PHYSICAL REVIEW D VOLUME 1, NUMBER 12 15 JUNE 1970

Equivalence Classes of Minimum Uncertainty Packets*

DAVIDSTOLER
Department of Physics, Polytechnic Itzstitute of Brooklyn, Brooklyn, New York 11201
(Received 8 December 1969)

We show that all the minimum uncertainty packets are unitarily equivalent to the coherent states and that
coherence is in fact stationary n~inimality.

I. INTRODUCTION instead of I?.This is quite permissible sine: the eigen-

value equation is homogeneous. Writing S= (2p)-1j2.1?
W E consider the totality of wave packets in one
dimension which minimize the uncertainty prod-
uct (Ax) (Ap), where x and p are the usual position and
we want to solve the eigenvalue equation
.j.:*)=sI$), (2)
conjugate momentum operators which satisfy the com-
where s = (2p)-lj2[(x)+ il*(p)].
mutation rule [x,p]=i (h= 1).
We develop an operator approach to classifying the I n terms of & and &t, we must solve the equation
minimal packets and show that the totality of minimal (& coshr+&t sinhr) I +)= s 1 +) ,
pacliets divides into equivalence classes. (3)
One of the equivalence classes is the totality of the where coshr = (l+,uA2)/(2Ad,u) and sinhr = (1-,A2)/
coherent states.l Besides demonstrating the unitary (2Xd~).
equivalence of the general minimum uncertainty pacliet Rather than solve this problem in the conventional
to the coherent states, we show that coherence is way, we note that if there exists an operator U which
essentially minimality. can, by means of a similarity transformation, transform
& coshr+&t sinhr into d , then the state / +)= U 1 a) for
11. MINIMALITY CONDITION any coherent state2 la) will be a solution. The proposed
transformation preserves the conlinutation relation so
I t is easily seen2 that the most general one-dimen- we may hope to find a unitary operator which does the
sional wave packet that minimizes the uncertainty job.
product of position and rnomentum is coinpletely speci-
fied by the requirement that it be a normalizable eigen- 111. UNITARY OPERATOR U,
function of the operator R=x+ipp with eigenvalue
Consider the unitary operator,
(x)+i,u(p). The only restriction on ,u is that i t be real and
positive. The requirement results from the Us= exp[&(z&&--z*&t&t)], (4)
requirement that the solution be normalizable. I t is a
trivial task to find the form of the most general mini- where z=reip is an arbitrary complex number. Inspec-
mum packet, and one can in fact find it in many tion of the above operator shows that U,t= U;l= U-.?.
textbooks on quantum theory. A straightforward application of the formula3
What we do here is to approach the class of minimal 1
packets in a slightly less pedestrian way and in so doing eABe-*= B+[A,B]+ - [ A , [ A , B ] ] f 9 .. (5)
display all of the pertinent relationships in a lucid 2!
manner. First we define the operators
reveals the following relation :
U,&U,'t=ci c~shr+&te-~q
sinhr,
U,&tUJ= dt coshr+&ei~sinhr . (6)
(1)
. .
So the operator U , will more than suit our purpose, i.e.,
&f = (lM(hx - -p , when z is purely real we have the transformation that
\ xi , we are seeking. Hence the most general minimal un-
where ), is an" real. ~ o s i t i v enumber. If A takes on the certainty pacliet is given by the expression
, L

value (nzw)l/z, then & and &t are the usual ladder I
operators for an harmonic oscillator of mass m land
1 Y;a), a = any complex number

angular frequency w . We can express the operator R i? = LT,Ia) (O<r< a). (7)
terms of d and dt. For convenience, we consider (2~)-lj2R There are three arbitrary real pararneters here, iae.,r,
Rea, and Ima, which is as it should be since the most
* Work supported in part by the Science Development Program
of the National Science Foundation. general mi?zimztm packet is specified by the three
R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. 131, 2766 (1963).
2 L. I. Schiff, Quantuln Meclzanics, 1st ed. (McGraw-Hill, New A. Messiah, Quantum Meclzanics (Interscience, New-York,
York). 1961), p. 339.
1 3217
3218 DAVID STOLER

numbers ( 2 ) , ( p ) , and Ax or Ap. For r=O we have all Using Eq. (12) in this relation, we have
the coherent states.
We might just as well consider the more general
states / z ; a ) when we consider detailed properties. We
shall see that in general these are not ?nitzimal packets.

IV. PROPERTIES OF STATES l z ; a )

A. Completeness (Overcompleteness)
This follows directly from the completeness or rather The solution to this functional equation for K is
overcompleteness of the ! a ) in a trivial fashion, i.e.,

So we have, finally,
Multiplying this equation by U , on the left and by
U,t on the right, we have4

B. Connection with Other Bases

I n this regard, all we need do is calculate the trans- Note that (01 U,10)= 1 so we are not dealing with an
formation function (a 1 z ; /3)= (a 1 UzIP) which can be inequivalent representation.
done very simply as follows. We can use Eq. (15) to find the transformation to the
If la) and ID) are coherent states, i.e., eigenstates of number state basis, i.e., the eigenstates of the operator
the operator a, then we have the following relation : $6. This is done quite easily by expanding ( a ( in terms
of the ($21 states in (a / LT,/p) and expanding the right-
hand side of (15) in powers of a*. The last-mentioned
expansion is done by means of the generating function
for the Hermite polynotnials. The result is
($11Z ; p)= (IZ!)-lI2tnexp(-9 IP 1 2+P2t*2)Hn(P/2~rt)
,
I n arriving a t the last results we have used Eq. (6)
(15')
and written c, for coshr and s, for sinhr. I n Eq. (10) we
make use of two properties of the coherent states, and H , is the nth order Hermite
where t = (~,e-~q/2c,)'/~
namely, (a 1 rit=a*(a 1 ; (a 1 ci= (alda*+&a)(a 1 , which polynomial.
gives us the following differential equation for (a I U,IP) :
C. Expectation Values
The simplest way to compute expectation values in
this approach is by means of the characteristic function.
T h e expectation value of any positive integral power of
The solution to this is
x, p, or a linear combination of these may be obtained
from the characteristic function of the operator 2 = y&
+y*cit, y being an arbitrary conlplex number. By a
straightforward application of E_q. (IS), we find the
characteristic function C A ( ( )of A in the state / z; a) to
where I< may depend on a, P, P*, Y, and p, but not on be
a*. We can use the unitarity of U , to determine the
functional form of K. ?tTehave C ~ ( t ) = ( z ; a : jexp[it(yci+y*&t)](z; a )
= exp[$(iE)2i k 1 2+it(k*a*+ka)], (16)
( a ,UzlP?*=(PI Uzlla?=(PI LT-Za). (13)
where k = yc,-y*s,ei".
4 I n exactly the same fashion one can demonstrate that all of The expectation value of A n is given by
the properties of the states 12; a ) as regards the expansion of
operators, diagonal representation, quasiprobability distributions,
etc., follow from those of the la) states automatically. Equation
(9) is a special case of the identity for overcomplete states which
may be found in J. R. Kiauder, J. Math. Phys. 5, 177 (1964).
1 E Q U I V A L E N C E C L A S S E S O F R1lINIR/IUM U N C E R T A I N T Y 9 3219

If we let y = l / X f i , then =x and we find We can ask what is the most general Hamiltonian
that keeps a minimal packet minimal. This question has
been answered for the special case of coherent states by
Sudarshan and Mehta.5 They show that the most
general Hamiltonian that keeps an a state an a state is
I n a siinilar manner, we also find given (in Heisenberg representation) by
(p),, ,= A d Im[a(c,+s,ei3], (18b)
A AX)^],;^= (1/2X2)[c,2+sT2- 2s,cT coscp] , (18c) The functions w(t) and P(t) must be real to make H(t)
Hermitian.
We can use this result and the unitary equivalence of
general minimal packets to coherent states to arrive a t
the form of the most general minimality-preserving
The last of these results shows that the state / z; a ) Hamiltonian. The result is
is a minimal uncertainty packet only if z is real. Notice
also that the variances are independent of a. +
H (t) =o (t)c, (t)&+(t)d (t) i w ( t ) ~(t) +
, [d2 (t) dt2(t)]
+g(t)d'(t)+gY:(t)&(t)+b(t), (21)
V. z CLASSES where c,(t) = coshr(t), s,(t) = sinhr(t), r(t) = any real
We can group the states jz; a ) into equivalence positive function of t; and w(t), b(t) are real but other-
classes, each of which is specified by its own particular wise arbitrary; g(t) is also arbitrary.
z. Since the width of these packets is independent of a,
we may regard the equivalence relation as being "having VII. DISCUSSION
the same width as."
The Weyl operator D(P)=exp(P&t-P*&) acting on a We have demonstrated the unitary equivalence of all
given state 1 z; a) talies it into a width-equivalent one. minimum-uncertainty packets to the coherent states.
This can be seen as follows: I t is clear that these results are easily extended to the
case of more than one degree of freedom. The technique
einployed here serves to reveal in a simple way the
From Eq. (6) we can also show that U-,D(P)U-,I is structure of minimal-uncertainty packets. The coherent
equal to D (@~,+P*s,e-~+'). states have found a very wide range of usefulness in a
Since D(a) 1 0)= 1 a ) and variety of contexts and the structure discussed here
seems to be relevant to that usefulness. For example, I
have been able to generate exact solutions to some
we have nonlinear oscillator problems and also arrive a t known
solutions to linear parametric problems in a simple way.
I n a future paper the details of this and a number of
other applications will be given.
where a= Im[~,~a+s,(ap*e-~~)]. Hence D(P) does not
It is of interest to note that in a state of mininlunl
alter the value of z and is thus reduced by z classes. For
uncertainty product, the position and momentum vari-
real z, we have U,U,l= U,+,l, so we can transform a
ables are uncorrelated. This is because a correlation
minimal packet from one class to another by means
between x and p would serve as a constraint on the
of U,.
minimization of the uncertainty product and prevent it
VI. TIME EVOLUTION O F I z ; a) from attaining its lowest possible value.
I n Schrijdinger representation, the state a t time t The results reported here have a very interesting
which evolves from I z; a ) a t t = O is given by I z; a ) $ bearing on quantum optics. First note that of all the z
= exp(-iHt) 1 z; a). H is the Hamiltonian operator
classes it is the z = 0 class that contains the state 0) :
governing the system involved. which for quantum optics is the no-photon state.
Let us consider the case of an harmonic oscillator Furthermore it is only the z = 0 class that remains
initially in the state I z ; a). Then the Hamiltonian is mifzimal a t all times under the action of the free-field
H = w (did++). A simple calculation then shows that un- Hamiltonian. Hence propagation of miniinality (in
der these circumstances we have I z; a) t= I zeZiUt ; aeciUt ) . time) alone serves to set the coherent states apart from
So we see that the free oscillator Hamiltonian will take all other minimum-uncertainty states. I n this sense we
a state out of its z class but periodically return it. I n may identify coherence with minimality.
particular, if z is real a t t = 0 (i.e., cp=O), then a t a later E. C. G. Sudarshan and C. L. Mehta, Pllys. Letters 22, 574
time the state is in general no longer a minimal packet. (1966).