Quick Navigation
Topics
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Quantum Simulation
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Time dependent quantum generators for the Galilei group
arXiv
Authors: Gianluigi Filippelli
Year
2014
Paper ID
46323
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
99
Citations
N/A
Abstract
In 1995 Doebner and Mann introduced an approach to the ray representations of the Galilei group in (1+1)-dimensions, giving rise to quantum generators with an explicit dependence on time. Recently (2004) Wawrzycki proposed a generalization of Bargmann's theory: in his paper he introduce phase exponents that are explicitely dependent by 4-space point. In order to find applications of such generalization, we extend the approach of Doebner and Mann to higher dimensions: as a result, we determine the generators of the ray representation in (2+1) and (3+1) dimensions. The differences of the outcoming formal apparatus with respect to the smaller dimension case are established.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2014 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- In 1995 Doebner and Mann introduced an approach to the ray representations of the Galilei group in (1+1)-dimensions, giving rise to quantum generators with an explicit...
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.