I'm considering the evolution of a two-level quantum system given by

$$i\begin{pmatrix}\dot{c}_1\\ \dot{c}_2\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix} \frac{1}{2}E & \Delta(t)\\\Delta(t) & -\frac{1}{2}E\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}c_1\\c_2\end{pmatrix}.$$

If $\,\Delta(t)\,$ is periodic, the model gives Rabi oscillations. But now I'm considering the function $\,\Delta(t)\,$ to be a real Gaussian white noise satisfying


In terms of the standard Wiener process $W_t$, the Schrodinger equation becomes

\begin{align} idc_1&=\frac{1}{2}Ec_1dt+\Gamma c_2dW_t,\\ idc_2&=\Gamma c_1dW_t-\frac{1}{2}Ec_2dt, \end{align}

where both $c_1dW_t$ and $c_2dW_t$ are in the Ito sense, meaning that $c_1$ and $c_2$ are at $t$ and $dW_t$ is during $[t,t+dt]$. I then go to the interaction picture


so that $\tilde{c}_1$ and $\tilde{c}_2$ do not evolve when $\,\Gamma=0$. In general, they satisfy \begin{align} id\tilde{c}_1&=\Gamma\tilde{c}_2e^{iEt}dW_t,\\ id\tilde{c}_2&=\Gamma\tilde{c}_1e^{-iEt}dW_t. \end{align}

Now how do I proceed from here to express $\tilde{c}_1$ and $\tilde{c}_2$ in terms of some integral of $W_t$? Also I'm wondering whether I get decoherence or still just Rabi oscillation because the system selectively absorbs frequency $E\,$ from the noise $W_t$.

  • $\begingroup$ It's not homework... $\endgroup$
    – Zhuoran He
    Nov 24 '17 at 21:32
  • $\begingroup$ Fine. Make it seem easier so people can solve it.. $\endgroup$
    – Zhuoran He
    Nov 24 '17 at 22:40

To solve these equations

\begin{align} id\tilde{c}_1&=\Gamma\tilde{c}_2e^{iEt}dW_t,\\ id\tilde{c}_2&=\Gamma\tilde{c}_1e^{-iEt}dW_t. \end{align}

let's look if we can find a pair of functions $F_1(t,x)$ and $F_2(t,x)$ such that $\tilde{c}_1=F_1(t,W_t)$ and $\tilde{c}_2=F_2(t,W_t)$. Plugging these in the formulas we have

\begin{align} idF_1(t,W_t)&=\Gamma F_2(t,W_t) e^{iEt}dW_t,\\ idF_2(t,W_t)&=\Gamma F_1(t,W_t) e^{-iEt}dW_t. \end{align}

We now apply Itô calculus to the differentials

\begin{align} i[F_{1t}(t,W_t)dt+F_{1x}(t,W_t)dW_t+1/2F_{1xx}(t,W_t)dt]&=\Gamma F_2(t,W_t) e^{iEt}dW_t,\\ i[F_{2t}(t,W_t)dt+F_{2x}(t,W_t)dW_t+1/2F_{2xx}(t,W_t)dt]&=\Gamma F_1(t,W_t) e^{-iEt}dW_t.\end{align}

In these the letters in the index notation are short hand for partial derivatives w.r.t. the corresponding variables. We hence obtain the following partial differential equations

\begin{align} F_{1t}(t,x)+1/2F_{1xx}(t,x) & = 0, \\ F_{2t}(t,x)+1/2F_{2xx}(t,x) & = 0, \\ iF_{1x}(t,x)& = \Gamma F_2(t,x) e^{iEt},\\ iF_{2x}(t,x)& = \Gamma F_1(t,x) e^{-iEt}. \end{align}

Taking the derivative to $x$ of the third equation and multiplying by $i$ we get

$$-F_{1xx}(t,x) = \Gamma iF_{2x}(t,x) e^{iEt}=\Gamma^2 F_1(t,x)$$

where in the last step I substitute in the fourth equation. Finally substituting this into the first equation we obtain


which is an easy first order linear partial differential equation in $t$. The solution is

$$F_1(t,x)=A(x)e^{\Gamma^2 t/2} \; .$$

With $A(x)$ some function to determine from the other equations. For instance, filling the result for $F_1$ in the first formula, we get the following differential equation for $A(x)$:

$$A_{xx}(x)+\Gamma^2 A(x)=0$$

the solutions of which are

$$A(x)=Be^{i\Gamma x}+De^{-i\Gamma x}$$

and thus

$$F_1(t,x)=(Be^{i\Gamma x}+De^{-i\Gamma x})e^{\Gamma^2 t/2}$$

and likewise

$$F_2(t,x)=(-Be^{i\Gamma x}+De^{-i\Gamma x})e^{(\Gamma^2/2-iE) t} \; .$$


\begin{align} \tilde{c}_1 & =(Be^{i\Gamma W_t}+De^{-i\Gamma W_t})e^{\Gamma^2 t/2} \; , \\ \tilde{c}_2 & =(-Be^{i\Gamma W_t}+De^{-i\Gamma W_t})e^{(\Gamma^2/2-iE) t} \; . \end{align}

  • $\begingroup$ I think one can show $|\tilde{c}_1|^2+|\tilde{c}_2|^2=\mathrm{const}$, so the probability amplitudes should not exponentially grow. But I'll try the idea of $\tilde{c}_i=F_i(t,W_t), i=1,2$. $\endgroup$
    – Zhuoran He
    Nov 24 '17 at 22:42
  • $\begingroup$ I found that strange as well, but there might be a sign error somewhere. Also, I just noticed a discrepancy in your formulation where the change to the interaction picture has a $1/2$ in the exponents, but those don't show up in your equations below. $\endgroup$ Nov 24 '17 at 22:44
  • $\begingroup$ I noticed one error in my computation. I forgot a $1/2$ factor myself. I'm going to fix it. $\endgroup$ Nov 24 '17 at 22:47
  • $\begingroup$ Actually $\tilde{c}_i=F_i(t,W_t)$ is a very strong assumption. It assumes $\tilde{c}_i$ does not depend on earlier $W_{t'}$ with $t'<t$. If you plug in your solution to the equation and find it actually works, then it's fine. Otherwise the solution should be of some integral form. $\endgroup$
    – Zhuoran He
    Nov 25 '17 at 0:03
  • $\begingroup$ That's a good point, but I don't think it is the issue here. $\endgroup$ Nov 25 '17 at 7:46

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.