), the evolution of expectation values, conditioned on the observations, closely approaches the behavior of classical trajectories. Here we show, by analyzing a specific example, that microscopic continuously observed quantum systems, even far from any classical limit, can have a positive Lyapunov exponent, and thus be truly chaotic.

View PDFchevron_right
A Comprehensive Thesis on Quantum Chaos Theory
Kaan Atam

This thesis provides a comprehensive exploration of quantum chaos theory, a field dedicated to understanding the quantum mechanical behavior of systems that exhibit chaotic dynamics in their classical limit. Unlike classical chaos, characterized by exponential sensitivity to initial conditions and continuous energy spectra, quantum systems are governed by the linear Schrödinger equation and possess discrete energy spectra in bounded systems. This fundamental difference necessitates a distinct approach to defining and identifying quantum chaos, focusing on statistical signatures rather than direct trajectory-based measures. The report delves into the historical development of the field, from its classical roots to the pioneering quantum insights that shaped its trajectory. It meticulously examines the theoretical frameworks, including Random Matrix Theory and semiclassical approximations like the Gutzwiller Trace Formula, which serve as crucial bridges between classical and quantum descriptions. Key quantum signatures such as spectral statistics (Wigner-Dyson and Poisson distributions), quantum scarring, quantum ergodicity, and information scrambling (probed by Out-of-Time-Ordered Correlators) are discussed in detail, along with their experimental observations across diverse physical systems, from atomic and nuclear physics to condensed matter and quantum optics. The thesis also explores the profound applications of quantum chaos in emerging technologies like quantum computing and its deep connections to fundamental physics, including black hole dynamics and quantum gravity. Finally, it addresses the persistent challenges and outlines promising future directions, emphasizing the ongoing quest for a rigorous definition, the impact of noise in open quantum systems, and the burgeoning field of many-body quantum chaos, all of which continue to shape the frontiers of this fascinating interdisciplinary domain.

View PDFchevron_right
Chaotic Behaviour in Quantum Dynamics
italo guarneri
View PDFchevron_right
Continuous Quantum Measurement and the Emergence of Classical Chaos
Tanmoy Bhattacharya

Physical Review Letters, 2000

We formulate the conditions under which the dynamics of a continuously measured quantum system becomes indistinguishable from that of the corresponding classical system. In particular, we demonstrate that even in a classically chaotic system the quantum state vector conditioned by the measurement remains localized and, under these conditions, follows a trajectory characterized by the classical Lyapunov exponent.

View PDFchevron_right
Quantum chaos: An entropy approach
Wojciech Słomczyński, Karol Zyczkowski

Journal of Mathematical Physics, 1994

A new definition of the entropy of a given dynamical system and of an instrument describing the measurement process is proposed within the operational approach to quantum mechanics. It generalizes other definitions of entropy, in both the classical and quantum cases. The Kolmogorov-Sinai (KS) entropy is obtained for a classical system and the sharp measurement instrument. For a quantum system and a coherent states instrument, a new quantity, coherent states entropy, is defined. It may be used to measure chaos in quantum mechanics. The following correspondence principle is proved: the upper limit of the coherent states entropy of a quantum map as h-+0 is less than or equal to the KS-entropy of the corresponding classical map.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Quantum Mechanics
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved