Diffusion of wave packets in a Markov random potential

Similar documents
Diffusion of Wave Packets in a Markov Random Potential

Diffusion for a Markov, Divergence-form Generator

Automorphic Equivalence Within Gapped Phases

arxiv:math-ph/ v2 16 Aug 2004

Hopping transport in disordered solids

Lecture 12. F o s, (1.1) F t := s>t

FRG Workshop in Cambridge MA, May

Feshbach-Schur RG for the Anderson Model

Waves in Honeycomb Structures

QUANTUM TRANSPORT. KUBO S FORMULA for. Jean BELLISSARD 1 2. Collaborations:

The Quantum Hall Conductance: A rigorous proof of quantization

Two Classical models of Quantum Dynamics

Stochastic domination in space-time for the supercritical contact process

Aditi Mitra New York University

Strongly correlated systems in atomic and condensed matter physics. Lecture notes for Physics 284 by Eugene Demler Harvard University

Design and realization of exotic quantum phases in atomic gases

Continuous quantum states, Particle on a line and Uncertainty relations

Stochastic nonlinear Schrödinger equations and modulation of solitary waves

Weak Localization for the alloy-type 3D Anderson Model

Berry s phase in Hall Effects and Topological Insulators

MP463 QUANTUM MECHANICS

Thermalization in Quantum Systems

Linear Theory of Evolution to an Unstable State

Logarithmic scaling of planar random walk s local times

Convergence to equilibrium for rough differential equations

Exponentially Accurate Semiclassical Tunneling Wave Functions in One Dimension

Honeycomb Schroedinger Operators in the Strong Binding Regime

Today: 5 July 2008 ٢

The University of Texas at Austin Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. EE381V: Large Scale Learning Spring 2013.

Magnetic symmetries:

Recurrences and Full-revivals in Quantum Walks

Part III Advanced Quantum Field Theory

Quantum Electrodynamics Test

The parabolic Anderson model on Z d with time-dependent potential: Frank s works

Phonons and lattice dynamics

P i [B k ] = lim. n=1 p(n) ii <. n=1. V i :=

Bose Gases, Bose Einstein Condensation, and the Bogoliubov Approximation

Hypothesis testing for Stochastic PDEs. Igor Cialenco

CONSTRAINED PERCOLATION ON Z 2

Quantum Mechanics I Physics 5701

. D CR Nomenclature D 1

Brownian Bridge and Self-Avoiding Random Walk.

Ergodic Theorems. Samy Tindel. Purdue University. Probability Theory 2 - MA 539. Taken from Probability: Theory and examples by R.

Statistical Mechanics for the Truncated Quasi-Geostrophic Equations

Group. Benzene D 6h z B B. E ( x y, xy) ( x, y) A B B C 2

LECTURE 3: Quantization and QFT

Brownian motion. Samy Tindel. Purdue University. Probability Theory 2 - MA 539

Chapter 2 The Group U(1) and its Representations

DISSIPATIVE TRANSPORT APERIODIC SOLIDS KUBO S FORMULA. and. Jean BELLISSARD 1 2. Collaborations:

HOPF S DECOMPOSITION AND RECURRENT SEMIGROUPS. Josef Teichmann

A Detailed Look at a Discrete Randomw Walk with Spatially Dependent Moments and Its Continuum Limit

. α β γ δ ε ζ η θ ι κ λ μ Aμ ν(x) ξ ο π ρ ς σ τ υ φ χ ψ ω. Α Β Γ Δ Ε Ζ Η Θ Ι Κ Λ Μ Ν Ξ Ο Π Ρ Σ Τ Υ Φ Χ Ψ Ω. Wednesday March 30 ± ǁ

Open Quantum Systems and Markov Processes II

Topological Kondo Insulators!

Spectral Continuity Properties of Graph Laplacians

Diffusion in the mean for a periodic Schrödinger equation perturbed by a fluctuating potential

Gradient Gibbs measures with disorder

Nonlinear instability of half-solitons on star graphs

ON THE REGULARITY OF SAMPLE PATHS OF SUB-ELLIPTIC DIFFUSIONS ON MANIFOLDS

A quantum walk based search algorithm, and its optical realisation

MAGNETIC BLOCH FUNCTIONS AND VECTOR BUNDLES. TYPICAL DISPERSION LAWS AND THEIR QUANTUM NUMBERS

A classification of gapped Hamiltonians in d = 1

Floquet Topological Insulator:

Statistics 992 Continuous-time Markov Chains Spring 2004

MATH 205C: STATIONARY PHASE LEMMA

Bound States and Recurrence Properties of Quantum Walks

Universal examples. Chapter The Bernoulli process

Lifshitz Hydrodynamics

Lecture 12: Detailed balance and Eigenfunction methods

NANOSCALE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Quasi-Diffusion in a SUSY Hyperbolic Sigma Model

Aditi Mitra New York University

2. As we shall see, we choose to write in terms of σ x because ( X ) 2 = σ 2 x.

Phys 531 Lecture 27 6 December 2005

Duality of multiparameter Hardy spaces H p on spaces of homogeneous type

Time Evolution in Diffusion and Quantum Mechanics. Paul Hughes & Daniel Martin

The range of tree-indexed random walk

Cold atoms and AdS/CFT

Stochastic Processes

Bistable entire solutions in cylinder-like domains

GARCH processes continuous counterparts (Part 2)

5.80 Small-Molecule Spectroscopy and Dynamics

Topological insulator part II: Berry Phase and Topological index

8 Quantized Interaction of Light and Matter

A scaling limit from Euler to Navier-Stokes equations with random perturbation

Beyond the Parity and Bloch Theorem: Local Symmetry as a Systematic Pathway to the Breaking of Discrete Symmetries

Quantum wires, orthogonal polynomials and Diophantine approximation

-state problems and an application to the free particle

Bound-state solutions and well-posedness of the dispersion-managed nonlinear Schrödinger and related equations

Superposition of electromagnetic waves

Translation Symmetry, Space Groups, Bloch functions, Fermi energy

arxiv: v2 [math.pr] 4 Sep 2017

H ψ = E ψ. Introduction to Exact Diagonalization. Andreas Läuchli, New states of quantum matter MPI für Physik komplexer Systeme - Dresden

BRST and Dirac Cohomology

Spin-Boson Model. A simple Open Quantum System. M. Miller F. Tschirsich. Quantum Mechanics on Macroscopic Scales Theory of Condensed Matter July 2012

Anderson Localization Looking Forward

Mixing in Product Spaces. Elchanan Mossel

QALGO workshop, Riga. 1 / 26. Quantum algorithms for linear algebra.

The Toric-Boson model and quantum memory at finite temperature

Simple one-dimensional potentials

Transcription:

Diffusion of wave packets in a Markov random potential Jeffrey Schenker Michigan State University Joint work with Yang Kang (JSP 134 (2009)) WIP with Eman Hamza & Yang Kang ETH Zürich 9 June 2009 Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 1 / 29

Outline 1 Introduction 2 The Markov tight binding Schrödinger equation 3 Proof Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 2 / 29

The problem Obvious fact Waves in a disordered environment diffuse. Problem: Despite experience and the rich physical theory surrounding this fact, we are very far from having a good mathematical understanding of this phenomenon. 1 1 Actually it is well understood in certain limiting regimes. Maybe that is good enough? Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 3 / 29

The problem Obvious fact Waves in a disordered environment diffuse. Problem: Despite experience and the rich physical theory surrounding this fact, we are very far from having a good mathematical understanding of this phenomenon. 1 1 Actually it is well understood in certain limiting regimes. Maybe that is good enough? Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 3 / 29

The problem Obvious fact Waves in a disordered environment diffuse. Problem: Despite experience and the rich physical theory surrounding this fact, we are very far from having a good mathematical understanding of this phenomenon. 1 1 Actually it is well understood in certain limiting regimes. Maybe that is good enough? Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 3 / 29

For example i t ψ(x) = ψ(y) + λv ω (x)ψ(x), ψ l 2 (Z d ), λ small v ω random y x =1 Does 1 lim t t x 2 ψ t (x) 2 = D > 0? x Erdös, Salmhofer, Yau: yes if you take λ 0 with t and rescale D. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 4 / 29

For example i t ψ(x) = ψ(y) + λv ω (x)ψ(x), ψ l 2 (Z d ), λ small v ω random y x =1 Does 1 lim t t x 2 ψ t (x) 2 = D > 0? x Erdös, Salmhofer, Yau: yes if you take λ 0 with t and rescale D. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 4 / 29

Why diffusion? multiple scattering = build up of random phases build up of random phases = loss of coherence loss of coherence = classical propagation (absence of interference) classical random scattering = diffusion (central limit theorem) There are mathematical difficulties with every step of this argument. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 5 / 29

Why diffusion? multiple scattering = build up of random phases build up of random phases = loss of coherence loss of coherence = classical propagation (absence of interference) classical random scattering = diffusion (central limit theorem) There are mathematical difficulties with every step of this argument. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 5 / 29

Why diffusion? multiple scattering = build up of random phases build up of random phases = loss of coherence loss of coherence = classical propagation (absence of interference) classical random scattering = diffusion (central limit theorem) There are mathematical difficulties with every step of this argument. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 5 / 29

Why diffusion? multiple scattering = build up of random phases build up of random phases = loss of coherence loss of coherence = classical propagation (absence of interference) classical random scattering = diffusion (central limit theorem) There are mathematical difficulties with every step of this argument. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 5 / 29

Why diffusion? multiple scattering = build up of random phases build up of random phases = loss of coherence loss of coherence = classical propagation (absence of interference) classical random scattering = diffusion (central limit theorem) There are mathematical difficulties with every step of this argument. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 5 / 29

Recurrence One key difficulty is recurrence: the wave packet may return often to regions visited previously. Makes loss of coherence imprecise Makes central limit theorem hard So let s get rid of recurrence: Make the potential time dependent with short correlations. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 6 / 29

Recurrence One key difficulty is recurrence: the wave packet may return often to regions visited previously. Makes loss of coherence imprecise Makes central limit theorem hard So let s get rid of recurrence: Make the potential time dependent with short correlations. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 6 / 29

Time dependent potentials Why? Applications to signal propagation in optical fibers (Mitra & Stark, Nature 411 (2001); Green, Littlewood, Mitra, Wegener PRE 66 (2002)) More fundamentally reason: to have a rigorous mathematical model of wave diffusion. It is more or less clear that one should expect diffusion (and only diffusion) from time dependent models 1. Can we prove it? Ovvchinnikov and Erikhman (JETP 40 (1974)): Gaussian white noise potential = diffusion. Pillet (CMP 102 (1985)): Transience of the wave packet. A very useful formula for a Markov potential. Tcheremchantsev (CMP 187 (1997), CMP 196 (1998)): Markov potential = diffusive scaling up to logarithmic corrections. 1 with a UV cut-off Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 7 / 29

Time dependent potentials Why? Applications to signal propagation in optical fibers (Mitra & Stark, Nature 411 (2001); Green, Littlewood, Mitra, Wegener PRE 66 (2002)) More fundamentally reason: to have a rigorous mathematical model of wave diffusion. It is more or less clear that one should expect diffusion (and only diffusion) from time dependent models 1. Can we prove it? Ovvchinnikov and Erikhman (JETP 40 (1974)): Gaussian white noise potential = diffusion. Pillet (CMP 102 (1985)): Transience of the wave packet. A very useful formula for a Markov potential. Tcheremchantsev (CMP 187 (1997), CMP 196 (1998)): Markov potential = diffusive scaling up to logarithmic corrections. 1 with a UV cut-off Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 7 / 29

Time dependent potentials Why? Applications to signal propagation in optical fibers (Mitra & Stark, Nature 411 (2001); Green, Littlewood, Mitra, Wegener PRE 66 (2002)) More fundamentally reason: to have a rigorous mathematical model of wave diffusion. It is more or less clear that one should expect diffusion (and only diffusion) from time dependent models 1. Can we prove it? Ovvchinnikov and Erikhman (JETP 40 (1974)): Gaussian white noise potential = diffusion. Pillet (CMP 102 (1985)): Transience of the wave packet. A very useful formula for a Markov potential. Tcheremchantsev (CMP 187 (1997), CMP 196 (1998)): Markov potential = diffusive scaling up to logarithmic corrections. 1 with a UV cut-off Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 7 / 29

Time dependent potentials Why? Applications to signal propagation in optical fibers (Mitra & Stark, Nature 411 (2001); Green, Littlewood, Mitra, Wegener PRE 66 (2002)) More fundamentally reason: to have a rigorous mathematical model of wave diffusion. It is more or less clear that one should expect diffusion (and only diffusion) from time dependent models 1. Can we prove it? Ovvchinnikov and Erikhman (JETP 40 (1974)): Gaussian white noise potential = diffusion. Pillet (CMP 102 (1985)): Transience of the wave packet. A very useful formula for a Markov potential. Tcheremchantsev (CMP 187 (1997), CMP 196 (1998)): Markov potential = diffusive scaling up to logarithmic corrections. 1 with a UV cut-off Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 7 / 29

Time dependent potentials Why? Applications to signal propagation in optical fibers (Mitra & Stark, Nature 411 (2001); Green, Littlewood, Mitra, Wegener PRE 66 (2002)) More fundamentally reason: to have a rigorous mathematical model of wave diffusion. It is more or less clear that one should expect diffusion (and only diffusion) from time dependent models 1. Can we prove it? Ovvchinnikov and Erikhman (JETP 40 (1974)): Gaussian white noise potential = diffusion. Pillet (CMP 102 (1985)): Transience of the wave packet. A very useful formula for a Markov potential. Tcheremchantsev (CMP 187 (1997), CMP 196 (1998)): Markov potential = diffusive scaling up to logarithmic corrections. 1 with a UV cut-off Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 7 / 29

Time dependent potentials Why? Applications to signal propagation in optical fibers (Mitra & Stark, Nature 411 (2001); Green, Littlewood, Mitra, Wegener PRE 66 (2002)) More fundamentally reason: to have a rigorous mathematical model of wave diffusion. It is more or less clear that one should expect diffusion (and only diffusion) from time dependent models 1. Can we prove it? Ovvchinnikov and Erikhman (JETP 40 (1974)): Gaussian white noise potential = diffusion. Pillet (CMP 102 (1985)): Transience of the wave packet. A very useful formula for a Markov potential. Tcheremchantsev (CMP 187 (1997), CMP 196 (1998)): Markov potential = diffusive scaling up to logarithmic corrections. 1 with a UV cut-off Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 7 / 29

Outline 1 Introduction 2 The Markov tight binding Schrödinger equation 3 Proof Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 8 / 29

Markov process A random path ω(t) in some topological space Ω: Distribution of ω( + t) given ω(s), 0 s t, depends only on ω(t). Precise definition with σ-algebras and transition measures. The increments of the process have no memory ω(t) and ω(s) can still be correlated. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 9 / 29

Markov process A random path ω(t) in some topological space Ω: Distribution of ω( + t) given ω(s), 0 s t, depends only on ω(t). Precise definition with σ-algebras and transition measures. The increments of the process have no memory ω(t) and ω(s) can still be correlated. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 9 / 29

with ζ ζ 2 h(ζ) < Markov tight binding Schroedinger equation i t ψ t (x) = ζ h(ζ)ψ(x ζ) + u x (ω(t))ψ(x) ω a Markov process. 1 u x : Ω R bounded measurable functions Question What do we need to know about h, u x and ω to prove diffusion? 1 with cádlág paths. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 10 / 29

with ζ ζ 2 h(ζ) < Markov tight binding Schroedinger equation i t ψ t (x) = ζ h(ζ)ψ(x ζ) + u x (ω(t))ψ(x) ω a Markov process. 1 u x : Ω R bounded measurable functions Question What do we need to know about h, u x and ω to prove diffusion? 1 with cádlág paths. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 10 / 29

Simple Example The flip model Suppose Ω = { 1, 1} Zd, so each element ω is a field of ±1 spins. Let u x (ω) = ω(x) = spin at x. Let ω(x) evolve in time, independently of all other spins, so that it flips at the times 0 < t 1 (x) < t 2 (x) < of a Poisson process. Then lim τ x e i 1 τ k x E ( ψ τt (x) 2) = ψ 0 2 e t P i,j D i,j k i k j. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 11 / 29

Simple Example The flip model Suppose Ω = { 1, 1} Zd, so each element ω is a field of ±1 spins. Let u x (ω) = ω(x) = spin at x. Let ω(x) evolve in time, independently of all other spins, so that it flips at the times 0 < t 1 (x) < t 2 (x) < of a Poisson process. Then lim τ x e i 1 τ k x E ( ψ τt (x) 2) = ψ 0 2 e t P i,j D i,j k i k j. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 11 / 29

Simple Example The flip model Suppose Ω = { 1, 1} Zd, so each element ω is a field of ±1 spins. Let u x (ω) = ω(x) = spin at x. Let ω(x) evolve in time, independently of all other spins, so that it flips at the times 0 < t 1 (x) < t 2 (x) < of a Poisson process. Then lim τ x e i 1 τ k x E ( ψ τt (x) 2) = ψ 0 2 e t P i,j D i,j k i k j. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 11 / 29

Simple Example The flip model Suppose Ω = { 1, 1} Zd, so each element ω is a field of ±1 spins. Let u x (ω) = ω(x) = spin at x. Let ω(x) evolve in time, independently of all other spins, so that it flips at the times 0 < t 1 (x) < t 2 (x) < of a Poisson process. Then lim τ x e i 1 τ k x E ( ψ τt (x) 2) = ψ 0 2 e t P i,j D i,j k i k j. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 11 / 29

Diffusion lim τ x = lim τ τ d 2 e i 1 τ k x E ( ψ τt (x) 2) = ψ 2 0 e t P i,j D i,j k i k j in the sense of distributions. ζ w( ( τr ζ)e ψ τt (ζ) 2) ψ 0 2 1 e r 2 (πdt) d Dt. 2 Mean square amplitude of the wave packet converges in a scaling limit to the fundamental solution of a heat equation. We also show that 1 lim t t x ( x 2 E ψ t (x) 2) = D. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 12 / 29

Diffusion lim τ x = lim τ τ d 2 e i 1 τ k x E ( ψ τt (x) 2) = ψ 2 0 e t P i,j D i,j k i k j in the sense of distributions. ζ w( ( τr ζ)e ψ τt (ζ) 2) ψ 0 2 1 e r 2 (πdt) d Dt. 2 Mean square amplitude of the wave packet converges in a scaling limit to the fundamental solution of a heat equation. We also show that 1 lim t t x ( x 2 E ψ t (x) 2) = D. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 12 / 29

Diffusion lim τ x = lim τ τ d 2 e i 1 τ k x E ( ψ τt (x) 2) = ψ 2 0 e t P i,j D i,j k i k j in the sense of distributions. ζ w( ( τr ζ)e ψ τt (ζ) 2) ψ 0 2 1 e r 2 (πdt) d Dt. 2 Mean square amplitude of the wave packet converges in a scaling limit to the fundamental solution of a heat equation. We also show that 1 lim t t x ( x 2 E ψ t (x) 2) = D. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 12 / 29

Conditions 1 (Stationarity): Invariant probability measure µ on Ω Bernoulli with p = 1/2 in the flip model. 2 (Translation invariance): u x = u 0 τ x with τ x : Ω Ω measure preserving maps, τ x τ y = τ x+y 3 (Markov generator): S t f (ω) = E (f (ω(t)) ω(0) = ω) defines a strongly continuous contraction semi-group on L 2 (Ω), so we have S t = e tb for some maximally dissipative operator B. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 13 / 29

Conditions 1 (Stationarity): Invariant probability measure µ on Ω Bernoulli with p = 1/2 in the flip model. 2 (Translation invariance): u x = u 0 τ x with τ x : Ω Ω measure preserving maps, τ x τ y = τ x+y 3 (Markov generator): S t f (ω) = E (f (ω(t)) ω(0) = ω) defines a strongly continuous contraction semi-group on L 2 (Ω), so we have S t = e tb for some maximally dissipative operator B. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 13 / 29

Conditions 1 (Stationarity): Invariant probability measure µ on Ω Bernoulli with p = 1/2 in the flip model. 2 (Translation invariance): u x = u 0 τ x with τ x : Ω Ω measure preserving maps, τ x τ y = τ x+y 3 (Markov generator): S t f (ω) = E (f (ω(t)) ω(0) = ω) defines a strongly continuous contraction semi-group on L 2 (Ω), so we have S t = e tb for some maximally dissipative operator B. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 13 / 29

Conditions on the generator 4 (Gap condition): A strict spectral gap for the generator B Re f, Bf L 2 (Ω) 1 T f, f L 2 (Ω), if f (ω)dµ(ω) = 0. 5 (Sectoriality): Ω Im f, Bf L 2 (Ω) γ Re f, Bf L 2 (Ω) Exponential return to equilibrium Taken together these imply S t f 1 exponentially fast. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 14 / 29

Conditions on the generator 4 (Gap condition): A strict spectral gap for the generator B Re f, Bf L 2 (Ω) 1 T f, f L 2 (Ω), if f (ω)dµ(ω) = 0. 5 (Sectoriality): Ω Im f, Bf L 2 (Ω) γ Re f, Bf L 2 (Ω) Exponential return to equilibrium Taken together these imply S t f 1 exponentially fast. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 14 / 29

Result Theorem (Kang and S. 2009) Under the above assumptions, if for all x y inf x y B 1 (u x u y ) L 2 (Ω) > 0, ( ) and if the hopping is non-trivial, 1 then lim τ x with D i,j a positive definite matrix. e i 1 τ k x E ( ψ τt (x) 2) = e t P i,j D i,j k i k j ψ 0 2 B 1 u x and B 1 u y independent (as in the flip model) = ( ): B 1 (u x u y ) 2 = var(b 1 u x ) + var(b 1 u y ) = 2 var(b 1 u 0 ). 1 P ζ (k ζ)2 h(ζ) 0 for all k R d \ {0}. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 15 / 29

Periodic potentials Theorem (Hamza, Kang and S. 2009) In place of ( ) suppose that u x is periodic, u x+lζ = u x some L 2 and min B 1 (u x u 0 ) L 2 (Ω) > 0, x Λ L \{0} ζ Z d with ( ) where Λ L = [0, L] d. Then lim τ x e i 1 τ k x E ( ψ τt (x) 2) = (0,2π] d e t P i,j D i,j (p)k i k j w ψ0 (p)dp with D i,j (p) positive definite for all p and w ψ0 (p) 0. Superposition of diffusions. Example: translate a periodic potential by a continuous time random walk. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 16 / 29

Outline 1 Introduction 2 The Markov tight binding Schrödinger equation 3 Proof Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 17 / 29

Density matrix ρ t (x, x) = ψ t (x) 2. Linear evolution: ρ t (x, y) = ψ t (x)ψ t (y), t ρ t (x, y) = i ζ h(ζ) [ρ t (x ζ, y) ρ t (x, y + ζ)] i (u x (ω(t)) u y (ω(t))) ρ t (x, y). Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 18 / 29

Feynman-Kac and Augmented space Pillet 1985 E (ρ t (x, y)) = δ x δ y 1, e tl ρ 0 1. L 2 (Z d Z d Ω) Augmented space: L 2 (Z d Z d Ω) = l 2 (Z d ) l 2 (Z d ) L 2 (Ω). Generator LΨ(x, y, ω) = i h(ζ) [Ψ(x ζ, y, ω) Ψ(x, y + ζ, ω)] ζ }{{} KΨ(x,y,ω) + i (u x (ω) u y (ω))ψ(x, y, ω) +BΨ(x, y, ω) }{{} V Ψ(x,y,ω) Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 19 / 29

Feynman-Kac and Augmented space Pillet 1985 E (ρ t (x, y)) = δ x δ y 1, e tl ρ 0 1. L 2 (Z d Z d Ω) Augmented space: L 2 (Z d Z d Ω) = l 2 (Z d ) l 2 (Z d ) L 2 (Ω). Generator LΨ(x, y, ω) = i h(ζ) [Ψ(x ζ, y, ω) Ψ(x, y + ζ, ω)] ζ }{{} KΨ(x,y,ω) + i (u x (ω) u y (ω))ψ(x, y, ω) +BΨ(x, y, ω) }{{} V Ψ(x,y,ω) Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 19 / 29

Feynman-Kac and Augmented space Pillet 1985 E (ρ t (x, y)) = δ x δ y 1, e tl ρ 0 1. L 2 (Z d Z d Ω) Augmented space: L 2 (Z d Z d Ω) = l 2 (Z d ) l 2 (Z d ) L 2 (Ω). Generator LΨ(x, y, ω) = i h(ζ) [Ψ(x ζ, y, ω) Ψ(x, y + ζ, ω)] ζ }{{} KΨ(x,y,ω) + i (u x (ω) u y (ω))ψ(x, y, ω) +BΨ(x, y, ω) }{{} V Ψ(x,y,ω) Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 19 / 29

Translation Symmetry [S ξ, L] = i[s ξ, K] + i[s ξ, V ] + [S ξ, B] = 0 S ξ Ψ(x, y, ω) = Ψ(x ξ, y ξ, τ ξ ω). Fourier transform Ψ(x, ω, k) = ζ e ik ζ S ζ Ψ(x, 0, ω) = ζ e ik ζ Ψ(x ζ, ζ, τ ζ ω). Partially diagonalizes L. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 20 / 29

Translation Symmetry [S ξ, L] = i[s ξ, K] + i[s ξ, V ] + [S ξ, B] = 0 S ξ Ψ(x, y, ω) = Ψ(x ξ, y ξ, τ ξ ω). Fourier transform Ψ(x, ω, k) = ζ e ik ζ S ζ Ψ(x, 0, ω) = ζ e ik ζ Ψ(x ζ, ζ, τ ζ ω). Partially diagonalizes L. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 20 / 29

Bloch decomposition E (ρ t (x, y)) = T d e ik y δ x y 1, e tb Lk ρ 0;k 1 dl(k). L 2 (Z d Ω) Generator Lk φ(x, ω) = i ζ [ ] h(ζ) φ(x ζ, ω) e ik ζ φ(x ζ, τ ζ ω) } {{ } bk k φ(x,ω) + i (u x (ω) u 0 (ω))φ(x, ω) +Bφ(x, ω). }{{} bv φ(x,ω) ρ 0;k (x) = ζ e ik ζ ρ 0 (x ζ, ζ). Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 21 / 29

Bloch decomposition E (ρ t (x, y)) = T d e ik y δ x y 1, e tb Lk ρ 0;k 1 dl(k). L 2 (Z d Ω) Generator Lk φ(x, ω) = i ζ [ ] h(ζ) φ(x ζ, ω) e ik ζ φ(x ζ, τ ζ ω) } {{ } bk k φ(x,ω) + i (u x (ω) u 0 (ω))φ(x, ω) +Bφ(x, ω). }{{} bv φ(x,ω) ρ 0;k (x) = ζ e ik ζ ρ 0 (x ζ, ζ). Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 21 / 29

Bloch decomposition E (ρ t (x, y)) = T d e ik y δ x y 1, e tb Lk ρ 0;k 1 dl(k). L 2 (Z d Ω) Generator Lk φ(x, ω) = i ζ [ ] h(ζ) φ(x ζ, ω) e ik ζ φ(x ζ, τ ζ ω) } {{ } bk k φ(x,ω) + i (u x (ω) u 0 (ω))φ(x, ω) +Bφ(x, ω). }{{} bv φ(x,ω) ρ 0;k (x) = ζ e ik ζ ρ 0 (x ζ, ζ). Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 21 / 29

Diffusively rescaled Feynman-Kac x e i 1 τ k x E (ρt (x, x)) = δ 0 1, e τtb L k/ τ ρ 0;k/ τ 1. L 2 (Z d Ω) Diffusion = good control over e tb L k for k 0. Strategy: 1 Understand k = 0. 2 Use perturbation theory. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 22 / 29

Diffusively rescaled Feynman-Kac x e i 1 τ k x E (ρt (x, x)) = δ 0 1, e τtb L k/ τ ρ 0;k/ τ 1. L 2 (Z d Ω) Diffusion = good control over e tb L k for k 0. Strategy: 1 Understand k = 0. 2 Use perturbation theory. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 22 / 29

Diffusively rescaled Feynman-Kac x e i 1 τ k x E (ρt (x, x)) = δ 0 1, e τtb L k/ τ ρ 0;k/ τ 1. L 2 (Z d Ω) Diffusion = good control over e tb L k for k 0. Strategy: 1 Understand k = 0. 2 Use perturbation theory. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 22 / 29

Block decomposition for L 0 Block decomposition L0 = ( ) 0 ip 0 V i V P 0 P0 L 0 P0 over H 0 H 0 with H 0 = l 2 (Z d ) {1}, H 0 = { φ(x, ω) : Ω } φ(x, ω)dµ(ω) = 0. L0 δ 0 1 = 0, because E (ρ t (x, x)) = x x ρ 0 (x, x). Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 23 / 29

Block decomposition for L 0 Block decomposition L0 = ( ) 0 ip 0 V i V P 0 P0 L 0 P0 over H 0 H 0 with H 0 = l 2 (Z d ) {1}, H 0 = { φ(x, ω) : Ω } φ(x, ω)dµ(ω) = 0. L0 δ 0 1 = 0, because E (ρ t (x, x)) = x x ρ 0 (x, x). Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 23 / 29

Spectral gap for L 0 L0 = ( ) 0 ip 0 V i V P 0 P0 L 0 P0 Re P0 L 0 P0 = P 0 BP 0 1 T P 0. Schur: 1 If Re z < 1/T then L 0 z is invertible if and only if ( Γ(z) = P 0 V P0 L 1 0 P0 z) V P0 z is invertible. Re Γ(z) σ 2 1 T Re z T u 2 ( ) 2 (1 Π 0 ), 1 + 4 T ĥ + 2T u + 1 Π 0 = projection onto δ 0 1. 1 or Feshbach, or Krein... Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 24 / 29

Spectral gap for L 0 L0 = ( ) 0 ip 0 V i V P 0 P0 L 0 P0 Re P0 L 0 P0 = P 0 BP 0 1 T P 0. Schur: 1 If Re z < 1/T then L 0 z is invertible if and only if ( Γ(z) = P 0 V P0 L 1 0 P0 z) V P0 z is invertible. Re Γ(z) σ 2 1 T Re z T u 2 ( ) 2 (1 Π 0 ), 1 + 4 T ĥ + 2T u + 1 Π 0 = projection onto δ 0 1. 1 or Feshbach, or Krein... Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 24 / 29

Spectral gap for L 0 Lemma There is δ > 0 such that where 1 0 is a non-degenerate eigenvalue, and 2 Σ + {z : Re z > δ}. σ( L 0 ) = {0} Σ + (1) Furthermore, if Q 0 = orthogonal projection onto δ 0 1, then e tb L 0 (1 Q 0 ) C ɛ e t(δ ɛ). Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 25 / 29

Perturbation theory for L k Lemma If k is sufficiently small, the spectrum of L k consists of: 1 A non-degenerate eigenvalue E(k) contained in H 0 = {z : z < c k }. 2 The rest of the spectrum is contained in the half plane H 1 = {z : Re z > δ c k } such that H 0 H 1 =. Furthermore, E(k) is C 2 in a neighborhood of 0, E(0) = 0, E(0) = 0, and i j E(0) = 2 Re i K0 δ 0 1, 1 L0 j K0 δ 0 1, is positive definite. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 26 / 29

Putting it together x e i 1 τ k x E (ρt (x, x)) = δ 0 1, e τtb L k/ τ ρ 0;k/ τ 1 L 2 (Z d Ω) = e τte(k/ τ) δ 0 1, Q(k) ρ 0;k/ τ 1 + L 2 (Z d Ω) O(e cτt ) = e t P i,j 1 2 i j E(0)k i k j δ 0 1, ρ 0;0 1 L 2 (Z d Ω) + o(1). 1 2 i j E(0) = Diffusion matrix Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 27 / 29

Putting it together x e i 1 τ k x E (ρt (x, x)) = δ 0 1, e τtb L k/ τ ρ 0;k/ τ 1 L 2 (Z d Ω) = e τte(k/ τ) δ 0 1, Q(k) ρ 0;k/ τ 1 + L 2 (Z d Ω) O(e cτt ) = e t P i,j 1 2 i j E(0)k i k j δ 0 1, ρ 0;0 1 L 2 (Z d Ω) + o(1). 1 2 i j E(0) = Diffusion matrix Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 27 / 29

Putting it together x e i 1 τ k x E (ρt (x, x)) = δ 0 1, e τtb L k/ τ ρ 0;k/ τ 1 L 2 (Z d Ω) = e τte(k/ τ) δ 0 1, Q(k) ρ 0;k/ τ 1 + L 2 (Z d Ω) O(e cτt ) = e t P i,j 1 2 i j E(0)k i k j δ 0 1, ρ 0;0 1 L 2 (Z d Ω) + o(1). 1 2 i j E(0) = Diffusion matrix Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 27 / 29

Putting it together x e i 1 τ k x E (ρt (x, x)) = δ 0 1, e τtb L k/ τ ρ 0;k/ τ 1 L 2 (Z d Ω) = e τte(k/ τ) δ 0 1, Q(k) ρ 0;k/ τ 1 + L 2 (Z d Ω) O(e cτt ) = e t P i,j 1 2 i j E(0)k i k j δ 0 1, ρ 0;0 1 L 2 (Z d Ω) + o(1). 1 2 i j E(0) = Diffusion matrix Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 27 / 29

Comments Diffusion in a Markov potential can be seen in an elementary fashion. If u x is periodic there is a further Bloch decomposition, with diffusion in each fiber. If λ = disorder strength D 1 λ 2 [D 0 + λq(λ)] D 0 is well behaved in the limit T. Not so Q! (nor should it be...) The augmented space setup works also for Anderson model. But no spectral gap. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 28 / 29

Comments Diffusion in a Markov potential can be seen in an elementary fashion. If u x is periodic there is a further Bloch decomposition, with diffusion in each fiber. If λ = disorder strength D 1 λ 2 [D 0 + λq(λ)] D 0 is well behaved in the limit T. Not so Q! (nor should it be...) The augmented space setup works also for Anderson model. But no spectral gap. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 28 / 29

Comments Diffusion in a Markov potential can be seen in an elementary fashion. If u x is periodic there is a further Bloch decomposition, with diffusion in each fiber. If λ = disorder strength D 1 λ 2 [D 0 + λq(λ)] D 0 is well behaved in the limit T. Not so Q! (nor should it be...) The augmented space setup works also for Anderson model. But no spectral gap. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 28 / 29

Comments Diffusion in a Markov potential can be seen in an elementary fashion. If u x is periodic there is a further Bloch decomposition, with diffusion in each fiber. If λ = disorder strength D 1 λ 2 [D 0 + λq(λ)] D 0 is well behaved in the limit T. Not so Q! (nor should it be...) The augmented space setup works also for Anderson model. But no spectral gap. Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 28 / 29

Open problems Convergence of higher time correlations: ( E ψ τt1 ( τx) 2 ψ τt2 ( τx) 2), etc. Almost sure convergence? Continuum? (no spectral gap. possibly super diffusion) Gapless processes And of course... diffusion for the Anderson model... Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 29 / 29

Open problems Convergence of higher time correlations: ( E ψ τt1 ( τx) 2 ψ τt2 ( τx) 2), etc. Almost sure convergence? Continuum? (no spectral gap. possibly super diffusion) Gapless processes And of course... diffusion for the Anderson model... Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 29 / 29

Open problems Convergence of higher time correlations: ( E ψ τt1 ( τx) 2 ψ τt2 ( τx) 2), etc. Almost sure convergence? Continuum? (no spectral gap. possibly super diffusion) Gapless processes And of course... diffusion for the Anderson model... Jeffrey Schenker (MSU) Diffusion of waves 9 June 2009 29 / 29