Quick Navigation
Topics
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Quantum Simulation
Twin Hamiltonians, three types of the Dyson maps, and the probabilistic interpretation problem in quasi-Hermitian quantum mechanics
arXiv
Authors: Aritra Ghosh, Adam Miranowicz, Miloslav Znojil
Year
2025
Paper ID
16669
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
148
Citations
N/A
Abstract
In the framework of the so-called quasi-Hermitian quantum mechanics of stationary unitary systems, bound states are usually constructed as eigenstates |ψn rangle of a Hamiltonian operator H with real spectrum which is non-Hermitian, H neq Hdagger. One of the ways of the standard probabilistic interpretation of such systems consists in a transformation of H into its isospectral Hermitian "twin" mathfrak{h}= mathfrak{h}dagger via one of the so-called Dyson maps Ω: H → mathfrak{h}. Naturally, the well known ambiguity of these H-dependent Dyson-map transformations implies also an ambiguity of the physical, Ω-dependent probabilistic and experimental interpretation of the system in question. In the present paper, an exhaustive classification of all of the eligible H-dependent Dyson maps Ω=Ω(H) is provided, implying also a systematic framework for a specification of all of the possible probabilistic interpretations of the quantum system characterized by a preselected H.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2025 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- In the framework of the so-called quasi-Hermitian quantum mechanics of stationary unitary systems, bound states are usually constructed as eigenstates |ψn rangle of a...
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.