Foundations of Physics

, Volume 37, Issue 11, pp 1519–1539 | Cite as

No Approximate Complex Fermion Coherent States

  • Tomáš Tyc
  • Brett Hamilton
  • Barry C. Sanders
  • William D. Oliver

Whereas boson coherent states with complex parametrization provide an elegant, and intuitive representation, there is no counterpart for fermions using complex parametrization. However, a complex parametrization provides a valuable way to describe amplitude and phase of a coherent beam. Thus we pose the question of whether a fermionic beam can be described, even approximately, by a complex-parametrized coherent state and define, in a natural way, approximate complex-parametrized fermion coherent states. Then we identify four appealing properties of boson coherent states (eigenstate of annihilation operator, displaced vacuum state, preservation of product states under linear coupling, and factorization of correlators) and show that these approximate complex fermion coherent states fail all four criteria. The inapplicability of complex parametrization supports the use of Grassman algebras as an appropriate alternative.


fermion coherent states 

PACS Numbers

05.30.Jp 05.30.Fk 42.50.Ar 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Signal A.I., Zülicke U. (2005). Appl. Phys. Lett. 87: 102102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sudarshan E.C.G. (1963). Phys. Rev. Lett. 10: 277zbMATHCrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glauber R.J. (1963). Phys. Rev. 130: 2529CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Glauber R.J. (1963). Phys. Rev. 131: 2766CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Klauder J.R. (1966). Phys. Rev. Lett. 16: 534CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. L. Martin, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 251, 543 (1959); Y. Ohnuki and T. Kashiwa, Prog. Theor. Phys. 60, 548 (1978); J. R. Klauder and B.-S. Skagerstam, Coherent States (World Scientific, Singapore, 1985).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berezin F.A. (1966). The Method of Second Quantization. Academic Press, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schwinger J. (1953). Phys. Rev. 92: 1283CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cahill K.E., Glauber R.J. (1999). Phys. Rev. A 59: 1538CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aharonov Y., Falkoff D., Lerner E., Pendleton H. (1966). Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 39: 498CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Titulaer U.M., Glauber R.J. (1965). Phys. Rev. 140: B676CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Titulaer U.M., Glauber R.J. (1966). Phys. Rev. 145: 1041CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. P. Yuen and J. H. Shapiro, in Coherence and Quantum Optics IV, L. Mandel and E. Wolf, eds. (Plenum, New York, 1978), p. 719.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tyc T., Sanders B.C. (2004). J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 37: 7341zbMATHCrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Saito S., Endo J., Kodama T., Tonomura A., Fukuhara A., Ohbayashi K. (1992). Phys. Lett. A 162: 442CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Büttiker M. (1992). Phys. Rev. B 46: 12485CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Beenakker C.W.J., Büttiker M. (1992). Phys. Rev. B 46: 1889CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu R.C., Yamamoto Y. (1994). Phys. Rev. B 49: 10520CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liu R.C., Yamamoto Y. (1994). Phys. Rev. B 50: 17411CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aguado R., Kouwenhoven L.P. (2000). Phys. Rev. Lett. 84: 1986CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mandel L., Wolf E. (1995). Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. Glauber, in Quantum Optics, S. Kay and A. Maitland, eds. (Academic Press, New York, 1970), p. 53.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    We use the quotation marks to emphasize that these states, as will be seen later, do not satisfy, even approximately, other requirements for coherent states.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tomáš Tyc
    • 1
  • Brett Hamilton
    • 2
  • Barry C. Sanders
    • 2
    • 3
  • William D. Oliver
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of Theoretical PhysicsMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic
  2. 2.Institute for Quantum Information ScienceUniversity of CalgaryAlbertaCanada
  3. 3.Australian Centre of Excellence for Quantum Computer TechnologyMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia
  4. 4.MIT Lincoln LaboratoryLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations