Abstract.
We elaborate further on the metric representation that is obtained by transferring the time-dependence from a Hermitian Hamiltonian to the metric operator in a related non-Hermitian system. We provide further insight into the procedure on how to employ the time-dependent Dyson relation and the quasi-Hermiticity relation to solve time-dependent Hermitian Hamiltonian systems. By solving both equations separately we argue here that it is in general easier to solve the former. We solve the mutually related time-dependent Schrödinger equation for a Hermitian and non-Hermitian spin 1/2, 1 and 3/2 model with time-independent and time-dependent metric, respectively. In all models the overdetermined coupled system of equations for the Dyson map can be decoupled algebraic manipulations and reduces to simple linear differential equations and an equation that can be converted into the non-linear Ermakov-Pinney equation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
A. Fring, T. Frith, Phys. Rev. A 95, 010102(R) (2017)
C.M. Bender, S. Boettcher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5243 (1998)
C.M. Bender, Rep. Prog. Phys. 70, 947 (2007)
A. Mostafazadeh, Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys. 7, 1191 (2010)
F. Cannata, M. Ioffe, G. Junker, D.J. Nishnianidze, J. Phys. A 32, 3583 (1999)
A.A. Andrianov, F. Cannata, J. Phys. A 37, 10297 (2004)
C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, A. Fring, J. Phys. A 39, 9269 (2006)
C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, A. Fring, Laser Phys. 17, 424 (2007)
A. Mostafazadeh, Phys. Lett. B 650, 208 (2007)
M. Znojil, Phys. Rev. D 78, 085003 (2008)
A. Fring, M.H.Y. Moussa, Phys. Rev. A 93, 042114 (2016)
F.S. Luiz, M.A. Pontes, M.H.Y. Moussa, Unitarity of the time-evolution and observability of non-Hermitian Hamiltonians for time-dependent Dyson maps, arXiv:1611.08286 (2016)
A. Fring, M.M.H.Y. Moussa, Phys. Rev. A 94, 042128 (2016)
G. von Gehlen, J. Phys. A 24, 5371 (1991)
O.A. Castro-Alvaredo, A. Fring, J. Phys. A 42, 465211 (2009)
V. Ermakov, Univ. Izv. Kiev. 20, 1 (1880)
E. Pinney, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1, 681 (1950)
A. Hone, Phys. Lett. A 263, 347 (1999)
R.M. Hawkins, J.E. Lidsey, Phys. Rev. D 66, 023523 (2002)
J.R. Choi, B.H. Kweon, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 16, 4733 (2002)
J.R. Choi, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 42, 853 (2003)
N. Ferkous, A. Bounames, M. Maamache, Phys. Scr. 88, 35001 (2013)
S. Dey, A. Fring, Phys. Rev. D 90, 084005 (2014)
M.V. Ioffe, H. Korsch, Phys. Lett. A 311, 200 (2003)
S. Dey, A. Fring, L. Gouba, J. Phys. A 48, 40FT01 (2015)
C. Eliezer, A. Gray, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 30, 463 (1976)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Fring, A., Frith, T. Metric versus observable operator representation, higher spin models. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 133, 57 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/i2018-11892-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/i2018-11892-4