We begin our study of many body quantum mechanics by examining a number of systems where eigenstates and eigenvalues may be found explicitly for any number of particles. Be warned that these situations are highly atypical – but are nevertheless very informative.
Reading: {% cite Baym:1969 %}.
Bosons and Fermions
An
Systems of indistinguishable particles are described by totally symmetric or totally antisymmetric wavefunctions.
Just to be clear, totally symmetric means the wavefunction is unchanged by exchanging any two coordinates, whereas totally antisymmetric means that it changes sign.
A good fraction of this course is devoted to exploring the ramifications of this fact. Perhaps we should therefore give a very quick summary of why it appears to be true.
The first question is: what are indistinguishable particles? I’ll give a theorist’s answer. Indistinguishable particles are those described by Hamiltonians that are invariant under permuting the particle’s labels. Thus the sum of single particle Hamiltonians
[did you remember that
does not, on account of the masses being all different. Any time we have a symmetry operation that commutes with the Hamiltonian, the eigenstates of that symmetry are preserved by time evolution with that Hamiltonian. Thus a symmetric potential
The Hamiltonian of indistinguishable particles commutes with every operator of particle exchange, defined by
These operators satisfy
We classify particles into symmetric bosons and antisymmetric fermions, named for Bose and Fermi respectively (the whimsical terminology is Dirac’s). The distinction works equally well for composite particles, provide we ignore the internal degrees of freedom and discuss only the center of mass coordinate.
All matter in the universe is made up of fermions: electrons, quarks, etc., but you can easily convince yourself that an even number of fermions make a composite boson (e.g. a
Two Particles
A pair of particles is described by a wavefunction
Accounting for indistinguishability, we have either
with the upper sign for bosons and the lower for fermions (The
Classically, if you had a function
This also follows from taking the square modulus of
In particular,
One dramatic illustration of this deviation from our classical intuition is provided by the Hong–Ou–Mandel effect in quantum optics. In simplified terms, we imagine wavepackets describing two photons (bosons) approaching a 50:50 beam splitter from either side. Because of the unitarity of scattering, the two photons end up in orthogonal states. For example,
If we start in
What state do we end up in?

Product States
The Hamiltonian of a system of
where
Let’s denote the eigenstates of the single particle Hamiltonian by
A set of labels
(We will frequently switch between the wavefunction
Such states are called product states. A general state will be expressed as a superposition of product states: they are special states which provide a frequently convenient basis.
As we’ve just discussed, however, we should really be dealing with a totally symmetric or totally antisymmetric wavefunction, depending on whether our identical particles are bosons or fermions. To write these down we introduce the operators of symmetrization and antisymmetrization
Here’s the definition of the various quantities in
- The sums are over all
permutations of objects. One way to think of a permutation is as a one-to-one correspondence (or bijection) between the set and itself, so that 1 is mapped to , etc.. denotes the corresponding permutation operator is the signature of the permutation, equal to for permutations involving an even number of exchanges, and for an odd number.
The normalization factors yield normalized wavefunctions if the single particle state
The normalization factor in the boson case involves the occupation numbers
Verify that the normalization factors in
are correct.
A more formal way of putting things is as follows. We first consider the space spanned by states of the form
Note that the fermion wavefunction takes the form of a Slater determinant (though it appears first in {% cite dirac1926 %}).
The vanishing of a determinant when two rows or two columns are identical means that the wavefunction is zero if two particle coordinates coincide (
The 1D Fermi Gas
Let’s consider perhaps the simplest many particle system one can think of: noninteracting particles on a ring. If the ring has circumference
with
Ground State
Let’s find the
That was easy! The fermion case is harder.
Since the occupation of each level is at most one, the lowest energy is obtained by filling each level with one particle, starting at the bottom. If we have an odd number of particles, this means filling the levels with
the Slater determinant
Let’s evaluate this complicated looking expression in a simple case. With three particles we have
The vanishing of the wavefunction when
Show this using the Vandermonde determinant
which can be proved in a variety of ways. Proving directly that is an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian is not easy, but can be accomplished using the identity
Check carefully that
is periodic and totally antisymmetric.
Let’s take the opportunity to introduce some terminology. The wavevector of the last fermion added is called the Fermi wavevector and denoted
Density; Density Matrix; Pair Distribution
Having a many particle wave function is one thing, but what to do with it? Bear in mind that


Since
The one particle distribution is related to the average density of particles, given by
Can you explain why this is the density? Think about the simpler case of two particles, with discrete locations. Why is the expected number of particles at position
What if we have more particles?
Normalization of the wavefunction then implies
We can regard
The single particle density matrix is a generalization of the expectation of the density, and is defined as (we’ll see shortly why this is a useful quantity)
Show that the average number of particles in a single particle state
is
Starting from the Slater determinant
(i.e. not from the explicit form ), show that for the ground state of the Fermi gas is where is the average density.
Find the average number of particles in a momentum state
using Note that in a translationally invariant system , and is the Fourier transform of .
To understand the origin of the name single particle density matrix, recall that the density matrix
describes a mixed state of a quantum system, and is the appropriate description when the quantum state is not known. is a positive definite hermitian operator satisfying . Its spectral resolution can be thought of as a statistical mixture of different quantum states with probabilities .
One natural way in which density matrices arise from pure states is as follows. The Hilbert space of a composite system consists of a tensor product of two or more components
. Starting from the density matrix corresponding to a pure state, we can obtain a density matrix for the component alone by ‘tracing out’ the subsystem. The probability for system to be in state is Thus you can think of the single particle density matrix as arising from tracing out particles from an -particle system.
We can also consider marginal probability distribution of a pair of particles, and define the pair distribution function
Starting from the Slater determinant
, show that This vanishes at , consistent with the Pauli principle.
A natural question:
Show that the correct relationship is
Impenetrable Bose Gas
There’s a bit more mileage in the 1D Fermi gas yet. Consider the following Hamiltonian, which we’ll study in more detail in Lecture 15
For bosons, it happens that the Hamiltonian can still be solved exactly. For now, however, we’ll concern ourselves only with the limit of infinite interaction:
Why?
Just like that, we’ve solved our first interacting many body system (and with infinite coupling, no less)!
Thus the ground state on the ring has the form
It’s not hard to see why this works. For a state to have a finite energy, the wavefunction must vanish whenever two coordinates coincide. This is because the interation energy has the expectation value
But we already have a complete set of eigenstates that obey this condition, namely the free fermion Slater determinants. It remains to make them symmetric functions by taking the modulus.
This mapping is quite powerful, and allows us to calculate any observable of the impenetrable Bose gas in terms of free fermions as long as that observable is insensitive to taking the modulus of the wavefunction. Thus the average density
Show this explicitly.
This means that the momentum distribution is not given by
References
{% bibliography –cited %}