arxiv: v2 [math-ph] 5 Oct 2018
|
|
- Coral Morgan
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 GROUD STATE EERGY OF MIXTURE OF BOSE GASES ALESSADRO MICHELAGELI, PHA THÀH AM, AD ALESSADRO OLGIATI arxiv: v [math-ph] 5 Oct 018 Abstract. We consider the asymptotic behavior of a system of multi-component trapped bosons, when the total particle number becomes large. In the dilute regime, when the interaction potentials have the length scale of order O 1 ), we show that the leading order of the ground state energy is captured correctly by the Gross-Pitaevskii energy functional and that the many-body ground state fully condensates on the Gross- Pitaevskii minimizers. In the mean-field regime, when the interaction length scale is O1), we are able to verify Bogoliubov s approximation and obtain the second order expansion of the ground state energy. While such asymptotic results have several precursors in the literature on one-component condensates, the adaption to the multi-component setting is non-trivial in various respects and the analysis will be presented in details. Contents 1. Introduction 1. Main results 4 3. Proof of Theorem GP minimiser Energy upper bound Dyson Lemma Energy lower bound Convergence of density matrices 4. Proof of Theorem Leading order and Hartree theory Bogoliubov Hamiltonian Estimate in the truncated two-component Fock space Localization in Fock space Validity of Bogoliubov correction 44 Appendix A. Quantum de Finetti Theorem References Introduction Experimental and theoretical investigations on mixtures of Bose gases displaying condensation have made important progress in the past years. The physical systems of interest consist of a gas formed by different species of interacting bosons, each of which is brought to condensation, thus with a macroscopic occupation of a one-body orbital for each species. Date: October 8,
2 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI They can be prepared as atomic gases of the same element, typically 87 Rb, which occupy two hyperfine states with no interconversion between particles of different hyperfine states [37, 3, 15, 16], or also as heteronuclear mixtures such as 41 K- 87 Rb [35], 41 K- 85 Rb [36], 39 K- 85 Rb [31], and 85 K- 87 Rb [43]. For a comprehensive review of the related physical properties we refer to [44, Chapter 1]. Mathematically, the natural Hilbert space for two populations, say, of 1 and identical bosons of different type in three dimensions is H 1, = L sym R3 1, dx 1,..., dx 1 ) L sym R3, dy 1,..., dy ), 1.1) where L symr 3 j ) is the space of square-integrable functions in R 3 ) j which are symmetric under permutations of j variables. o overall exchange symmetry is present among variables of different type. Most of the physically relevant phenomena are modelled by Hamiltonians acting on H 1, which include the customary intra-species and inter-species two-body interaction term, as well as an overall trapping potential for each species such confinements can indeed be different for each type of particles. Rigorous statements can only be proved in suitable limits of infinitely many particles, say, when the population ratios are asymptotically fixed: := 1 + +, j lim + =: c j 0,1), j {1,}. 1.) It is not restrictive to assume that the ratios 1 / and / are fixed, and so shall we henceforth. In the present work we intend to investigate the limit of infinitely many particles for two significant scaling regimes: the mean field, for interactions of weak magnitude and long range, and the dilute scaling, for interactions of strong magnitude and short range. In principle, the former regime is mathematically easier because of the natural emergence of the law of large number, while the latter regime is more relevant to realistic experiments of the Bose-Einstein condensation. To be precise, we shall consider the following Hamiltonian in suitable units) H := 1 j=1 k=1 xj +U 1) trap x j) ) yk +U ) trap y k) ) j=1 k=1 V 1) x j y k ), 1 j<r 1 V 1) 1 k<l V ) x i x j ) y k y l ) 1.3) with self-explanatory kinetic, confining, and interaction terms. Under our assumptions, H will bebounded from below on the core domain of smooth, compactly supportedfunctions and it is unambiguously realised as a self-adjoint operator by Friedrichs s extension, still denoted by H. Correspondingly, weshall specialise 1.3) in two forms, themean fieldhamiltonian H MF and the Gross-Pitaevskii Hamiltonian H GP α), in which the interaction potentials V are
3 chosen as 1 V α),mf x) := V α) x), V α),gp x) := 3 V α) x), for suitable -independent potentials V 1), V ), and V 1). We are interested in the large- behavior of the ground state energies E MF E GP := infσh MF ), := infσh GP ), α {1,,1} 1.4) 3 1.5) and the corresponding ground states. This subject has been deeply investigated for onecomponent Bose gases, as we shall address below, but is virtually unexplored for multicomponent gases. It turns out that by analogy with the one-component case, the leading order of the ground-state energies are captured by effective energy functionals which describe the condensation at the one-body level. More precisely, in the mean-field regime we have the Hartree functional E H [u,v] := c 1 u R dx+c 1 U 1) trap u dx+ c 1 V 1) u ) u dx 3 R 3 R 3 +c v R dx+c U ) trap u dx+ c V ) v ) v dx 3 R 3 R 3 +c 1 c R 3 V 1) v ) u dx 1.6) where c 1 and c are the population ratios defined in 1.4). On the other hand, in the dilute regime, we have the Gross-Pitaevskii functional E GP [u,v] := c 1 u R dx+c 1 U 1) trap u dx+4πa 1 c 1 u 4 dx 3 R 3 R 3 +c v R dx+c U ) trap u dx+4πa c v 4 dx 1.7) 3 R 3 R 3 +8πa 1 c 1 c R 3 v u dx. Here a α is the s-wave) scattering length of the potential V α), α {1,,1}, which is defined by the variational problem see [8] for a detailed discussion) { [ 4πa α = inf fx) + 1 V α x) fx) ] } dx : f : R 3 R, lim fx) = ) x R 3 We are going to show that under suitable, physically realistic conditions, the many-body groundstateenergyperparticlee MF / oregp / converges tothegroundstateenergyof the Hartree/Gross-Pitaevskii functional. Moreover, the corresponding many-body ground state ψ condensates on the unique Hartree/Gross-Pitaevskii minimisers u 0,v 0 ) in terms of the reduced density matrices: lim + γk,l) ψ = u k 0 v l 0 u k 0 v0 l, k,l = 0,1,, ) 1 In the physical literature [34, 41, 33] a different convention is preferred for α {1,}, namely V α) = c 1 α V α) for mean-field regime, and V α) = c αv α) c α ) for Gross-Pitaevskii regime.
4 4 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI Here recall that for every k,l 0, the reduced density matrix γ k,l) ψ of ψ is a trace class, positive operator on H k,l with kernel γ k,l) ψ X,Y;X,Y ) := dx k+1 dx 1 dy l+1 dy R 3 l) R 3 1 k) ψ X,x k+1,...,x 1 ;Y,y l+1,...,y ) ψ X,x k+1,...,x 1 ;Y,y l+1,...,y ) where X,X R 3 ) k and Y,Y R 3 ) l. The convergence 1.9) expresses the asymptotic closeness as ψ u 1 0 v ) in a weak sense. Heuristically, this closeness emerges naturally in the mean-field regime as the Hartree functional is the energy per particle of the trial state u 1 v. In the Gross-Pitaevskii regime, however, the ansazt u 1 0 v 0 is not good enough to produce the Gross-Pitaevskii energy, and a non-trivial correction due to the short-range correlation between particles is needed to recover the actual scattering lengths a α, instead of their first Born approximations 8π) 1 V α). In the mean-field regime, to see the macroscopic effect of the particle correlation we have to go to the next-to-leading order of the energy contribution. We will show that there exists a -independent self-adjoint operator H on a suitable Fock space such that E MF = e H +infσh)+o1) ) In fact, the operator H is the Bogoliubov Hamiltonian the second quantisation of the Hessian of the Hartree functional at the minimiser) that will be introduced in Section. Moreover, we will obtain an approximation for the ground state ψ of H MF in the norm topology of H 1,, which is much more precise than the convergence of the reduced density matrices 1.9). Such asymptotic results have several precursors in the literature on one-component condensates; see [6, 3, 4, 39, 4] for the leading order in the Gross-Pitaevskii regime and [46, 13, 1, 8, 40, 4, 45] for the second order in the mean-field regime. The novelty here is the adaptation, which in various respects is non-trivial, of previous analyses to the multi-component setting. This includes an amount of controls of the emerging mixed i.e., inter-species) terms, among which the convexity argument for the GP minimiser which singles out the role of the miscibility condition), the inter-species short-scale structure for the energy estimates which is crucial for the ground state energy in the Gross-Pitaevskii regime), and the double-component bounds on the Bogoliubov Hamiltonian which is the key ingredient for the second order contribution to the ground state energy in the mean field regime).. Main results Let us present the explicit set of assumptions for the potentials appeared in 1.3). A 1 ) For α {1,}, the confining potentials satisfy U α) trap L3/ loc R3,R) and U α) trap x) + as x +.
5 A GP ) For α {1,,1} the interaction potentials V α) C c R 3 ) are nonnegative, spherically symmetric, and such that the respective scattering lengths satisfy the miscibility condition a 1 a a 1..1) A MF ) For α {1,,1} the interaction potentials V α) : R 3 R are measurable, spherically symmetric, and satisfy the operator inequality V α) ) C½ ),.) the point-wise) positivity of the Fourier transform and the miscibility condition V 1) 0, V ) 0.3) V 1) V ) V 1) )..4) The assumption A 1 ) ensures that the one-body operator T α) := + U α) trap is bounded from below, and with compact resolvent. It covers trivially the harmonic confinement U α) trap x) = c α x, which is often used in realistic experiments. Our results can be generalisedwiththelaplacian replacedbythemagneticlaplaciani +Ax)), andin themean-field casewecan alsodeal withthepseudo-relativistic Laplacian +m m. Conditions.)-.3)ofA MF ) are technical assumptions needed to validate Bogoliubov theory they were already used in the one-component case in [1]). These conditions cover a wide range of interaction potentials, including Coulomb interactions. Condition.1) in A GP ), as well as its mean field counterpart namely.4) in A MF ), is needed to ensure that the Gross-Pitaevskii or Hartree minimiser is unique. These conditions explicitly emerged in the physical literature and they were recognised in the experimental observations as the miscibility condition between the two components of the mixtures that is, the interspecies repulsion does not overcome the repulsion among particles of the same time and the two components are spatially mixed); see, e.g., [10], [30, Section 15.], [14, Section 16..1] and [44, Section 1.1]. Here we will rigorously justify a uniqueness that is expected in theoretical physical arguments. Let us remark that our results below actually hold in a larger generality where.1) or.3) is replaced by the condition that the Gross-Pitaevskii or Hartree functional has a unique minimiser. Our first main result is the leading order behavior of the many-body ground state energy and the complete condensation of the ground state in the dilute regime. Theorem.1 Leading order in the Gross-Pitaevskii limit). Let Assumptions A 1 ) and A GP ) be satisfied. Then the following statements hold true. i) There exists a unique minimiser u 0,v 0 ) up to phases) for the variational problem e GP := inf E GP [u,v]. u,v H 1 R 3 ) u L = v L =1 ii) The ground state energy of H GP satisfies lim E GP = e GP..5) 5
6 6 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI iii) If ψ is an approximate ground state of H GP, in the sense that lim ψ,h GP ψ = e GP, then it exhibits complete double-component Bose-Einstein condensation: lim + γk,l) ψ = u k 0 v l 0 u k 0 v0 l, k,l = 0,1,,....6) in trace class. In Theorem.1, we actually do not need the local integrability of potentials; for example, our analysis can be extended to hard sphere potentials. In fact, using Dyson s argument [9] we can always replace V α) by a solf potential see Lemma 3. below) and the detailed profile of the potential plays no role; only its scattering length matters. We also do not need to assume that the potential is short-range, because as soon as the potential decays fast enough, we can make a space cut-off and obtain the same result by a standard density argument. However, in the following, we will keep the conditions A 1 ), A GP ) to simplify the presentation. The analogue of Theorem.1 in the one-component case has been first proved by Lieb, Seiringer and Yngvason [6] for the convergence of the ground state energy, and by Lieb and Seiringer [3, 4] for the condensation of the ground state. Later, based on quantum de Finetti methods [6, 1, 19] the ground state energy asymptotics and the condensation of the ground state were re-obtained by am, Rougerie and Seiringer [39]. Very recently, Boccato, Brennecke, Cenatiempo, and Schlein [4] obtained the optimal convergence rate in the homogeneous case where the particles are confined in a unit torus, without external potential). In the present paper, we will follow the simplified approach in[39] when dealing with the multi-component case. Theorem.1 as well as its mean-field counterpart in Theorem 4.1) justifies crucial information of the initial states assumed in various recent works on the dynamical problem for mixtures of condensates [34, 41, ]. There, one proves that the mixture preserves its double-component condensation in the course of time evolution, if it is prepared at time t = 0 in a state of condensation and, in the GP regime, provided that the energy per particle of the initial state is given by the GP energy functional. In the experiments the preparation of the compound condensate is precisely made by letting the system relax onto a suitable many-body ground state or low-energy state), then the dynamical experiments starts by perturbing such an initial state, e.g., removing the confinement [14]. ow our result provides the rigorous ground for such initial conditions assumed in the dynamical analysis. In the mean-field regime, we can go beyond the leading order by a detailed analysis of the fluctuations around the condensate. It is convenient to turn to the Fock space formalism where the number of particles is not fixed. Let us introduce the single-component Fock spaces F j) := h j) ) symn, h j) := L R 3 ), j {1,}.7) n=0
7 and the double-component Fock space F := F 1) F ) = L=0 n,m 0 n+m=l h 1) ) symn h ) ) symm ) 7..8) Let u m ) m=0 and v n) n=0 be orthonormal bases of h1) and h ), respectively, with u 0,v 0 ) being the Hartree minimiser. We shall choose once and for all these two bases in such a way that all their elements belong to the domain of self-adjointness, respectively, of the operator h 1) on h 1) and of the operator h ) on h ) that we are going to define in formula.16) below. Let a m := au m ), a m := a u m ), b n := bv n ), b n := b v n )..9) be the usual creation and annihilation operators on F 1) and F ), which are linear operators defined by the actions a m Ψ n )x 1,...,x n 1 ) = n dx fx)ψ n x,x 1,...,x n 1 ), R 3 a mψ n )x 1,...,x n+1 ) = n+1 1 fx j )Ψ n x 1,...,x j 1,x j,...,x n+1 ) n+1 j=1.10) for all Ψ n h 1) ) symn and for all n 0, and similar actions for b m,b m. They satisfy the canonical commutation relations CCR) [a m,a n ] = 0 = [a m,a n], [a m,a n] = δ m,n 1 1) F, + [b m,b n ] = 0 = [b m,b n], [b m,b n] = δ m,n 1 ) F. + With no risk of confusion we shall keep denoting with a m, a m, b m, b m the operators.11) a m ½ F ), a m ½ F ), ½ F 1) b m, ½ F 1) b m.1) now acting on F = F 1) F ). Obviously, a m,a m commute with b n,b n. In terms of these operators, we can extend the -body Hamiltonian H MF on H 1, as an operator on the Fock space F as H MF := ) u m, +U 1) trap )u n a m a n + v m, +U ) trap )v n b m b n where m,n m,n,p,q 1 V 1) mnpqa ma na p a q + 1 V ) mnpqb mb nb p b q +V 1) mnpqa mb na p b q ).13) V 1) mnpq := u m,[v 1) u n u q )]u p, V ) mnpq := v m,[v ) v n v q )]v p.14) V 1) mnpq := u m,[v 1) v n v q )]u p. Bogoliubov s approximation [3] suggests to formally replace a 0,a 0 and b 0,b 0 by the scalar values 1 and, respectively. It turns out that the terms of order are
8 8 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI canceled due to the Euler-Lagrange equations for the Hartree minimiser h 1) u 0 = 0, h ) v 0 = 0.15) where h 1) := +U 1) trap +c 1V 1) u 0 +c V 1) v 0 µ 1), h ) := +U ) trap +c.16) V ) v 0 +c 1 V 1) u 0 µ ) with the chemical potentials µ 1) := u 0, +U 1) trap )u 0 +c 1 u 0,V 1) u 0 u 0 +c u 0,V 1) v 0 u 0, µ ) := v 0, +U ) trap )v 0 +c v 0,V ) v 0 v 0 +c 1 u 0,V 1) v 0 u 0. All this results in the quadratic Hamiltonian H := [ u m,h 1) u n a ma n + v m,h ) v n b mb n +c 1 V 1) m00n a ma n +c V ) m,n 1 m00n b mb n + 1 c V ) mn00 b mb n + 1 c V ) mn00 b mb n + 1 c 1V 1) mn00 a ma n + 1 c 1V 1) mn00 a ma n + c 1 c V 1) 0mn0 b m a n + c 1 c V 1) 0mn0 a m b n + ] c 1 c V 1) mn00 a m b n + c 1 c V 1) mn00 a mb n 1 c 1V 1) c V ) 0000 which acts on the excited Fock space where F + := F 1) + F) + = L=0 n,m 0 n+m=l h 1) + ) symn )) symm h + ).17).18).19) h 1) + := {u 0} L R 3 ), h ) + := {v 0} L R 3 )..0) ote that H is independent of the choice of u m ) m=1 and v n) n=1, apart from the technical assumption that these functions belong to the domains Dh 1) ), Dh ) ) of the self-adjoint extension of h 1), h ), respectively. We can rigorously interpret H as an operator with core domain M M=0L=0 n,m 0 n+m=l h 1) + Dh1) ) ) symn h ) + Dh) ) ) symm ),.1) which turns out to be bounded from below and can be extended to a self-adjoint operator by Friedrichs method. In fact, the Bogoliubov Hamiltonian H is nothing but the quantized form of half) the Hessian of the Hartree functional at the minimiser. This -independent Hamiltonian is expected to describe the fluctuations around the condensate. Our second main result is the next order correction to the ground state energy in the mean field regime and a norm convergence for the ground state. Theorem. Bogoliubov correction to the mean-field limit). Let Assumptions A 1 ) and A MF ) be satisfied. Then the following statements hold true.
9 i) There exists a unique minimiser u 0,v 0 ) up to phases) for the variational problem e H := inf E H [u,v]. u,v H 1 R 3 ) u = v =1 ii) The Bogoliubov Hamiltonian H in.18) is bounded from below on F + with the core domain.1). Moreover, its Friedrichs self-adjoint extension, still denoted by H, has a unique, non-degenerate ground state Φ gs = Φ gs m,n) m,n 0 F +. iii) The ground state energy of H MF satisfies iv) The ground state ψ gs approximation lim ψgs lim E MF e H) = infσh)..) of HMF 0 m 1 0 n satisfies, up to a correct choice of phase, the norm a 0 ) 1 m b 0 ) n 1 m)! n)! Φgs m,n 9 = 0..3) H1, We remark that the ground state ψ of H MF is unique, up to complex phases. More precisely, in the case of no magnetic fields as in Theorem.), the ground state of H MF under the partial symmetric conditions in the first and the second components) is the same with the absolute ground state without any symmetry); see [5, Section 3..4]. Thus the uniqueness and positivity of ψ follow from the standard analysis of Schrödinger operators; see e.g. [, Chapter 11]. In the one-component case, Bogoliubov s second order correction for the ground state energy and the excitation spectrum in the mean-field regime has been first obtained by Seiringer [46] for the homogeneous Bose gas where particles are confined in a unit torus, without external potentials), and by Grech and Seiringer [13] for the non-homogeneous trapped gas. Then Lewin, am, Serfaty, Solovej [1] showed that, under the assumption of Bose-Einstein condensation, one can get the next order expansion in the energy by Bogoliubov theory in very general setting, and in particular also for Coulomb-type interaction potentials. Further extensions include a mixed mean-field large-volume limit by Dereziński and apiorkówski [8], collective excitations and multiple condensations by am and Seiringer [40], a power expansion by Pizzo [4] of the ground state in terms of a small coupling constant describing the interaction strength which is 1 in our meanfield regime), and an infinitely-splitting double-well model by Rougerie and Spehner [45]. In the present work, we will follow the general strategy in [1] to justify Bogoliubov s approximation. Here we can also deal with the excitation spectrum of H MF, but we will focus only on the ground state to simplify the representation. In a very recent breakthrough [5], Boccato, Brennecke, Cenatiempo, and Schlein were able to justify Bogoliubov s theory in the Gross-Pitaevskii limit for the homogeneous Bose gas. We expect that a similar result should hold for the multi-component case as well. We will prove Theorem.1 in Section 3 and prove Theorem. in Section 4.
10 10 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI 3. Proof of Theorem GP minimiser. Under the assumptions A 1 ) and A GP ), the existence of minimisers for the Gross-Pitaevskii functional 1.7) follows easily from the standard direct method in the calculus of variations. Here we only focus on the uniqueness part. Let us define an auxiliary functional, with f,g 0, The first step is to show convexity of D GP, namely D GP[ f +r D GP [f,g] := E GP [ f, g]. 3.1), g +s ] DGP [f,g]+d GP [r,s]. 3.) This is easily checked for the summands of D GP that contain the kinetic operator by [, Theorem 7.8]) and for those that contain the trapping potentials. For the terms containing the interaction potentials, let us consider, in self-explanatory notation, D1 GP, D GP, D1 GP as the three summands of D GP containing, respectively, a 1, a and a 1. We have the identities D GP 1 [f,g]+d GP 1 [r, s] D GP [f,g]+d GP [r, s] D GP 1 [f,g]+dgp 1 [r,s] D GP 1 D GP D GP 1 [ f +r [ f +r [ f +r, g +s ] = 4πa 1 c 1 ], g +s, g +s dk fk) rk), 3.3) = 4πa c dk ĝk) ŝk), ] = 8πa 1 c 1 c dk fk) rk) ĝk) ŝk). By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality together with.1), 4πa 1 c 1 dk fk) rk) +4πa c dk ĝk) ŝk) 8πa 1 c 1 c dk fk) rk) ĝk) ŝk), and the convexity property 3.) follows. ext, let us show that any Gross-Pitaevskii minimisers is positive, up to a complex phase. Indeed, let u 1,v 1 ) be a Gross-Pitaevskii minimiser. By the diamagnetic inequality [, Theorem 7.8], u 1, v 1 ) is a Gross-Pitaevskii minimiser too, and we have u 1 = u 1, v 1 = v ) Moreover, by a standard elliptic regularity from the Gross-Pitaevskii equation for u 1, v 1 ), it follows that u 1, v 1 > 0 pointwise. Together with the equalities 3.4), we can conclude from [, Theorem 7.8] that u 1 = θ 1 u 1 and v 1 = θ 1 v 1 for complex constants θ 1,θ 1. Thus up to complex phases, we can assume that u 1,v 1 > 0 pointwise. ext, assumethatu 1,v 1 )andu,v )aretwogross-pitaevskii minimisers,withu i,v i > 0 for i = 1,. Denote f i := u i and g i := v i. Obviously, f 1,g 1 ) and f,g ) are minimisers for D GP [f,g] with the constraint f L 1 = g L 1 = 1. Combining with the
11 convexity of D GP, we have the following chain of inequalities 0 D[f 1,g 1 ]+D[f,g ] [ f1 +f D, g 1 +g ] 0. This implies D[f 1,g 1 ]+D[f,g ] [ f1 +f = D, g 1 +g ], and in particular f 1, f 1 + f, f f 1 +f f1 +f =,. 3.5) By [, Theorem 7.8], the equality 3.5) and the fact that f 1,f > 0 imply that f 1 and f are proportional. The normalization condition f 1 L 1 = f L 1 = 1 implies that f 1 = f, and hence u 1 = u. The same argument shows v 1 = v. 3.. Energy upper bound. We will follow ideas in [6], with some modifications. First, let us recall the following result [11, Appendix A.1]. Lemma 3.1. Let 0 V C c R 3 ) be a radial function, with scattering length a > 0. Then V.) has scattering length a/. Moreover, for every constant l > 0, if is large enough so as to have suppv { x l}, then there exists a unique ground state f 0 of the eumann problem f + 1 V.)f = λ f on the ball x l, with fx) = 1 on x = l. We can can extend f to R 3 by setting fx) = 1 if x l, and hence f + 1 V.)f = λ f1 B0,l) 3.6) on R 3. Moreover, λ = 3a l 3 + O1) C1 x l) l4, 0 1 f, f x Trial function. Let us introduce the notations 11 C1 x l) x. 3.7) z 1,...,z ) := x 1,...,x 1,y 1,...,y ), 3.8) { U 1) trap if i 1, U i := U ) trap if i > 1, V 1).),a 1 ) if i,j 1, V ij,a i,j ) := V ).),a ) if i,j > 1, V 1).),a 1 ) if i 1 < j or j 1 < i. Let l > 0 be a small constant which is independent of. For every i j, let f ij,λ,ij ) be the pair f,λ ) in Lemma 3.1 with V.) replaced by V ij. Thus we can write H GP = zi +U i z i ))+ i=1 V ij z i z j ). 3.9) i<j
12 1 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI Taketwofunctionsu,v Cc R 3 ), whichareindependentof andl, suchthat u L = v L = 1. For every i = 1,,..., denote { u if i 1, u i := 3.10) v if i > 1. Consider the trial function Ψz 1,...,z ) = u i z i ) f jk z j z k ). 3.11) i=1 ote that we are using the full product j<k f jkz j z k ) to capture the short-range correlation, instead of using only a nearest-neighbor induction as in [6] in the onecomponent case. We found that this strategy is more transparent and flexible, as it does not require bosonic symmetry between particles. The trial state Ψ in 3.11) is not normalized, but nevertheless we have E GP j<k Ψ,HGP Ψ. 3.1) Ψ,Ψ orm estimates. For every i = 1,,...,, let us denote the z i -independent function Ψ Ψ i := u i z i ) j i f ijz i z j ). Since 0 f ij 1, we have the pointwise estimate On the other hand, using 3.7) we can estimate 1 j i f ijz i z j ) j i Ψ u i z i ) Ψ i. 3.13) 1 f ijz i z j )) j i C1z i z j ) z i z j. Thus 0 u i z i ) Ψ i Ψ = 1 ) ijz j if i z j ) u i z i ) Ψ i j i C u i L 1 z i z j l) Ψ i. z i z j Integrating this estimate leads to Ψ i L Ψ L 1 Cl ) Ψ i L. 3.14) We will choose l > 0 small such that 1 Cl is close to 1. Similarly, for every i j, the z i,z j )-independent function satisfies Ψ ij := Ψ u i z i )u j z j )f ij z i z j ) k i,j f ikz i z k )f jk z j z k ) Ψ ij L Ψ L 1 Cl ) Ψ ij L. 3.15)
13 Energy estimates. In order to obtain an upper bound for the energy convergence of Theorem.1, we show how to estimate all summands of the energy of the trial function 3.11) in terms of the GP functional, at the expense of negligible remainders. First, we bound the one-body potential energy. For simplicity, let us assume U i 0 for all i = 1,,..., this technical assumption will be removed at the end). Using 3.13) and 3.14) we can bound 13 U i z i ) Ψ ) U i z i ) u i z i ) Ψ i = U i z) u i z) dz Ψ i L 3.16) R 3 ) U i z) u i z) dz 1 Cl ) 1 Ψ L. R 3 Here the identity follows from the fact that Ψ i is independent of z i. ext, we consider the kinetic energy. For every i = 1,,...,, we have zi Ψ zi = u i) Ψ + zi f ij ) Ψ u i f ij j i = zi u i Ψ u i + zi f ij Ψ f ij 3.17) j i +Re zi u i ) Ψ zi f ij ) Ψ +Re zi f ij ) Ψ zi f ik ) Ψ. u i f ij f ij f j i ik j i k j Let us show that the cross terms in 3.17) are small. In fact, for all i j, using 3.7), 3.13) and 3.14), we can estimate zi u i ) Ψ zi f ij ) Ψ Ψ i u i zi u i zi f ij u i f ij u i u i L Ψ i zi f ij z i z j ) ) ) = u i u i L z f ij z) dz Ψ i R 3 Cl Ψ i L Cl 1 Cl ) Ψ L. 3.18) Here the identity follows by integrating w.r.t. z i fist and using again that Ψ i is independent of z i ). The constant C may depend on u and v, but it is always independent of
14 14 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI and l. Similarly, for all i j k i, we have zi f ij ) Ψ f ij zi f ik ) Ψ f ik u i L u j L Ψ ij u i u j zi f ij zi f ik Ψ ij zi f ij z i z j ) zi f ik z i z k ) ) = u i L u j L R z f ij z) dz 3 Cl Ψ ij L Ψ ij ) Cl 1 Cl ) Ψ L. 3.19) The identity follows by integrating w.r.t. z j fist, then integrating w.r.t. z i, and using the fact that Ψ ij is independent of z i,z j ). ext we turn to the main terms in 3.17). The first term can be estimated similarly to 3.16): zi u i Ψ u i zi u i Ψ i = u i L Ψ i L 1 1 Cl u i L Ψ L. 3.0) The second term in 3.17) will be coupled with the interaction energy. We have where zi f ij z i z j ) Ψ f ij + 1 V ij z i z j ) Ψ [ f zi ijz i z j ) + 1 V ijz i z j ) f ij z i z j ) ] u i z i ) u j z j ) Ψ ij ) = Φ ij x y) u i x) u j y) dxdy Ψ ij L R 3 R 3 ) Φ ij x y) u i x) u j y) 1 dxdy R 3 R 3 1 Cl Ψ L Φ ij z) := z f ij z) + 1 V ijz) f ij z). Since Φ ij is supported on x l, we can estimate Φ ij x y) u i x) u j y) dxdy Φ ij L 1 u i x) u j x) dx R 3 R 3 R 3 = Φ ij x y) u i x) u j x) u j y) )dxdy R 3 R 3 sup u j x) u j y) Φ ij x y) u i x) R dxdy 3 R 3 x y l l u j ) L Φ ij L 1.
15 Moreover, using equation 3.6) for f ij, the fact that 0 f ij 1, and the estimate 3.7) for the eigenvalue λ = λ,ij we find that 15 Φ ij L 1 = z f ij z) + 1 R 3 V ijz) f ij z) dz = λ,ij R 3 f ij z) 1 z l)dz 3ai,j l 3 + C ) l 4 1 z l)dz 4πa R 3 + C l. Thus Φ ij x y) u i x) u j y) dxdy 1+Cl) Φ ij L 1 u i x) u j x) dx R 3 R 3 R 3 4πai,j 1+Cl) + C ) u i x) u j x) dx l R 3 and hence zi f ij z i z j ) Ψ f ij + 1 V ij z i z j ) Ψ 1+Cl 4πai,j 1 Cl + C ) ) u i x) u j x) dx Ψ L. 3.1) l R 3 Conclusion of the upper bound. In summary, putting3.16)-3.1) together we obtain, for every i = 1,,...,, Ψ, zi +U i z i )+ 1 1 Cl u i L Cl 1 Cl j i 4πai,j + C l 1 ) V ijz i z j ) Ψ Ψ L j i ) U i z) u i z) dz + Cl R 3 1 Cl + Cl 1 Cl ) ) u i x) u j x) dx. 3.) R 3
16 16 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI Summing over i = 1,,..., and using the choice 3.10), we find that E GP Ψ,HGP Ψ c 1 Ψ 1 Cl L u L + R 3 U 1) trap z) uz) dz ) c + 1 Cl v L + U ) trap z) vz) dz R 3 +c 1+Cl 1 4πa 1 Cl 1 + C ) ) ux) 4 dx l R 3 +c 1+Cl 4πa 1 Cl + C ) ) vx) 4 dx l R 3 1+Cl +c 1 c 4πa 1 Cl 1 + C ) l ) ) ux) vx) dx R 3 + Cl 1 Cl + Cl 1 Cl. 3.3) Taking +, and then taking l 0 in 3.3) lead to lim sup E GP EGP [u,v]. 3.4) So far, we have proved 3.4) under the additional assumption that U α) trap 0, α {1,}. In general, if U α) trap s have negative parts, we can use 3.16) with U i replaced by maxu i, ε 1 ) + ε 1 0, where ε > 0 is a small constant. This gives, instead of 3.4), where E GP,ε lim sup E GP,ε EGP ε [u,v]. and EGP ε [u, v] are, respectively, the many-body ground state energy and the Gross-Pitaevskii functional with U α) trap replaced by maxuα) trap, ε 1 ), α {1,}. We observe that a ε 1 summand appears on both sides of the inequality, and hence exactly cancels. Since, by Lebesgue s monotone convergence theorem, E,ε GP EGP and Eε GP [u,v] E GP [u,v] as ε 0, we conclude that 3.4) holds true in general. Optimizing 3.4) over all u,v Cc R 3 ) satisfying u L = v L = 1, we obtain the desired upper bound lim sup E GP e GP. 3.5) 3.3. Dyson Lemma. ow weturntothelower bound. Wewillfollow thestrategy in[39]. First, as in [6, 7, 4, 39], we will replace the short-range potential w by a longer-range potential with less singular scaling behavior. This idea goes back to Dyson [9]. For every R > 0 define x θ R x) = θ, U R x) = R) 1 x ) R 3U R where U C c R3 ) are radial functions satisfying 0 θ 1, θx) 0 for x 1, θx) 1 for x,
17 U 0, Ux) 0 for x / [1/,1], U = 4π. R 3 We will always denote by p = i the momentum variable. The following result is taken from [7]. Lemma 3. Generalized Dyson lemma). Let v be a non-negative smooth function, supported on x R/ with scattering length a. Then for all ε,s > 0, pθ s p)1 x R)θ s p)p+ 1 vx) 1 ε)au Rx) CaR εs 5. Proof. The bound follows from [7, Lemma 4] with U,χ,s) replaced by U R,θ s,s 1 ) and the first estimate in [7, Eq. 5)]. ext, we apply Lemma 3. to derive a lower bound to the many-body Hamiltonian. Under the notations 3.8), we have H GP Lemma 3.3 Lower bound for many-body Hamiltonian). Let ε, s > 0 be independent of and let 1 R 1/. Then [ ] H GP zi +U i z i ) 1 ε)p z i θsp zi ) i=1 + 1 ε) a i,j U R z i z j ) j i k i,j 17 θ R z j z k )+o). 3.6) The purpose of Lemma 3.3 is to replace the short-range potentials V α) by the longerrange potential U R, which essentially places us in the mean-field limit. This is done by usingalmost all of the high-momentum part p θ s p) of thekinetic operator, and employing a many-body cut-off k i,j θ Rz j z k ) which rules out the event of having three particles close to each other. This technical cut-off will be removed later. Proof. ote that 1 V 1) = V 1).) is supported on x C 1 and has scattering length a 1 1. Therefore, when 1 R 1/ we can apply Lemma 3. to obtain p zi θ s p zi )1 z i z j R)θ s p zi )p zi + 1 V ijz i z j ) 1 ε) a i,j U Rz i z j )+o ). 3.7) For every i = 1,,...,, if every point in {z j } j i has a distance R to the others, then there is at most one of them has a distance R to z i. In this case, 1 z i z j R) 1, j i and hence summing 3.7) over j leads to p z i θ s p z i )+ j i 1 V ijz i z j ) 1 ε) j i a i,j U Rz i z j )+o ).
18 18 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI The latter estimate can be extended to all {z j } j i R 3 as p z i θsp 1 zi )+ V ijz i z j ) 1 ε) a i,j U R z i z j ) j i j i k i,j θ R z j z k )+o ). 3.8) because the left side is always nonnegative. Multiplying both sides by 1 ε) leads to the desired estimate. We use again the notation z 1,...,z ) := x 1,...,x 1,y 1,...,y ) and introduce { T1) z h i := i := zi +U 1) trap z i) 1 ε)p z i θsp zi ), if i 1, T z ) i := zi +U ) trap z i) 1 ε)p z i θs p z i ) if i > 1, W i := 1 ε) a i,j U R z i z j ) θ R z j z k ), H := i=1 j i h i + 1 ) W i. Lemma 3.3 can be rewritten as k i,j H GP H +o). 3.9) Thus for the lower bound on E GP it suffices to estimate the ground state energy of the modified Hamiltonian H. By proceeding exactly as in [39, Lemma 3.1, Lemma 3.4] where the symmetries of h i s and W i s are not essential), we have the second moment estimate H ) 1 ) h i Cε,s 3.30) 3 i=1 and we can remove the cut-off k i,j θ Rz j z k ): H h i + 1 ε) a i,j U R z i z j )+o) 1 H ) 4, 3.31) i=1 j i provided that ε,s > 0 are independent of and /3 R 1/. ow let Ψ be a ground state for H which exists by a standard compactness argument). Taking the expectation of 3.31) against Ψ, and using the equation H Ψ = Ẽ Ψ with Ẽ = O), we find that E GP Ẽ +o1) Ψ, 1 h i + 1 ε) i=1 a i,j U R z i z j ) Ψ +o1), 3.3) j i where the first inequality is due to 3.9). Thus, it remains to be bounded from below the right-side of 3.3).
19 3.4. Energy lower bound. A further simplification on the right-hand side of 3.3) is obtained by inserting a finite dimensional cut-off similarly to what is done in [39]). We report here the argument. We can find a constant C 0 > 0 which might depend on s,ε) such that K := ε )+minu 1) trap,u trap )+C 0 1. Then K has compact resolvent because minu 1) trap x),u trap x)) + as x +. Therefore, for every fixed L > 0, we have the finite-rank projection P :=1K L). Using the operator inequality see, e.g. [39, Lemma 3.]) U R z i z j ) C U R L 11 zi ) 1 δ 1 zj ) 1 δ, 1/4 > δ > ) and the fact that 1 is K-bounded, we have the simple Cauchy-Schwarz type inequality c.f. [39, Eq. before 4.10)]) U R z i z j ) P zi P zj U R z i z j )P zi P zj C ε,s L 1/10 K zi K zj, 1 i j. From the second moment estimate 3.30), we find that Thus 3.3) reduces to E GP Ψ, 1 Ψ,K zi K zj Ψ C ε,s, 1 i j. 3.34) i=1 h i + 1 ε) a i,j P zi P zj U R z i z j )P zi P zj Ψ j i +o1) +OL 1/10 ) [ T1) = c 1 Tr γ ]+c 1,0) [ T) Tr γ ]+o1) 0,1) +OL 1/10 ) Ψ Ψ [ ] +1 ε) c 1 a 1Tr P x1 P x U R x 1 x )P x1 P x γ,0) Ψ [ ] +1 ε) c a Tr P y1 P y U R y 1 y )P y1 P y γ 0,) Ψ [ +1 ε) c 1 c a 1 Tr P x P y U R x y)p x P y γ ]. 1,1) 3.35) Ψ Here we simply use the definition of the reduced density matrices 1.9). Our next tool is the following abstract result. Theorem 3.4 Quantum de Finetti theorem for -component Bose gas). Let K be a separable Hilbert space. Let Ψ be a wave function in K 1 sym K sym and let γk,l) Ψ be the reduced density matrices defined similarly as in 1.10) with L R 3 ) replaced by K). Then, up to a subsequence of {Ψ }, there exists a Borel probability measure µ supported on the set {u,v) : u,v K, u 1, v 1} such that γ k,l) Ψ u k v l u k v l dµu,v), k,l = 0,1,, ) 19
20 0 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI weakly-* in trace class as. Moreover, if γ 1,0) Ψ and γ 0,1) Ψ converge strongly in trace class, then µ is supported on the set {u,v) : u,v K, u = v = 1} and the convergence in 3.36) is strong in trace class for all k,l 0. This is the two-component analogue for the quantum de Finetti theorem, which was proved in [48, 17] for the case of strong convergence and in [1, 19] for the case of weak convergence. Theorem 3.4 can be proved by following the strategy in the one-component case in [19]. We sketch a proof in Appendix A for the reader s convenience. ow let us conclude the desired lower bound using Theorem 3.4). Since h i K zi C ε,s, i = 1,...,, we deduce from 3.34) that Tr[Kγ 1,0) Ψ ] and Tr[Kγ 0,1) Ψ ] are bounded uniformly in. Since K has compact resolvent, up to a subsequence as, we obtain that γ 1,0) Ψ and γ 0,1) Ψ converge strongly in trace class. Thus up to a subsequence again, Theorem 3.4 ensures the existence of a Borel probability measure ν supported on the set such that lim γk,l) Ψ = {u,v) : u,v L R 3 ), u L = v L = 1} u k v l u k v l dνu,v), k,l = 0,1,, ) ow we take the limit, and then L later on the right side of 3.35). Since T 1), T ) are bounded from below, we can use 3.37) and Fatou s lemma to get [ T1) ] lim inf Tr γ 1,0) u, T 1) u dνu,v), 3.38) Ψ [ T) ] lim inf Tr γ 0,1) v, T ) v dνu,v). 3.39) Ψ The operator inequality 3.33) and the fact that 1 ) is K-bounded ensure that P x P y U R x y)p x P y is uniformly bounded in as an operator. Therefore, the trace class convergence 3.37) implies that [ ] Tr P x P y U R x y)p x P y γ 1,1) Ψ = u v,p x P y U R x y)p x P y u v dνu,v)+o1). From the choice of U R, we get lim u v,p x P y U R x y)p x P y u v = lim Pu,U R Pv = 4π Pux) Pvx) dx. R 3 ext we take the limit L to remove the cut-off P =1K L). Since Tr[Kγ 1,0) Ψ ] and Tr[Kγ 0,1) Ψ ] are bounded, ν is supported on QK) QK) where QK) is the quadratic form domain of K. Consequently, for all u,v) in the support of ν, we have Pu u and
21 Pv v strongly in QK) as L. Moreover, since 1 ) is K-bounded, we have the continuous embeddings QK) H 1 R 3 ) L 4 R 3 ). Therefore, lim Pux) Pvx) dx = ux) vx) dx, L R 3 R 3 and hence lim lim u v,p x P y U R x y)p x P y u v = 4π ux) vx) dx. L R 3 Thus by Fatou s lemma, we find that [ ] lim inf liminf Tr P x P y U R x y)p x P y γ 1,1) L Ψ = liminf liminf u v,p x P y U R x y)p x P y u v dνu,v) L [ ] 4π ux) vx) dx dνu,v). 3.40) R 3 Similarly, we also have [ ] [ ] lim inf liminf Tr P x1 P x U R x 1 x )P x1 P x γ,0) 4π ux) 4 dx dνu,v), L Ψ R ) [ ] [ ] lim inf liminf Tr P y1 P y U R y 1 y )P y1 P y γ 0,) 4π vy) 4 dx dνu,v). L Ψ R ) Inserting 3.38)-3.4) into the right side of 3.35), we arrive at E GP lim inf Ẽε,s GP [u,v]dνu,v) inf Ẽε,s GP [u, v] 3.43) u L = v L =1 where Ẽε,s GP [u,v] := c 1 u, T 1) u +c v, T ) v +1 ε) 4πa 1 c 1 ux) 4 dx 3.44) R 3 +1 ε) 4πa c vx) 4 dx+1 ε) 8πa 1 c 1 c ux) vx) dx. R 3 R 3 Finally, we take s 0, and then ε 0. By a standard compactness argument as in [4, after 103)], we have lim lim ε 0s 0 inf u L = v L =1 Thus 3.43) leads to the desired lower bound lim inf Ẽ GP ε,s [u,v] = e GP. 3.45) E GP e GP. 3.46) Strictly speaking, we have so far proved 3.46) for a subsequence as. However, since the limit e GP is independent of the subsequence, we can obtain the estimate for the whole sequence by a standard contradiction argument.
22 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI Combining with the energy upper bound 3.5), we conclude the proof of.5): lim E GP = e GP Convergence of density matrices. Let ψ be an approximate ground state for H GP. Since Tr[ +U1) trap )γ1,0) ψ ] and Tr[ +U ) trap )γ0,1) ψ ] are bounded uniformly in, up to a subsequence as, γ 1,0) ψ and γ 0,1) ψ converge strongly in trace class. Thus, by Theorem 3.4, up to a subsequence again, there exists a Borel probability measure µ supported on the set such that lim γk,l) ψ = {u,v) : u,v L R 3 ), u L = v L = 1} u k v l u k v l dµu,v), k,l = 0,1,, ) strongly in trace class. Let us show that µ is supported on the set {e iθ 1 u 0,e θ v 0 ) : θ 1,θ R}, where u 0,v 0 ) is the unique Gross-Pitaevskii minimiser. This follows from the convergence of ground state energy and a standard Hellmann-Feynman type argument as in [4]. To be precise, let us denote Q := u 0 v 0 u 0 v 0 and for every fixed η > 0, consider the perturbed Hamiltonian H GP,η := H GP + η c 1 c 1 Q xi,y j, i=1 j=1 where Q xi,y j indicates the projector Q acting on the i-th variable of the first sector of H 1,,sym and on the j-th variable of the second sector. Then by the same method as above, we obtain the analogue of.5) a lower bound is sufficient for our purpose) lim inf infσh,η GP) ext, we can write Tr[Qγ 1,1) ψ ] = 1 c 1 c inf u L = v L =1 1 ψ, Q xi,y j ψ i=1 j=1 { E GP [u,v]+η u,u 0 v,v 0 } =: e GP,η. 3.48) = 1 [ ] ψ,h GP η,ηψ ψ,h GP ψ. Using the lower bound 3.48) and the assumption that ψ is an approximate ground state for H GP, we find that liminf Tr[Qγ1,1) ψ ] 1 ] [e GP,η e GP. η ext, when η 0, the minimiser u η,v η ) of e GP,η becomes a minimising sequence for e GP, and it converges to the unique minimiser u 0,v 0 ) of e GP by a standard compactness argument. Therefore, lim inf η 0 1 ] [e GP,η e GP liminf η u η,u 0 v η,v 0 = 1. η 0
23 3 Thus in conclusion, we have with Q = u 0 v 0 u 0 v 0, lim inf Tr[Qγ1,1) ψ ] 1. Consequently, the convergence 3.47) implies that u,u 0 v,v 0 dµu,v) 1. Thus µ is supported on the set {e iθ 1 u 0,e θ v 0 ) : θ 1,θ R}, and hence 3.47) reduces to the desired convergence.6): lim γk,l) ψ = u k 0 v0 l u k 0 v0 l, k,l = 0,1,,... in trace class. Again, we have so far proved.6) for a subsequence as, but since the limit is unique, the convergence actually holds for the whole sequence. 4. Proof of Theorem Leading order and Hartree theory. In the mean-field regime, we have the following analogue of Theorem.1). Theorem 4.1 Leading order in the mean-field limit). Let Assumptions A 1 ) and A MF ) be satisfied. i) There exists a unique minimiser u 0,v 0 ) up to phases) for the variational problem e H := inf E H [u,v]. u,v H 1 R 3 ) u L = v L =1 ii) The ground state energy of H MF satisfies lim E MF = e H. 4.1) iii) If ψ is an approximate ground state of H MF, in the sense that lim ψ,h MF ψ = e H, then it exhibits complete double-component Bose-Einstein condensation: in trace class. lim + γk,l) ψ = u k 0 v l 0 u k 0 v0 l, k,l = 0,1,,... 4.) Proof. The proof of Theorem 4.1 is similar to indeed easier than) the proof of Theorem.1. Let us quickly explain the necessary adaptation. i) The existence of minimisers of e H is standard. The uniqueness of miminizer up to complex phases) follows a convexity argument as in the Gross-Pitaevskii regime. More precisely, if we denote D H [f,g] = E H [ f, g] for f,g 0, then D H is convex. Indeed,
24 4 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI by considering D1 H, DH and DH 1 as the summands of the Hartree functional containing respectively V 1), V ) and V 1), we obtain the following analogue D1 H[f,g]+DH 1 [r,s] [ f +r D1 H, g+s ] = c 1 dk fk) rk) V 1) k), D H[f,g]+DH [r,s] [ f +r D H, g+s ] = c dk ĝk) ŝk) V ) k), D1 H[f,g]+DH 1 [r,s] [ f +r D1 H, g+s ] = c 1 c dk fk) rk) ĝk) ŝk) V 1) k). Therefore, the convexity follows from the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and Assumptions.3)-.4). The rest is exactly similar to the Gross-Pitaevskii case. ii)-iii) The convergence of energy and approximate ground states can be obtained by following the strategy in the one component case [19]. In fact, the energy upper bound lim sup E MF e H follows immediately from choosing the trial state u 1 v. ow let Ψ be a wave function in H 1, such that We can write, in terms of reduced density matrices, e H +o1) Ψ,H MFΨ = c 1 Tr Ψ,H MF Ψ E MF +o). 4.3) [ ] T 1) γ 1,0) Ψ + c 1 [ +c Tr +c 1 c Tr Ψ ] [ Tr V 1) x 1 x )γ,0) T ) γ 0,1) [ ] V 1) x y)γ 1,1) Ψ Ψ ] + c [ ] Tr V ) y 1 y )γ 0,) Ψ 4.4) where T α) := +U α) trap. Using the assumptions A 1)-A MF ), we obtain the operator inequalities ±V 1) x 1 x ) εt 1) x 1 +C ε, 4.5) ±V ) y 1 y ) εt ) y 1 +C ε, 4.6) ±V 1) x y) εt 1) x +T ) y )+C ε 4.7) for all ε > 0. Consequently, Tr[T 1) γ 1,0) Ψ ] and Tr[T ) γ 0,1) Ψ ] are bounded uniformly in. Since T 1) and T ) have compact resolvents, up to a subsequence as, γ 1,0) Ψ and γ 0,1) Ψ converge strongly in trace class. Thus Theorem 3.4 ensures that, up to a subsequence again, there exists a Borel probability measure µ supported on the set such that lim γk,l) Ψ = {u,v) : u,v L R 3 ), u = v = 1} u k v l u k v l dµu,v), k,l = 0,1,, )
25 5 strongly in trace class. ext, thanks to the operator inequality 4.5), c 1 4 T1) x 1 + c 1 4 T1) x + c 1 V 1) x 1 x ) C. Therefore, from the convergence 4.8) and Fatou s lemma, it follows that [ lim inf Tr c1 4 T1) x 1 + c 1 [ c1 Tr [c1 = 4 T1) x 1 + c 1 ) V 1) x 1 x ) γ,0) ) V 1) x 1 x ) u u dµu,v)] ] dµu,v). 4 T1) x + c 1 4 T1) x + c 1 u,t1) u + c 1 u,v 1) u Ψ ] Similarly, we have [ lim inf Tr c1 4 T) y 1 + c 4 T) y + c ) V ) y 1 y ) [ c v,t) v + c ] v,v ) v dµu, v) and [ lim inf Tr c1 T1) x + c [c1 T) ) y +c 1 c V 1) x y) ] γ 1,1) Ψ u,t1) u + c v,t) v +c 1 c uv,v 1) uv) ] γ 0,) Ψ Summing these lower bounds, we can bound the right side of 4.4) as Ψ,H Ψ lim inf E H [u,v]dµu,v) e H. Combining with the upper bound in 4.4), we conclude 4.1): Ψ,H Ψ lim = E H [u,v]dµu,v) = e H. ] dµu,v). The last equality means that µ is supported on the set of Hartree minimisers, i.e., {e iθ 1 u 0,e iθ v 0 ) : θ 1,θ R}, and hence 4.8) reduces to 4.). Strictly speaking, we have proved 4.1) and 4.) for a subsequence as, but the convergence must hold for the whole sequence because the limits are unique. This completes the proof. 4.. Bogoliubov Hamiltonian. The aim of this section is to show that the Bogoliubov Hamiltonian H defined in.18) is precisely the same operator that arises from a suitable second quantization of the Hessian of thehartree functional E H evaluated at theminimiser u 0,v 0 ). We refer to [1] for discussions in one-component case. The main result of this section is Theorem 4.4 below, which gives useful estimates on H. In order to formulate this result precisely, let us first recall the explicit canonical) isomorphism that realizes F + in.19) as a Fock space.
26 6 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI We consider the Fock space with base space h 1) + h) + 1) ) sym G + := h. 4.9) =0 + h) + For a generic f g h 1) + h) +, let us denote the canonical creation and annihilation operators on G + as Z f g),zf g). The -th sector of G + is interpreted as the space of states with exactly total particles, regardless of which type they are. In fact see, e.g. [7, Theorems 16 and 19]) G + is isomorphic to F + through a natural isomorphism that preserves the CCR. Theorem 4.. There exists a unitary operator U : F + G + such that i) UΩ F+ ) = Ω G+, where Ω F+ is the vacuum of F + and Ω G+ is the vacuum of G +, ii) for any f g h 1) + h) + Z f g)u = U a f) ½+½ b g) ) Zf g)u = U af) ½+½ bg) ). We define the second quantization of an operator A on h 1) + h) + by dγa) := f m,af n Z f m )Zf n ), 4.10) m,n 1 where f m ) m=1 is an orthonormal basis of h1) + h) + belonging entirely to the domain of A, with an overall operator closure being understood on the right side. Similarly, for generic self-adjoint operators A 1) on h 1) + and A) on h ) +, we denote dγ 1) A 1) ) := u m,a 1) u n a m a n with u m ) m=1 particular, m,n 1 dγ ) A ) ) := m,n 1 v m,a ) v n b mb n, 4.11) an orthonormal basis of h1) + and v n) n=1 an orthonormal basis of h) +. In 1 := dγ 1) ½), := dγ ) ½) 4.1) defines the number operators in each species sectors, and := ) defines the total number operator on F +. Within this formalism, it is natural to introduce the class of quadratic Hamiltonians in the Fock space G + ; through the isomorphism of Theorem 4., such a class turns out to correspond to the class of Hamiltonians which are jointly quadratic in a, a, b, and b, as is the case for H. ote that, already the operators defined by 4.10), which are quadratic in Z and Z, are in general not separately quadratic in a, a or b, b ; this is true only if the operator A is reduced with respect to the direct sum h 1) + h) +.
27 Let us consider two densely defined operators satisfying the properties where J : h 1) + h) B 1 : DB 1 ) h 1) B : DB ) h 1) + + h) + h1) + h) + ) h ) + ) h 1) + h) +, DB 1 ) J DB ), B 1 = B 1, JB J = B, + h 1) + ) )), h + Jf g) := f g, h 1) + h) ) is the operator mapping a vector to the corresponding form. Let us form the operator ) B1 B B := B JB 1 J 4.15) acting on the space We define H B := dγb 1 )+ 1 on the space m,n 1 h := h 1) + h) + h 1) + ) )). h ) ) f m,b Jf n Zf m )Zf n )+ f m,b Jf n Z f m )Z f n ) DB 1 ) symn. n=0 4.17) In turns out that many properties of the quadratic Hamiltonian H B depend crucially on their analogues for the corresponding classical operator B. The following Lemma, which is a consequence of [38, Theorem ], collects some of them. Lemma 4.3. Assume that B 1 > 0, B > 0 and that B is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator. Assume further that B 1/ 1 B JB 1/ 1 < 1. Then: i) Self-adjointness) Formula 4.17) defines a self-adjoint operator. ii) Uniqueness of the ground state) H B has a unique ground state Φ gs B. iii) Spectral gap) If, in addition, B τ > 0 for some τ > 0, then infσh {Φ gs B } ) > λh B), 4.18) where λh B ) is the ground state energy of H B. In particular, H B is bounded from below, namely there exists a constant C B > 0 such that H B C B. 4.19) Proof. All the claims follow directly from Theorem in [38]: by such result there exists a unitary operator U on G + such that UH B U = dγξ)+infσh B ), 4.0) for a positive operator ξ on h 1) + h) +. This proves the self-adjointness and implies that UΩ G+ is the unique ground state of H B. If, in addition, B τ > 0, then ξ τ > 0, and this implies 4.18).
28 8 A. MICHELAGELI, P.T. AM, AD A. OLGIATI otice that in Lemma 4.3 we require B to be Hilbert-Schmidt, an assumption which is fulfilled in the application we are interested in, and which ensures the weaker hypotheses in [38] to be satisfied. Our interest in operators of the form H B is due to the fact that the Bogoliubov Hamiltonian.18) can be realized as a quadratic Hamiltonian in the sense of 4.17). More precisely, H = U H HessE H [u 0,v 0 ]U, 4.1) where HessE H [u 0,v 0 ] is the Hessian of the Hartree functional evaluated at the minimiser andu isgivenbytheorem4.. InthepresentcontexttheHessianoftheHartreefunctional is defined by the second term of a Taylor expansion around the minimiser u 0,v 0 ), that is, E H [u,v] = E H [u 0,v 0 ] + 1 c1 u u 0 ) c v v 0 ),HessE H [u 0,v 0 ] c 1 u u 0 ) c v v 0 ) +o u u 0, v v 0 ). 4.) In 4.) we are considering variations that are weighted according to the relative populations of the two species. In order to explicitly write the expression of HessE H [u 0,v 0 ], let us introduce the following three integral operators K α), α {1,,1}, together with their kernels: K 1) : h 1) + h1), K 1) x,y) := V 1) x y)u 0 x)u 0 y) 4.3) K ) : h ) + h), K ) x,y) := V ) x y)v 0 x)v 0 y) 4.4) K 1) : h ) + h1), K 1) x,y) := V 1) x y)u 0 x)v 0 y). 4.5) With the quantities introduced in.14) we can write u m,k 1) u n = V 1) m00n v m,k ) v n = V ) m00n u m,k 1) v n = V 1) m00n u m,k 1) u n = V 1) mn00 v m,k ) v n = V ) mn00 u m,k 1) v n = V 1) mn00. Moreover, as a straightforward consequence of Assumption A MF ), each such operator is Hilbert-Schmidt: indeed, K 1) HS = dxdy K 1) x,y) C 1) +C 1) u 0 +C 1) v 0 < +, 4.6) and the same holds for K ) and K 1). In terms of the K s, and of h 1) and h ) defined in.16), the Hessian of the Hartree functional reads HessE H [u 0,v 0 ] = h 1) +c 1 K 1) c1 c K 1) c 1 K 1) J c1 c K 1) J c1 c K 1) h ) +c K ) c1 c K 1) J c K ) J c 1 JK 1) c1 c JK 1) Jh 1) J +c 1 JK 1) J c1 c JK 1) 1 J c1 c JK 1) c JK ) c1 c JK 1) J Jh ) J +c JK ) J 4.7)
Bose Gases, Bose Einstein Condensation, and the Bogoliubov Approximation
Bose Gases, Bose Einstein Condensation, and the Bogoliubov Approximation Robert Seiringer IST Austria Mathematical Horizons for Quantum Physics IMS Singapore, September 18, 2013 R. Seiringer Bose Gases,
More informationSuperfluidity & Bogoliubov Theory: Rigorous Results
Superfluidity & Bogoliubov Theory: Rigorous Results Mathieu LEWIN mathieu.lewin@math.cnrs.fr (CNRS & Université Paris-Dauphine) collaborations with P.T. Nam (Vienna), N. Rougerie (Grenoble), B. Schlein
More informationBosonic quadratic Hamiltonians. diagonalization
and their diagonalization P. T. Nam 1 M. Napiórkowski 2 J. P. Solovej 3 1 Masaryk University Brno 2 University of Warsaw 3 University of Copenhagen Macroscopic Limits of Quantum Systems 70th Birthday of
More informationDiagonalization of bosonic quadratic Hamiltonians by Bogoliubov transformations 1
Diagonalization of bosonic quadratic Hamiltonians by Bogoliubov transformations 1 P. T. Nam 1 M. Napiórkowski 1 J. P. Solovej 2 1 Institute of Science and Technology Austria 2 Department of Mathematics,
More informationarxiv: v3 [math-ph] 8 Sep 2015
GROUD STATES OF LARGE BOSOIC SYSTEMS: THE GROSS-PITAEVSKII LIMIT REVISITED PHA THÀH AM, ICOLAS ROUGERIE, AD ROBERT SEIRIGER arxiv:1503.07061v3 [math-ph] 8 Sep 2015 Abstract. We study the ground state of
More informationStructure of large bosonic systems : the mean-field approximation and the quantum de Finetti theorem
Structure of large bosonic systems : the mean-field approximation and the quantum de Finetti theorem icolas Rougerie LPMMC CRS & Universite Grenoble 1 Mathematical horizons of quantum physics IMS, Singapore,
More informationNon-relativistic Quantum Electrodynamics
Rigorous Aspects of Relaxation to the Ground State Institut für Analysis, Dynamik und Modellierung October 25, 2010 Overview 1 Definition of the model Second quantization Non-relativistic QED 2 Existence
More informationDerivation of the time dependent Gross-Pitaevskii equation for the dynamics of the Bose-Einstein condensate
Derivation of the time dependent Gross-Pitaevskii equation for the dynamics of the Bose-Einstein condensate László Erdős University of Munich Evian-les-Bains, 2007 June Joint work with B. Schlein and H.T.
More information08a. Operators on Hilbert spaces. 1. Boundedness, continuity, operator norms
(February 24, 2017) 08a. Operators on Hilbert spaces Paul Garrett garrett@math.umn.edu http://www.math.umn.edu/ garrett/ [This document is http://www.math.umn.edu/ garrett/m/real/notes 2016-17/08a-ops
More informationThe following definition is fundamental.
1. Some Basics from Linear Algebra With these notes, I will try and clarify certain topics that I only quickly mention in class. First and foremost, I will assume that you are familiar with many basic
More informationLocal Density Approximation for the Almost-bosonic Anyon Gas. Michele Correggi
Local Density Approximation for the Almost-bosonic Anyon Gas Michele Correggi Università degli Studi Roma Tre www.cond-math.it QMATH13 Many-body Systems and Statistical Mechanics joint work with D. Lundholm
More informationFrom many body quantum dynamics to nonlinear dispersive PDE, and back
From many body quantum dynamics to nonlinear dispersive PDE, and back ataša Pavlović (based on joint works with T. Chen, and with T. Chen and. Tzirakis) University of Texas at Austin June 18, 2013 SF-CBMS
More information1 Math 241A-B Homework Problem List for F2015 and W2016
1 Math 241A-B Homework Problem List for F2015 W2016 1.1 Homework 1. Due Wednesday, October 7, 2015 Notation 1.1 Let U be any set, g be a positive function on U, Y be a normed space. For any f : U Y let
More informationAPPENDIX A. Background Mathematics. A.1 Linear Algebra. Vector algebra. Let x denote the n-dimensional column vector with components x 1 x 2.
APPENDIX A Background Mathematics A. Linear Algebra A.. Vector algebra Let x denote the n-dimensional column vector with components 0 x x 2 B C @. A x n Definition 6 (scalar product). The scalar product
More informationChapter 7: Bounded Operators in Hilbert Spaces
Chapter 7: Bounded Operators in Hilbert Spaces I-Liang Chern Department of Applied Mathematics National Chiao Tung University and Department of Mathematics National Taiwan University Fall, 2013 1 / 84
More informationLecture Notes on PDEs
Lecture Notes on PDEs Alberto Bressan February 26, 2012 1 Elliptic equations Let IR n be a bounded open set Given measurable functions a ij, b i, c : IR, consider the linear, second order differential
More informationSPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF THE LAPLACIAN ON BOUNDED DOMAINS
SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF THE LAPLACIAN ON BOUNDED DOMAINS TSOGTGEREL GANTUMUR Abstract. After establishing discrete spectra for a large class of elliptic operators, we present some fundamental spectral properties
More informationChapter 8 Integral Operators
Chapter 8 Integral Operators In our development of metrics, norms, inner products, and operator theory in Chapters 1 7 we only tangentially considered topics that involved the use of Lebesgue measure,
More informationDerivation of Mean-Field Dynamics for Fermions
IST Austria Mathematical Many Body Theory and its Applications Bilbao, June 17, 2016 Derivation = show that solution of microscopic eq. is close to solution of effective eq. (with fewer degrees of freedom)
More informationCondensation of fermion pairs in a domain
Condensation of fermion pairs in a domain Marius Lemm (Caltech) joint with Rupert L. Frank and Barry Simon QMath 13, Georgia Tech, October 8, 2016 BCS states We consider a gas of spin 1/2 fermions, confined
More informationRepresentation theory and quantum mechanics tutorial Spin and the hydrogen atom
Representation theory and quantum mechanics tutorial Spin and the hydrogen atom Justin Campbell August 3, 2017 1 Representations of SU 2 and SO 3 (R) 1.1 The following observation is long overdue. Proposition
More informationFriedrich symmetric systems
viii CHAPTER 8 Friedrich symmetric systems In this chapter, we describe a theory due to Friedrich [13] for positive symmetric systems, which gives the existence and uniqueness of weak solutions of boundary
More informationSobolev Spaces. Chapter Hölder spaces
Chapter 2 Sobolev Spaces Sobolev spaces turn out often to be the proper setting in which to apply ideas of functional analysis to get information concerning partial differential equations. Here, we collect
More informationMean Field Limits for Interacting Bose Gases and the Cauchy Problem for Gross-Pitaevskii Hierarchies. Thomas Chen University of Texas at Austin
Mean Field Limits for Interacting Bose Gases and the Cauchy Problem for Gross-Pitaevskii Hierarchies Thomas Chen University of Texas at Austin Nataša Pavlović University of Texas at Austin Analysis and
More informationVector Spaces. Vector space, ν, over the field of complex numbers, C, is a set of elements a, b,..., satisfying the following axioms.
Vector Spaces Vector space, ν, over the field of complex numbers, C, is a set of elements a, b,..., satisfying the following axioms. For each two vectors a, b ν there exists a summation procedure: a +
More informationTHE FORM SUM AND THE FRIEDRICHS EXTENSION OF SCHRÖDINGER-TYPE OPERATORS ON RIEMANNIAN MANIFOLDS
THE FORM SUM AND THE FRIEDRICHS EXTENSION OF SCHRÖDINGER-TYPE OPERATORS ON RIEMANNIAN MANIFOLDS OGNJEN MILATOVIC Abstract. We consider H V = M +V, where (M, g) is a Riemannian manifold (not necessarily
More informationHilbert Spaces. Hilbert space is a vector space with some extra structure. We start with formal (axiomatic) definition of a vector space.
Hilbert Spaces Hilbert space is a vector space with some extra structure. We start with formal (axiomatic) definition of a vector space. Vector Space. Vector space, ν, over the field of complex numbers,
More informationThe Dirichlet s P rinciple. In this lecture we discuss an alternative formulation of the Dirichlet problem for the Laplace equation:
Oct. 1 The Dirichlet s P rinciple In this lecture we discuss an alternative formulation of the Dirichlet problem for the Laplace equation: 1. Dirichlet s Principle. u = in, u = g on. ( 1 ) If we multiply
More information1 Assignment 1: Nonlinear dynamics (due September
Assignment : Nonlinear dynamics (due September 4, 28). Consider the ordinary differential equation du/dt = cos(u). Sketch the equilibria and indicate by arrows the increase or decrease of the solutions.
More information1 Definition and Basic Properties of Compa Operator
1 Definition and Basic Properties of Compa Operator 1.1 Let X be a infinite dimensional Banach space. Show that if A C(X ), A does not have bounded inverse. Proof. Denote the unit ball of X by B and the
More information11 a 12 a 21 a 11 a 22 a 12 a 21. (C.11) A = The determinant of a product of two matrices is given by AB = A B 1 1 = (C.13) and similarly.
C PROPERTIES OF MATRICES 697 to whether the permutation i 1 i 2 i N is even or odd, respectively Note that I =1 Thus, for a 2 2 matrix, the determinant takes the form A = a 11 a 12 = a a 21 a 11 a 22 a
More informationDERIVATION OF THE CUBIC NLS AND GROSS-PITAEVSKII HIERARCHY FROM MANYBODY DYNAMICS IN d = 2, 3 BASED ON SPACETIME NORMS
DERIVATIO OF THE CUBIC LS AD GROSS-PITAEVSKII HIERARCHY FROM MAYBODY DYAMICS I d = 2, 3 BASED O SPACETIME ORMS THOMAS CHE AD ATAŠA PAVLOVIĆ Abstract. We derive the defocusing cubic Gross-Pitaevskii (GP)
More informationMagnetic wells in dimension three
Magnetic wells in dimension three Yuri A. Kordyukov joint with Bernard Helffer & Nicolas Raymond & San Vũ Ngọc Magnetic Fields and Semiclassical Analysis Rennes, May 21, 2015 Yuri A. Kordyukov (Ufa) Magnetic
More informationSuperfluidity versus Bose-Einstein Condensation
Superfluidity versus Bose-Einstein Condensation Jakob Yngvason University of Vienna IHES, Bures-sur-Yvette, March 19, 2015 Jakob Yngvason (Uni Vienna) Superfluidity vs BEC 1 / 42 Concepts Bose Einstein
More informationMultivariable Calculus
2 Multivariable Calculus 2.1 Limits and Continuity Problem 2.1.1 (Fa94) Let the function f : R n R n satisfy the following two conditions: (i) f (K ) is compact whenever K is a compact subset of R n. (ii)
More informationStability of Feedback Solutions for Infinite Horizon Noncooperative Differential Games
Stability of Feedback Solutions for Infinite Horizon Noncooperative Differential Games Alberto Bressan ) and Khai T. Nguyen ) *) Department of Mathematics, Penn State University **) Department of Mathematics,
More informationKernel Method: Data Analysis with Positive Definite Kernels
Kernel Method: Data Analysis with Positive Definite Kernels 2. Positive Definite Kernel and Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Space Kenji Fukumizu The Institute of Statistical Mathematics. Graduate University
More informationBOGOLIUBOV SPECTRUM OF INTERACTING BOSE GASES
BOGOLIUBOV SPECTRUM OF ITERACTIG BOSE GASES MATHIEU LEWI, PHA THÀH AM, SYLVIA SERFATY, AD JA PHILIP SOLOVEJ Abstract. We study the large- limit of a system of bosons interacting with a potential of intensity
More informationFinite-dimensional spaces. C n is the space of n-tuples x = (x 1,..., x n ) of complex numbers. It is a Hilbert space with the inner product
Chapter 4 Hilbert Spaces 4.1 Inner Product Spaces Inner Product Space. A complex vector space E is called an inner product space (or a pre-hilbert space, or a unitary space) if there is a mapping (, )
More informationSome lecture notes for Math 6050E: PDEs, Fall 2016
Some lecture notes for Math 65E: PDEs, Fall 216 Tianling Jin December 1, 216 1 Variational methods We discuss an example of the use of variational methods in obtaining existence of solutions. Theorem 1.1.
More informationwhere P a is a projector to the eigenspace of A corresponding to a. 4. Time evolution of states is governed by the Schrödinger equation
1 Content of the course Quantum Field Theory by M. Srednicki, Part 1. Combining QM and relativity We are going to keep all axioms of QM: 1. states are vectors (or rather rays) in Hilbert space.. observables
More informationBOUNDARY VALUE PROBLEMS ON A HALF SIERPINSKI GASKET
BOUNDARY VALUE PROBLEMS ON A HALF SIERPINSKI GASKET WEILIN LI AND ROBERT S. STRICHARTZ Abstract. We study boundary value problems for the Laplacian on a domain Ω consisting of the left half of the Sierpinski
More informationOn some weighted fractional porous media equations
On some weighted fractional porous media equations Gabriele Grillo Politecnico di Milano September 16 th, 2015 Anacapri Joint works with M. Muratori and F. Punzo Gabriele Grillo Weighted Fractional PME
More informationIncompressibility Estimates in the Laughlin Phase
Incompressibility Estimates in the Laughlin Phase Jakob Yngvason, University of Vienna with Nicolas Rougerie, University of Grenoble ESI, September 8, 2014 Jakob Yngvason (Uni Vienna) Incompressibility
More informationLecture Models for heavy-ion collisions (Part III): transport models. SS2016: Dynamical models for relativistic heavy-ion collisions
Lecture Models for heavy-ion collisions (Part III: transport models SS06: Dynamical models for relativistic heavy-ion collisions Quantum mechanical description of the many-body system Dynamics of heavy-ion
More informationThe Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator
Lecture 8 The Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator The Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator plays an important role in the theory of inverse problems. In fact, from measurements of electrical currents at the surface
More informationExercise Solutions to Functional Analysis
Exercise Solutions to Functional Analysis Note: References refer to M. Schechter, Principles of Functional Analysis Exersize that. Let φ,..., φ n be an orthonormal set in a Hilbert space H. Show n f n
More informationIntegral Representation Formula, Boundary Integral Operators and Calderón projection
Integral Representation Formula, Boundary Integral Operators and Calderón projection Seminar BEM on Wave Scattering Franziska Weber ETH Zürich October 22, 2010 Outline Integral Representation Formula Newton
More informationWe denote the derivative at x by DF (x) = L. With respect to the standard bases of R n and R m, DF (x) is simply the matrix of partial derivatives,
The derivative Let O be an open subset of R n, and F : O R m a continuous function We say F is differentiable at a point x O, with derivative L, if L : R n R m is a linear transformation such that, for
More informationEffective dynamics of many-body quantum systems
Effective dynamics of many-body quantum systems László Erdős University of Munich Grenoble, May 30, 2006 A l occassion de soixantiéme anniversaire de Yves Colin de Verdiére Joint with B. Schlein and H.-T.
More informationSELF-ADJOINTNESS OF SCHRÖDINGER-TYPE OPERATORS WITH SINGULAR POTENTIALS ON MANIFOLDS OF BOUNDED GEOMETRY
Electronic Journal of Differential Equations, Vol. 2003(2003), No.??, pp. 1 8. ISSN: 1072-6691. URL: http://ejde.math.swt.edu or http://ejde.math.unt.edu ftp ejde.math.swt.edu (login: ftp) SELF-ADJOINTNESS
More informationSecond Quantization: Quantum Fields
Second Quantization: Quantum Fields Bosons and Fermions Let X j stand for the coordinate and spin subscript (if any) of the j-th particle, so that the vector of state Ψ of N particles has the form Ψ Ψ(X
More information2 A Model, Harmonic Map, Problem
ELLIPTIC SYSTEMS JOHN E. HUTCHINSON Department of Mathematics School of Mathematical Sciences, A.N.U. 1 Introduction Elliptic equations model the behaviour of scalar quantities u, such as temperature or
More informationarxiv:quant-ph/ v5 10 Feb 2003
Quantum entanglement of identical particles Yu Shi Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge CB3 0WA, United Kingdom and Theory of
More informationBIHARMONIC WAVE MAPS INTO SPHERES
BIHARMONIC WAVE MAPS INTO SPHERES SEBASTIAN HERR, TOBIAS LAMM, AND ROLAND SCHNAUBELT Abstract. A global weak solution of the biharmonic wave map equation in the energy space for spherical targets is constructed.
More informationMathematical Statistical Physics Solution Sketch of the math part of the Exam
Prof. B. Paredes, Prof. P. Pickl Summer Term 2016 Lukas Nickel, Carlos Velasco July 22, 2016 Mathematical Statistical Physics Solution Sketch of the math part of the Exam Family Name: First name: Student
More informationRapidly Rotating Bose-Einstein Condensates in Strongly Anharmonic Traps. Michele Correggi. T. Rindler-Daller, J. Yngvason math-ph/
Rapidly Rotating Bose-Einstein Condensates in Strongly Anharmonic Traps Michele Correggi Erwin Schrödinger Institute, Vienna T. Rindler-Daller, J. Yngvason math-ph/0606058 in collaboration with preprint
More informationGround State Patterns of Spin-1 Bose-Einstein condensation via Γ-convergence Theory
Ground State Patterns of Spin-1 Bose-Einstein condensation via Γ-convergence Theory Tien-Tsan Shieh joint work with I-Liang Chern and Chiu-Fen Chou National Center of Theoretical Science December 19, 2015
More informationarxiv: v1 [math-ph] 17 Dec 2007
Ground state energy of the low density Hubbard model arxiv:072.280v [math-ph] 7 Dec 2007 Robert Seiringer and Jun Yin Department of Physics, Jadwin Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08542-0708,
More informationSPECTRAL THEOREM FOR COMPACT SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS
SPECTRAL THEOREM FOR COMPACT SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS G. RAMESH Contents Introduction 1 1. Bounded Operators 1 1.3. Examples 3 2. Compact Operators 5 2.1. Properties 6 3. The Spectral Theorem 9 3.3. Self-adjoint
More informationAutomorphic Equivalence Within Gapped Phases
1 Harvard University May 18, 2011 Automorphic Equivalence Within Gapped Phases Robert Sims University of Arizona based on joint work with Sven Bachmann, Spyridon Michalakis, and Bruno Nachtergaele 2 Outline:
More informationDerivation of Pekar s polaron from a microscopic model of quantum crystal
Derivation of Pekar s polaron from a microscopic model of quantum crystal Mathieu LEWIN Mathieu.Lewin@math.cnrs.fr (CNRS & University of Cergy-Pontoise) joint work with Nicolas Rougerie (Grenoble, France)
More informationCONVERGENCE THEORY. G. ALLAIRE CMAP, Ecole Polytechnique. 1. Maximum principle. 2. Oscillating test function. 3. Two-scale convergence
1 CONVERGENCE THEOR G. ALLAIRE CMAP, Ecole Polytechnique 1. Maximum principle 2. Oscillating test function 3. Two-scale convergence 4. Application to homogenization 5. General theory H-convergence) 6.
More informationBose-Einstein condensates in optical lattices: mathematical analysis and analytical approximate formulas
0.5 setgray0 0.5 setgray1 Bose-Einstein condensates in optical lattices: mathematical analysis and analytical approximate formulas IV EBED João Pessoa - 2011 Rolci Cipolatti Instituto de Matemática - UFRJ
More informationIn this chapter we study elliptical PDEs. That is, PDEs of the form. 2 u = lots,
Chapter 8 Elliptic PDEs In this chapter we study elliptical PDEs. That is, PDEs of the form 2 u = lots, where lots means lower-order terms (u x, u y,..., u, f). Here are some ways to think about the physical
More informationSELF-ADJOINTNESS OF DIRAC OPERATORS VIA HARDY-DIRAC INEQUALITIES
SELF-ADJOINTNESS OF DIRAC OPERATORS VIA HARDY-DIRAC INEQUALITIES MARIA J. ESTEBAN 1 AND MICHAEL LOSS Abstract. Distinguished selfadjoint extension of Dirac operators are constructed for a class of potentials
More informationfor all subintervals I J. If the same is true for the dyadic subintervals I D J only, we will write ϕ BMO d (J). In fact, the following is true
3 ohn Nirenberg inequality, Part I A function ϕ L () belongs to the space BMO() if sup ϕ(s) ϕ I I I < for all subintervals I If the same is true for the dyadic subintervals I D only, we will write ϕ BMO
More informationMATH 205C: STATIONARY PHASE LEMMA
MATH 205C: STATIONARY PHASE LEMMA For ω, consider an integral of the form I(ω) = e iωf(x) u(x) dx, where u Cc (R n ) complex valued, with support in a compact set K, and f C (R n ) real valued. Thus, I(ω)
More informationTraces, extensions and co-normal derivatives for elliptic systems on Lipschitz domains
Traces, extensions and co-normal derivatives for elliptic systems on Lipschitz domains Sergey E. Mikhailov Brunel University West London, Department of Mathematics, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, UK J. Math. Analysis
More informationThe Sommerfeld Polynomial Method: Harmonic Oscillator Example
Chemistry 460 Fall 2017 Dr. Jean M. Standard October 2, 2017 The Sommerfeld Polynomial Method: Harmonic Oscillator Example Scaling the Harmonic Oscillator Equation Recall the basic definitions of the harmonic
More informationu( x) = g( y) ds y ( 1 ) U solves u = 0 in U; u = 0 on U. ( 3)
M ath 5 2 7 Fall 2 0 0 9 L ecture 4 ( S ep. 6, 2 0 0 9 ) Properties and Estimates of Laplace s and Poisson s Equations In our last lecture we derived the formulas for the solutions of Poisson s equation
More informationFact Sheet Functional Analysis
Fact Sheet Functional Analysis Literature: Hackbusch, W.: Theorie und Numerik elliptischer Differentialgleichungen. Teubner, 986. Knabner, P., Angermann, L.: Numerik partieller Differentialgleichungen.
More informationFunctional Analysis. Franck Sueur Metric spaces Definitions Completeness Compactness Separability...
Functional Analysis Franck Sueur 2018-2019 Contents 1 Metric spaces 1 1.1 Definitions........................................ 1 1.2 Completeness...................................... 3 1.3 Compactness......................................
More informationFrom the N-body problem to the cubic NLS equation
From the N-body problem to the cubic NLS equation François Golse Université Paris 7 & Laboratoire J.-L. Lions golse@math.jussieu.fr Los Alamos CNLS, January 26th, 2005 Formal derivation by N.N. Bogolyubov
More informationMath Homework 2
Math 73 Homework Due: September 8, 6 Suppose that f is holomorphic in a region Ω, ie an open connected set Prove that in any of the following cases (a) R(f) is constant; (b) I(f) is constant; (c) f is
More informationNew Identities for Weak KAM Theory
New Identities for Weak KAM Theory Lawrence C. Evans Department of Mathematics University of California, Berkeley Abstract This paper records for the Hamiltonian H = p + W (x) some old and new identities
More informationHilbert space methods for quantum mechanics. S. Richard
Hilbert space methods for quantum mechanics S. Richard Spring Semester 2016 2 Contents 1 Hilbert space and bounded linear operators 5 1.1 Hilbert space................................ 5 1.2 Vector-valued
More informationTHE STEINER REARRANGEMENT IN ANY CODIMENSION
THE STEINER REARRANGEMENT IN ANY CODIMENSION GIUSEPPE MARIA CAPRIANI Abstract. We analyze the Steiner rearrangement in any codimension of Sobolev and BV functions. In particular, we prove a Pólya-Szegő
More informationPage 404. Lecture 22: Simple Harmonic Oscillator: Energy Basis Date Given: 2008/11/19 Date Revised: 2008/11/19
Page 404 Lecture : Simple Harmonic Oscillator: Energy Basis Date Given: 008/11/19 Date Revised: 008/11/19 Coordinate Basis Section 6. The One-Dimensional Simple Harmonic Oscillator: Coordinate Basis Page
More informationThe 3 dimensional Schrödinger Equation
Chapter 6 The 3 dimensional Schrödinger Equation 6.1 Angular Momentum To study how angular momentum is represented in quantum mechanics we start by reviewing the classical vector of orbital angular momentum
More informationUNIQUENESS OF POSITIVE SOLUTION TO SOME COUPLED COOPERATIVE VARIATIONAL ELLIPTIC SYSTEMS
TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 00, Number 0, Pages 000 000 S 0002-9947(XX)0000-0 UNIQUENESS OF POSITIVE SOLUTION TO SOME COUPLED COOPERATIVE VARIATIONAL ELLIPTIC SYSTEMS YULIAN
More informationQuantum Physics III (8.06) Spring 2007 FINAL EXAMINATION Monday May 21, 9:00 am You have 3 hours.
Quantum Physics III (8.06) Spring 2007 FINAL EXAMINATION Monday May 21, 9:00 am You have 3 hours. There are 10 problems, totalling 180 points. Do all problems. Answer all problems in the white books provided.
More informationMath The Laplacian. 1 Green s Identities, Fundamental Solution
Math. 209 The Laplacian Green s Identities, Fundamental Solution Let be a bounded open set in R n, n 2, with smooth boundary. The fact that the boundary is smooth means that at each point x the external
More informationOptimization Theory. A Concise Introduction. Jiongmin Yong
October 11, 017 16:5 ws-book9x6 Book Title Optimization Theory 017-08-Lecture Notes page 1 1 Optimization Theory A Concise Introduction Jiongmin Yong Optimization Theory 017-08-Lecture Notes page Optimization
More informationConservation law equations : problem set
Conservation law equations : problem set Luis Silvestre For Isaac Neal and Elia Portnoy in the 2018 summer bootcamp 1 Method of characteristics For the problems in this section, assume that the solutions
More informationLaplace s Equation. Chapter Mean Value Formulas
Chapter 1 Laplace s Equation Let be an open set in R n. A function u C 2 () is called harmonic in if it satisfies Laplace s equation n (1.1) u := D ii u = 0 in. i=1 A function u C 2 () is called subharmonic
More information2 Canonical quantization
Phys540.nb 7 Canonical quantization.1. Lagrangian mechanics and canonical quantization Q: How do we quantize a general system?.1.1.lagrangian Lagrangian mechanics is a reformulation of classical mechanics.
More informationQFT Perturbation Theory
QFT Perturbation Theory Ling-Fong Li Institute) Slide_04 1 / 44 Interaction Theory As an illustration, take electromagnetic interaction. Lagrangian density is The combination is the covariant derivative.
More informationPartial Differential Equations
Part II Partial Differential Equations Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2015 Paper 4, Section II 29E Partial Differential Equations 72 (a) Show that the Cauchy problem for u(x,
More informationWeek 6 Notes, Math 865, Tanveer
Week 6 Notes, Math 865, Tanveer. Energy Methods for Euler and Navier-Stokes Equation We will consider this week basic energy estimates. These are estimates on the L 2 spatial norms of the solution u(x,
More informationAn introduction to Birkhoff normal form
An introduction to Birkhoff normal form Dario Bambusi Dipartimento di Matematica, Universitá di Milano via Saldini 50, 0133 Milano (Italy) 19.11.14 1 Introduction The aim of this note is to present an
More informationCalculus of Variations. Final Examination
Université Paris-Saclay M AMS and Optimization January 18th, 018 Calculus of Variations Final Examination Duration : 3h ; all kind of paper documents (notes, books...) are authorized. The total score of
More informationProceedings of the 5th International Conference on Inverse Problems in Engineering: Theory and Practice, Cambridge, UK, 11-15th July 2005
Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Inverse Problems in Engineering: Theory and Practice, Cambridge, UK, 11-15th July 2005 SOME INVERSE SCATTERING PROBLEMS FOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL SCHRÖDINGER
More informationOn the infimum of the excitation spectrum of a homogeneous Bose gas. H.D. Cornean, J. Dereziński,
On the infimum of the excitation spectrum of a homogeneous Bose gas H.D. Cornean, J. Dereziński, P. Ziń. 1 Homogeneous Bose gas n bosons on R d interacting with a 2-body potential v are ( described by
More informationON MATRIX VALUED SQUARE INTEGRABLE POSITIVE DEFINITE FUNCTIONS
1 2 3 ON MATRIX VALUED SQUARE INTERABLE POSITIVE DEFINITE FUNCTIONS HONYU HE Abstract. In this paper, we study matrix valued positive definite functions on a unimodular group. We generalize two important
More informationADJOINT METHODS FOR OBSTACLE PROBLEMS AND WEAKLY COUPLED SYSTEMS OF PDE. 1. Introduction
ADJOINT METHODS FOR OBSTACLE PROBLEMS AND WEAKLY COPLED SYSTEMS OF PDE F. CAGNETTI, D. GOMES, AND H.V. TRAN Abstract. The adjoint method, recently introduced by Evans, is used to study obstacle problems,
More informationSHARP BOUNDARY TRACE INEQUALITIES. 1. Introduction
SHARP BOUNDARY TRACE INEQUALITIES GILES AUCHMUTY Abstract. This paper describes sharp inequalities for the trace of Sobolev functions on the boundary of a bounded region R N. The inequalities bound (semi-)norms
More informationarxiv:cond-mat/ v1 [cond-mat.stat-mech] 2 Aug 2004
Ground state energy of a homogeneous Bose-Einstein condensate beyond Bogoliubov Christoph Weiss and André Eckardt Institut für Physik, Carl von Ossietzky Universität, D-6 Oldenburg, Germany (Dated: November
More informationAlgebraic Theory of Entanglement
Algebraic Theory of (arxiv: 1205.2882) 1 (in collaboration with T.R. Govindarajan, A. Queiroz and A.F. Reyes-Lega) 1 Physics Department, Syracuse University, Syracuse, N.Y. and The Institute of Mathematical
More informationIf Y and Y 0 satisfy (1-2), then Y = Y 0 a.s.
20 6. CONDITIONAL EXPECTATION Having discussed at length the limit theory for sums of independent random variables we will now move on to deal with dependent random variables. An important tool in this
More information