arxiv: v2 [quant-ph] 9 May 2016

Transcription

1 Time-local Heisenberg Langevin equations an the riven qubit S. J. Whalen an H. J. Carmichael The Do-Walls Centre for Photonic an Quantum Technologies, Department of Physics, University of Aucklan, Private Bag 9219, Aucklan, New Zealan The time-local master equation for a riven boson system interacting with a boson environment is erive by way of a time-local Heisenberg Langevin equation. Extension to the riven qubit fails except for weak excitation ue to the lost linearity of the system-environment interaction. We show that a reporte time-local master equation for the riven qubit is incorrect. As a corollary to our emonstration, we also uncover o asymptotic behavior in the repackage time-local ynamics of a system riven to a far-from-equilibrium steay state: the ensity operator becomes steay while time-epenent coefficients oscillate (with perioic singularities) forever. arxiv: v2 [quant-ph] 9 May 216 Treatments in the Heisenberg picture of a system in interaction with an environment ate to the work, from the 196s, by Senitzky [1], who consiere the ampe harmonic oscillator with a min to applications to the raiation fiel in a cavity. The associate equations of motion subsequently took the name of quantum Langevin or Heisenberg Langevin equations, recognizing the role of environment operators as a ranom force, or noise, as in the classical Langevin equation. Although this ranom force is never Markovian [2], Markovian moels can serve as an excellent approximation [3], an are wiely use, particularly in quantum optics, where the input-output theory of Gariner an Collett [4] is now canonical. Issues of formal exactness asie, the current move from given quantum systems an atom or raiation fiel in a cavity to engineere systems, rives a more pragmatic interest in the theory of non-markovian open quantum systems. While generalizations of input-output theory to the non-markovian regime have been consiere [5 7], more commonly the Schröinger picture is aopte, where, after the work of Hu et al. [8], time-local master equations are erive [9 16]. Of particular interest in this paper are the time-local master equation for a riven boson system in interaction with a boson environment (first erive in [11]) an the equation for spontaneous emission from a two-state system, or qubit [9 12]. They invite a conflation: a time-local master equation for the riven qubit. The riven qubit is an important example, consiering its role in quantum information science an the numerous physical realizations. The question of a time-local master equation is an ol one. It is raise in Sec. IVA of Ref. [11], where, after first noting obstacles to its erivation, the author mentions an equation reporte in a preprint [18], following with: Such a relatively simple result seems to be inconsistent with the conclusion reache above about the ifficulty of ealing with the two level atom problem, an is hence an issue that requires further consieration. The note equation is absent from the publishe version of [18] (Ref. [1]), which can be seen to enorse the call for further consieration. The relatively simple result substitutes qubit raising an lowering operators for the creation an annihilation operators in the time-local master equation for the riven boson system. Having appeare first in [18], it reappears in a recent work of Shen et al. [17], along with a erivation from Feynman-Vernon influence functional theory which invokes a coherent state representation in Grassmannian variables for the qubit state. We show in this paper that the erive time-local master equation is incorrect; it is not influence functional theory an coherent-state path integrals that yiel a successful erivation, but linearity, which for the riven qubit is lost. While in spontaneous emission [9 12] linearity is effectively retaine ue to the one-quantum truncation for the riven qubit, multiphoton scattering (nonlinearity) becomes important. As introuction an backgroun, we first recover the known time-local master equation for the riven boson system [11, 15] from a time-local Heisenberg Langevin equation. Our use of the Heisenberg picture exposes the essentials of a successful erivation an unerpins the iscussion of the riven qubit that follows. A system S an environment E have free Hamiltonian H = j ω ja j a j + α l α ω lα b αl α b αlα, where a j (b αlα ) an ω j (ω lα ) are system (environment) operators an frequencies; the inex j (α) labels ifferent subsystems (subenvironments) an the inex l α labels the moes of subenvironment α. Operators of S an E commute, while [a j, a j ] = δ jj, [b αl, b α l ] = δ αα δ ll. We aopt the rotating-wave approximation, such that in an interaction picture generate by H j jja j a j, jj = ω j ω, the Hamiltonian of S in interaction with E is where H S (t) = jk H(t) = H S (t) + H SE (t), (1) jk a j a k + j [Ω j (t)a j + Ω j (t)a j ], (2) with jk = kj, accounts for etuning ( jj ), coupling among subsystems ( jk, k j), an riving (Ω j ), an H SE (t) = j [ a j B j(t) + B j (t)a j], (3)

2 2 with B j (t) = αl α κ jαlα exp[i(ω ω lα )t]b αlα, (4) where κ jαlα are coupling constants. We assume the state of the entire system to be separable, ρ = ρ S ρ E, with subenvironment α in a thermal state of temperature T α, i.e., ρ E = Z 1 α exp ( Tα 1 l α ω lα b ) αl α b αlα, where Z enotes the partition function. We also introuce the issipation kernel F jk (t 1 t 2 ) = [B j (t 1 ), B k (t 2)] = α ωj αjk (ω)e iω(t1 t2), (5) an the noise kernel with G jk (t 1 t 2 ) = B k (t 2)B j (t 1 ) = α ωj αjk (ω)n α (ω)e iω(t1 t2), (6) J αjk (ω) = l α κ jαlα κ kαl α δ(ω + ω ω lα ) (7) a spectral ensity an n α (ω) = {exp[(ω +ω )/T α ] 1 1 the Bose Einstein istribution for subenvironment α. Formally eliminating the environment operators B j (t) from the Heisenberg equation of motion for system operator A(t) yiels the Heisenberg Langevin equation: t A(t) = t A(t) i [A(t), H S(t)] + jk +Fjk(t t )a k (t ) [A(t), a j (t)] + i j t { F jk (t t ) [a j (t), A(t)] a k(t ) { [a j (t), A(t)] B j(t) B j (t) [A(t), a j(t)], (8) with alternate compact form t A((t) = t A(t) { ( ) [a j (t), A(t)] t a j(t) j ( ) + t a j (t) [A(t), a j (t)]. (9) Thus if the erivatives a j (t)/t can be written in timelocal form, so can the Heisenberg Langevin equation. To this en, we collect the a j (t) into the column vector, a(t), an similarly introuce Ω(t), B(t), an matrices an F (t 12 ). With this notation, from Eq. (8), a(t) = i a(t) t t F (t t )a(t ) i[ω(t) + B(t)], (1) which we solve by Laplace transforms: a(t) = V (t)a i(v Ω)(t) ic(t), (11) with C(t) = (V B)(t), where enotes convolution an the Green s function, V (t), satisfies V (t) = i V (t) t t F (t t )V (t ), (12) with V () = I N, N the range of inex j. Equations (11) an (12) constitute a solution which might be use to evaluate expectations an correlation functions irectly. Our aim, though, is to present it as an equation of motion in time-local form. We therefore ifferentiate Eq. (11) an then use the same equation to eliminate the initial conition. Assuming V (t) invertible, an introucing we thereby arrive at with γ(t) = [V (t)/t]v (t) 1, (13) a(t) = γ(t)a(t) iξ(t) id(t), (14) t ξ(t) = [γ(t) + /t](v Ω)(t) (15) an D(t) = [γ(t) + /t]c(t). Equations (9) an (14) cast the Heisenberg Langevin equation, Eq. (8), into time-local form:

3 3 t A(t) = t A(t) i [A(t), ξ j (t)a j (t) + ξ j (t)a j (t)] + j jk +γjk(t)a k (t) [A(t), a j(t)] + i j { γ jk (t) [a j (t), A(t)] a k(t) { [a j (t), A(t)] D j(t) D j (t) [A(t), a j(t)]. (16) We move to a master equation by taking expectation values on both sies of Eq. (16), where only the last term on the right involves operators of the environment. Wick s theorem allows us to eal with the one troublesome term: for Gaussian ρ E, as below Eq. (4), it allows us to factor out contractions of C k (t) entering from the ajoint of Eq. (11) an D j (t); specifically, we fin A(t)D j (t) = i k C k (t)d j(t) [a k (t), A(t)], (17) for any A(t) that satisfies Eq. (16). Using this result, the expectation of the last term on the right in Eq. (16) may be expane as the sum over expectations of system operators alone, jk λ jk(t) [[a j (t), A(t)], a k(t)], where λ jk (t) = C k (t)d j(t) + D k (t)c j(t) (18) is evaluate from λ(t) = t W (t) + γ(t)w (t) + W (t)γ (t), (19) with the matrix W (t), W jk (t) = C k (t)c j(t) [with C(t) efine below Eq. (8)], evaluate from Eq. (6): W (t) = t 1 t 2 V (t t 1 )G(t 12 )V (t t 2 ). (2) With all expectations now system operator expectations, the time-local master equation can be rea from the timelocal Heisenberg Langevin equation by inspection: t ρ S(t) = i j [ξ j (t)a j + ξ j (t)a j, ρ S (t)] + jk {γ jk (t) [a k ρ S (t), a j ] + γ jk(t) [a j, ρ S (t)a k ] + jk λ jk (t) [[a k, ρ S (t)], a j ]. (21) The result agrees with that obtaine from the wiely use Feynman-Vernon influence functional metho by Lei an Zhang [15]; an for T α = with Cresser [11]. The treatment above may be extene by aing an interaction term jk (χ jka j a k +h.c.), with χ jk a complex constant, to H S (t). The evolution is still linear, but with annihilation an creation operators couple. Parallel to Eq. (1), one sets out the equations of motion as a vector equation of twice the imension whence the time-local form, as in Eq. (14), follows. It is also possible to inclue counter-rotating terms in the interaction between system an environment, in which case it is natural to omit the transformation to the interaction picture. Chang an an Law [19] have solve the Heisenberg Langevin equation for one subsystem with a parametric interaction keeping counter-rotating terms. They reach a time-local master equation by assuming a Gaussian state an matching the equations of motion for moments up to secon orer. The metho is similar to ours, though a Heisenberg Langevin equation in time-local form, Eq. (16), is not consiere. Note that Eq. (16) is specific to the Hamiltonian aopte. We now turn to the riven qubit an begin by asking whether the above generalizes to this apparently relate case. We limit ourselves to one subsystem for simplicity s sake, i.e., we consier the Hamiltonian H S (t) = σ + σ + Ω(t)σ + + Ω (t)σ, (22) where σ + an σ are raising an lowering operators, with commutation relation [σ +, σ ] = σ z. In place of Eq. (1), we have the Heisenberg Langevin equation for the qubit lowering operator { t t σ (t) = σ z (t) i σ (t) + t F (t t )σ (t ) +i[ω(t) + B(t)], (23)

4 4 an in place of Eq. (9), t A(t) = ( ) t A(t) + [σ +(t), A(t)] σ z (t) t σ (t) ( ) + t σ +(t) σ z (t) [A(t), σ (t)]. (24) Thus, if we are able to express the erivative of σ (t) in time-local form, we can use Eq. (24) to erive a time-local Heisenberg Langevin equation an corresponing master equation. Unfortunately, Eq. (23) is nonlinear an not so easily solve. In fact, to our knowlege, no close-form solution exists even in the Markovian case. We cannot, then, obtain time-local Heisenberg Langevin an master equations for the riven qubit. Suppose, though, that the qubit is only very weakly excite, so that at all times it remains close to its groun state. In this case we may approximate σ z (t) by 1, an Eq. (23) reas as Eq. (1) with a(t) σ (t); the above proceure then leas to Eqs. (16) an (21) with qubit rasing (lowering) operators staning in for boson creation (annihilation) operators. We emphasize, however, that the simple extrapolation hols only when the riving is weak. Shen et al. [17] report a erivation with no such restriction; they assume a zero-temperature environment but amit coherent riving of any strength. They return to the equation from [18] an revive Cresser s concern [11]: Such a relatively simple result... is an issue that requires further consieration. We answer the concern below by emonstrating that the extrapolation from the riven boson system to the riven qubit is, most generally, incorrect. It is known to hol, however, if there is no rive at all [9 12]. Since the latter follows espite the nonlinearity in Eq. (23), we first set Ω(t) to zero an show why this is so. Consier the initial state to be an arbitrary state of the qubit with the environment in the vacuum state, i.e., ψ() = α g, + β() e,, α 2 + β() 2 = 1, where g (e) enotes the groun (excite) state of the qubit, an enotes the environment vacuum state. Note then that the global groun state, g,, oes not evolve, while the qubit emits at most one photon; thus, the state at a later time amits the truncate expansion ψ(t) = α g, + β(t) e, + l η l (t) g, l, (25) where l labels the moe of the environment occupie by the single photon. From this expansion alone, the trivial ientity β(t)/t = γ(t)β(t), γ(t) = [β(t)/t]β(t) 1, yiels the time-local master equation t ρ S(t) = γ(t)[σ ρ S (t), σ + ] + γ (t)[σ, ρ S (t)σ + ]. (26) It remains to fin an explicit expression for γ(t). To this en, we place Eq. (23) between g, an ψ(), an use B(t) ψ() = an g, σ z (t)σ (t ) ψ() = g, σ ψ(t ) = β(t ), (27) where the latter result follows by transferring the unitary evolution from operators to states again, g, oes not evolve, an σ z g, = g,. We fin that β(t) satisfies Eq. (12), whence γ(t) = [V (t)/t]v (t) 1. The requirement that g, not evolve is a preconition of the one-photon truncation an central to this erivation. It is only met for zero rive; otherwise the equation erive in Ref. [17], where i [ξ(t)σ + + ξ (t)σ, ρ S (t)] is ae to the right-han sie of Eq. (26), is incorrect. We can emonstrate its failure by consiering the Lorentzian spectral ensity, J(ω) = Γ 2π λ 2 (ω + δ) 2 + λ 2, (28) from Sec. VB of that paper, with (δ) the etuning of the qubit from the rive (center of the Lorentzian line), λ the Lorentzian linewith, an Γ a parameter to control the system-environment interaction strength; we aopt a frame rotating with the rive an take Ω(t) constant. The issipation kernel an Green s function [Eqs. (5) an (12)] can be foun analytically for the Lorentzian spectral ensity. The master equation erive in Ref. [17] is then fully efine by γ(t), above, an ξ(t) = [γ(t) + /t](v Ω)(t), with V (t) the solution to Eq. (12); with it we can irectly compute the riven qubit response. Alternatively, the Lorentzian spectral ensity maps to a ampe harmonic oscillator initially in the vacuum state. Thus, we can check the response against ρ S (t) = tr b [ρ(t)], with the trace taken over the harmonic oscillator state an ρ(t) obeying the master equation t ρ(t) = i [H, ρ(t)] + L b[ρ(t)], (29) where L b [ ] = λ [ 2b b b b b b ] an H = σ + σ + ( δ)b b + Ω (σ + + σ ) + (λγ/2) 1/2 ( σ + b + b σ ). (3) The upper two frames of Fig. 1 reprouce the curves from Figs. 2(b) an 5(b) of Ref. [17], comparing results compute from Eq. (29). The frame on the left isplays ecay from the excite state in the presence of relatively strong riving, where, since λ = 25Γ brings us close to the Markov limit, the agreement, as expecte, is goo. On the right the riving is weaker an the rive etuning greater; nonetheless, although the excitation in steaystate is less, the ecay takes place away from the Markov limit an a clear iscrepancy has set in. More generally, the isagreement can be far more substantial, even

5 5 σ z (t) Γt σ z ( ) /λ Γt 1 1 /λ FIG. 1. Comparison of the time-local master equation of Ref. [17] with the equivalent moel, Eq. (29), for a Lorentzian spectral ensity. (Top) Evolution of σ z(t) to steay state, for λ = 25, =.3, Ω = 1, δ =.1 (Left), an λ =.5, = 3.5, Ω =.4, δ =.1 (Right) parameters in units of Γ; from Ref. [17] (blue) an Eq. (29) (re). (Bottom) Steaystate response σ z( ) versus from Eq. (34) (Left) an Eq. (29) (Right); for (Γ/2λ) 1/2 = 1 an Ω/λ = 4, 1, 16, 22 (lower curve to upper curve). of a qualitative nature, as we now show by consiering solutions in the asymptotic limit t. The time-local master equation is equivalent to Bloch equations with time-epenent coefficients, γ(t) (ecay an etuning) an ξ(t) (rive). These equations amit a steay-state solution, σ ( ) an σ z ( ) inepenent of time, if γ(t) σ ( ) = iξ(t) σ z ( ), (31) Re{γ(t)[ σ z ( ) + 1] = Re{2iξ (t) σ ( ). (32) There is no guarantee that γ(t) an ξ(t) reach a steay value, but the ratio γ(t) 1 ξ(t) = [1 + γ(t) 1 /t](v Ω)(t) must because V (t) ecays to zero its convolution with constant Ω is an integral of fixe asymptotic value. Equations (31) an (32) then give [ σ z ( ) = lim (V Ω)(t) 2] 1, (33) t an from the asymptotic value of the convolution, setting δ = for simplicity, [ Ω 2 (λ ] 1 ) σ z ( ) = (λγ/2 2 ) 2 + λ 2 2. (34) Consier the coupling (λγ/2) 1/2 much larger than the linewith λ; Eq. (34) clearly escribes a response peake at = ±(λγ/2) 1/2. This oublet follows from vacuum Rabi splitting an is just what we woul expect. What is not expecte, though, is the featureless power broaening shown in the bottom-left panel of Fig. 1. The response compute from Eq. (29) is far more complex; it shows the multi-photon resonances of photon blockae [2, 21] isplaye in the bottom-right panel of Fig. 1. Moreover, with the ratio of time-epenent coefficients eliminate from Eqs. (31) an (32), we fin the constraint σ z ( ) [ σ z ( ) + 1] = 2 σ ( ) 2. (35) The solution constructe from Eq. (29) violates Eq. (35) by as much as 1%, with the right-han sie close to zero when the left, as a function of /λ, takes its maximum absolute value. The form of the master equation reporte in Ref. [17] is therefore incorrect, not only the expressions for its time-epenent coefficients. We conclue with an observation pertinent to the timelocal escription of riven systems in general. It appears, from Eqs. (31) an (32), that riven systems may reach a far-from-equilibrium state with all operator averages steay but time-epenent coefficients that still evolve; such packaging of the ynamics can appear eciely o from a physical point of view. Inee, returning to a coupling strength (λγ/2) 1/2 much larger than the linewith λ, an choosing = δ =, to take a simplest case, γ(t) an ξ(t) both oscillate forever in the long-time limit, as tan[(λγ/2) 1/2 t] with perioic singularities. Of course Eqs. (31) an (32) are incorrect for the steay state of the riven qubit; but the equivalent equation, γ(t) a( ) = iξ(t) [ σ z ( ) 1 in Eq. (31)], hols for the steay state of the riven boson system. This asymptotic behavior is therefore a feature of a formally correct if eciely o time-local repackaging of the ynamics. It speaks a wor of caution for the physical interpretation of coefficients in the time-local formulation of non-markovian ynamics. Figure 2 illustrates the o asymptotic behavior of a strongly couple boson system riven to a far-from-equilibrium steay state. We erive the time-local master equation for a riven boson system interacting with a boson environment by way of a time-local Heisenberg Langevin equation. Our erivation is clear an irect: first, the time-nonlocal Heisenberg Langevin equation is solve an the solution inverte; a time-local Heisenberg Langevin equation can then be constructe by ifferentiating the solution an eliminating initial conitions; finally, taking expectations an using Wick s theorem to remove system-environment correlations, the time-local master equation is rea off by inspection. Our approach oes not exten, however, to the riven qubit where the Heisenberg Langevin equation is nonlinear an cannot be solve. Inee, we showe that the tempting transcription, a, a σ, σ + [17], is generally incorrect, though vali for spontaneous emission an, as an approximation, if the excitation is weak. While it can

6 6 iγ a(t) /2Ω 6 Fun of the RSNZ λt γ(t)/λ, Γξ(t)/2λΩ λt FIG. 2. Peculiar asymptotic behavior of the time-epenent coefficients, γ(t) an ξ(t), in the time-local master equation of a riven boson system; for a Lorentzian spectral ensity with (Γ/2λ) 1/2 = 5 an = δ =. (Top) All expectations, e.g., a(t) (as shown), evolve to a steay state. (Bottom) Both γ(t) (blue) an ξ(t) (magenta) oscillate forever with perioic singularities. account at some level for power broaening, it overlooks multiphoton resonances that erive from the many-boy excite states of the qubit couple to its environment. We also uncovere an oity of the repackage timelocal ynamics in a far-from-equilibrium steay state, where although the ensity operator is steay, coefficients in the master equation oscillate forever. The authors acknowlege helpful iscussions with Jim Cresser, Arne Grimsmo, an Ricaro Gutiérrez-Jáuregui; also useful feeback from Francesco Petruccione an Ilya Sinayskiy. This work was supporte by the Marsen simon.whalen@gmail.com [1] I. R. Senitzky, Phys. Rev. 119, 67 (196); 124, 642 (1961). [2] G. W. For, J. T. Lewis, an R. F. O Connell, Phys. Rev. A 37, 4419 (1988). [3] M. Lax, Optics Commun. 179, 463 (2). [4] C. W. Gariner an M. J. Collett, Phys. Rev. A 31, 3761 (1985). [5] C. Ciuti an I. Carusotto, Phys. Rev. A 74, (26). [6] L. Diósi, Phys. Rev. A 85, 3411 (212). [7] J. Zhang, Y.-X. Liu, R.-B. Wu, K. Jacobs, an F. Nori, Phys. Rev. A 87, (213). [8] B. L. Hu, J. P. Paz, an Y. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 45, 2843 (1992) [9] H.-P. Breuer, B. Kappler, an F. Petruccione, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1633 (1999). [1] C. Anastopoulos an B. L. Hu, Phys. Rev. A 62, (2). [11] J. Cresser, Laser Phys. 1, 337 (2). [12] W. T. Strunz an T. Yu, Phys. Rev. A 69, (24). [13] J.-H. An, an W.-M. Zhang, Phys. Rev. A 76, (27). [14] H.-N. Xiong, W.-M. Zhang, X. Wang, an M.-H. Wu, Phys. Rev. A 82, 1215 (21). [15] C. U. Lei an W.-M. Zhang, Ann. Phys. 327, 148 (212). [16] M. W. Y. Tu an W.-M. Zhang, Phys. Rev. B 78, (28). [17] H. Z. Shen, M. Qin, X.-M. Xiu, an X. X. Yi, Phys. Rev. A 89, (214). [18] C. Anastopoulos an B. L. Hu, arxiv:quant-ph/99178 v2, Eq. (V.16). [19] K. W. Chang an C. K. Law, Phys. Rev. A 81, 5215 (21). [2] L. V. Bishop, J. M. Chow, J. Koch, A. A. Houck, M. H. Devoret, E. Thuneberg, S. M. Girvin, an R. J. Schoelkopf, Nature Phys. 5, 15 (29). [21] H. J. Carmichael, Phys. Rev. X 5, 3128 (215).