Timeline for How to add Langevin terms to the semiclassical Bose-Hubbard model?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 3, 2015 at 22:39 | history | edited | Ted Pudlik | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added second-thoughts about the signs in the equation.
|
| Nov 3, 2015 at 22:27 | comment | added | Ted Pudlik | The sign of the $\imath \gamma\mu\psi_i$ term should perhaps also be negative. In general, the sign convention used in this paper is a little confusing to me. (Shouldn't the equation of motion be $\imath \dot{z_i} = \partial H/\partial z_i^*$? They have an extra minus sign.) But it's clearly a relevant reference! I recommend you send an email to the authors asking if your translation of their equation into your notation is correct, or if there are sign issues. | |
| Nov 3, 2015 at 21:52 | comment | added | Robert | It didn't even occur to me to look for the NLSE. I somehow associate it with photonics and continuous systems (Gross-Pitaevskii equation). The above equation seems to work (integration is stable) after changing the sign in $\left(1+\imath\gamma\right)$ to $\left(1-\imath\gamma\right)$. I think that's because in the paper they don't take the convention that the tunneling term has a negative sign in front of it. The derivation in the appendix is also very insightful. Thanks a lot for your help! | |
| Nov 3, 2015 at 21:48 | vote | accept | Robert | ||
| Nov 3, 2015 at 16:36 | history | answered | Ted Pudlik | CC BY-SA 3.0 |