Advertisement

International Journal of Theoretical Physics

, Volume 47, Issue 12, pp 3408–3447 | Cite as

A Categorical Framework for the Quantum Harmonic Oscillator

  • Jamie VicaryEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper describes how the structure of the state space of the quantum harmonic oscillator can be described by an adjunction of categories, that encodes the raising and lowering operators into a commutative comonoid. The formulation is an entirely general one in which Hilbert spaces play no special role.

Generalised coherent states arise through the hom-set isomorphisms defining the adjunction, and we prove that they are eigenstates of the lowering operators. Generalised exponentials also emerge naturally in this setting, and we demonstrate that coherent states are produced by the exponential of a raising morphism acting on the zero-particle state. Finally, we examine all of these constructions in a suitable category of Hilbert spaces, and find that they reproduce the conventional mathematical structures.

Keywords

Quantum Category Fock space Canonical commutation relations Harmonic oscillator 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abramsky, S., Coecke, B.: A categorical semantics of quantum protocols. In: Proceedings of the 19th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pp. 415–425. IEEE Computer Science, Los Alamos (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blute, R., Panangaden, P., Seely, R.A.G.: Fock Space: A Model of Linear Exponential Types (1994) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blute, R., Cockett, J.R.B., Seely, R.A.G.: Differential categories. Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. 16(6), 1049–1083 (2006) zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fiore, M.: Differential structure in models of multiplicative biadditive intuitionistic linear logic. In: Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications (TLCA 2007). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4583, pp. 163–177. Springer, Berlin (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fox, T.: Coalgebras and Cartesian categories. Commun. Algebra 4, 665–667 (1976) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kelly, G.M., Laplaza, M.L.: Coherence for compact closed categories. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 19, 193–213 (1980) zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goldstern, M.: Completion of Semirings (1985) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Isham, C.: Some reflections on the status of conventional quantum theory when applied to quantum gravity. Presented at Stephen Hawking’s 60th Birthday Symposium, University of Cambridge (2002) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Joyal, A., Street, R.: The geometry of tensor calculus I. Adv. Math. 88, 55–112 (1991) zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mac Lane, S.: Categories for the Working Mathematician. Springer, Berlin (1997) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Melliès, P.-A.: Categorical Semantics of Linear Logic: a Survey (2008) Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Penrose, R.: Applications of negative-dimensional tensors. In: Welsh, D.J.A. (ed.) Combinatorial Mathematics and Its Applications. Academic Press, New York (1971) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Selinger, P.: Idempotents in dagger categories. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Quantum Programming Languages, July 2006 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Imperial College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations