The Interaction of Radiation and Matter: Quantum
Theory (cont.)
III. Representations
of Photon States (pdf)
1. Fock or "Number" States: [1]
As we have seen, the Fock or number states
 |
[ III-1 ] |
are complete set eigenstates of an important group of commuting
observables -- viz.
,
and
.
Reprise of Characteristics and Properties
of Fock States:
a. The expectation value of the number operator and the
fractional
uncertainty associated with a single Fock state:
 |
[ III-2a ] |
 |
[ III-2b ] |
b. Expectation value of the fields associated with a single mode:
For one mode Equations [ II-24a ] and [ II-24b ] reduce to
 |
[ III-3a ] |
 |
[ III-3b ] |
where

 |
[ III-4a ] |
 |
[ III-4b ] |

c. Phase of field associated with single mode:
To obtain something analogous to the classical theory we would
like to separate the creation and destruction operators (and, thus, the
electric and magnetic field operators) into a product of amplitude and
phase operators. Following Susskind and Glogower,[2]
we define a
phase operator,
such that
 |
[ III-5 ] |
Defined in this way, the basic properties of the phase operator
may be evaluated from known properties of the creation, destruction and
number operators. Inverting, we obtain
 |
[ III-6 ] |
and since
,
it follows that
 |
[ III-7 ] |
but only in this order! Operating
on number states with the phase operators, we obtain from Equation [ I-26
]
 |
[ III-8 ] |
Consequently, the only nonvanishing
matrix elements of the phase operator are
 |
[ III-9 ] |
The phase operators defined by Equation [ III-36 ] do have
the felicitous or
classically analogous property of revealing magnitude
independent information, but unfortunately they are nonHermitian
operators -- i.e.
-- and, hence, cannot represent observables.
However, they may be
paired into operators that are observables
-- viz.
 |
[ III-10 ] |
which have the following nonvanishing matrix elements:
 |
[ III-11 ] |
These nearly commuting operators [3]
may be adopted as the quantum mechanical operators which represent (as
we will demonstrate anon) the observable phase properties of the electromagnetic
field.
For the Fock state:
 |
[ III-12a ] |
 |
[ III-12b ] |
 |
[ III-12c ] |
c. The coordinate or Schrödinger representation of state:
Recall from Equations [ I-10a ] and [I-31] that
 |
[ III-13 ] |
Therefore, the probability
of eigenvalues q for a given Fock state
is give by
 |
[ III-14 ] |
d. Approximate "localization" of a photon: [4]
Of course a plane wave is distributed or "de-localized" in
both time and space. Defining the "wave function for a photon" is a task
fraught with danger,[5] but the simpler task of defining
a wave function approximately localized at a given instant is relatively
straight forward -- viz.
 |
[ III-14 ] |
2. Photon States of Well-defined Phase:
Consider the state defined by
 |
[ III-15 ] |
Clearly,
given the orthonormal properties of the number states. Essential question:
Is this state an eigenstate of the phase operators? To answer
the question we need to consider the followingpotential
eigenvalue equation:
 |
[ III-16a ] |
Using Equations [ III-10 ] and [ III-10 ], we obtain
 |
[ III-16b ] |
so that the state
fails to be a strict eigenket of
by terms that diminish faster than
as
.
Similarly, we can see that diagonal matrix elements of
and
are given by
 |
[ III-17a ] |
 |
[ III-17b ] |
Reprise of Characteristics and Properties of
Phase States:
a. The expectation value of the number operator and the
fractional
uncertainty associated with a state of well-defined phase:
 |
[ III-18a ] |
 |
[ III-18b ] |
b. Expectation value of the fields associated with a single mode:
From Equation [ III-3a ]
 |
[ III-19 ] |

c. Phase of field associated with single mode:
 |
[ III-20a ] |
 |
[ III-20b ] |
d. Probability of photon number:
Finally, we may easily deduce the probability of finding n
photons (i.e.the photon statistics) in a particular state of well
defined phase -- viz.
 |
[ III-50 ] |
We see that there is a equal, but small probability of any
number: this agrees with the intuition that the magnitude of the field
is completely undetermined if the phase is precisely known!
3. Coherent Photon States: [6]
It would, indeed, be useful to have eigenstates of the destruction
operator (electric or magnetic field) -- viz.
 |
[ III-51 ] |
Reprise of Characteristics and Properties of Coherent
States:
a. The Fock state representation of the coherent state:
Since.
and
, then
and we are able to write a representative of the sought state in
the number state basis -- viz.
 |
[ III-52a ] |
or
 |
[ III-52b ] |
Using the expansion of the identity operator, the eigenket
becomes
 |
[ III-53 ] |
To normalize the eigenket write
 |
[ III-54 ] |
so that
. Finally, we see that
 |
[ III-55 ] |
is a normalize representation of the eigenkets of the destruction
operator.
b. The expectation value of the number operator and the fractional
uncertainty associated with a coherent state:
 |
[ III-56a ] |
 |
[ III-56b ] |
Thus, we see that the fractional uncertainty
diminishes with mean photon number!
c. Expectation value of the electric field associated with a single
mode:
From Equation [ III-3a ]
 |
[ III-57a ] |
where
.[7]
 |
[ III-57b ] |
Electric Field Associated
with a Coherent State
State with largest a
|
 |
State with smallest a
|
d. Probability of photon number:
From the representation of the coherent state given in Equation
[ III-55 ] we may easily deduce the probability of finding n photons
(the photon statistics) in a particular coherent state is given by a Poisson
distribution characterized by the mean value
.
-- viz.
 |
[ III-58 ] |
SAMPLE POISSON DISTRIBUTIONS - COHERENT STATE PHOTON STATISTICS


e. Phase of field associated with single mode:
 |
[ III-59a] |
Unfortunately, it is not possible to evaluate this summation
analytically. However, Carruthers [8] has given an asymptotic
expansion which is valid for a large mean number of photons --
viz.
 |
[ III-59b] |
f. Coherent states as a basis:
As we will see presently, the coherent states are very useful
in describing the quantized electromagnetic field, but, alas, there is
a complication -- the coherent states are not truly orthogonal!
From Equation [ III-6 ] we see that
 |
[ III-60 ] |
so that
 |
[ III-61 ] |
That is, the eigenkets are approximately
orthogonal only when
is large!
g. The "displacement operator:"
There are a growing and significant set of applications where
it is useful to express the coherent states directly in terms of the vacuum
state
.
If we use the number state generating rule
-- i.e. Equation [ I-27 ] -- the coherent state may
be written in the form
 |
[ III-62 ] |
If we make us of the Baker-Hausdorff theorem,[9]we
may easily show that
 |
[ III-63 ] |
so that
may be interpreted as a creation
operator which generates a coherent
state from the vacuum. (Its adjoint operator
is a destructionoperator which destroys a state).
In some treatments
is described as the "displacement operator" (written
)
[10]
and the coherent states are called the "displaced states of the vacuum."
[11]
To explore this point of view (and to give some meaning to the phase of
the coherent state eigenvalue), we may express
in a two-dimensional, dimensionless "phase space" representation. To that
end, following Equation [ I-16 ], we write the dimensionless coordinate
as
 |
[ III-64a ] |
and the dimensionless momentum as
 |
[ III-64b ] |
so that
 |
[ III-64c ] |
and since these variables are canonical [12]
 |
[ III-64d ] |
Since
 |
[ III-65 ] |
the mode field (see Equation [II-24a])
 |
[ III-66a ] |
becomes
 |
[ III-66b ] |
Since
has a coordinate space representation [13]
and
has a momentum representation
Then
 |
[ III-67a ] |
and
 |
[ III-67b ] |
Thus,
defines or generates a two-dimensional Taylor expansion when it acts on
a function of
and
.
In particular, if we take the "phase space" representation of the ground
or vacuum state
as the product of two Gaussians (see Equations [ I-10a ] and [ I-29 ]),
then
represents a shift or displacement of this "phase space" representation
--
i.e.
 |
[ III-68 ] |
In light of Equation [ II-23b ],
we can write
 |
[ III-69 ] |
where
.
h. The diagonal coherent-state representation of the density operator
(Glauber-Sudarshan P-representation):
It may be easily established that
 |
[ III-70 ] |
so that it seems quite reseasonable to look for a representation of
the density matrix is the form
 |
[ III-71 ] |
For a pure coherent state, P is clearly a two-dimensional
delta function
Example 1 -- Coherent state
 |
[ III-72 ] |
In general, using Equation [ III-60 ] -- i.e.
 |
[ III-60 ] |
we may find a simple procedure for finding the P-representation
by writing
 |
[III-73 ] |
Thus,
is the two-dimensional Fourier transform of the function
and we may write
 |
[ III-74 ] |
As a second example, consider a thermal radiation field described
by a canonical ensemble
 |
[III-75 ] |
where
.
Thus,
 |
[III-76 ] |
and
 |
[III-77 ] |
so that
 |
[III-78 ] |
Thus, we can write
 |
[III-79 ] |
and
 |
[III-80 ] |
Finally, we see that
Example 2 -- Thermal radiation - a chaotic
state
 |
[III-81 ] |
As a third example, consider Fock or number state. From Equation
[ III-55 ] we see that
 |
[III-82a ] |
and
 |
[ III-82b ] |
so that
Example 3 -- Pure Fock or number state
 |
[ III-82b ] |
i. The Glauber-Sudarshan-Klauder "optical equivalence" theorem:
Suppose we have some "normally ordered" function
 |
[III-83 ] |
The expectation value is given by
 |
[III-84 ] |
Using Equation [ III-71 ] we see that
 |
[III-85a ] |
or, finally, the "optical equivalence"
theorem
 |
[III-85b ] |
j. The Uncertainty Relationship for
:
Since
we see from Equation [ III-64a ] that
 |
[ III-86 ] |
where
symbollizes the normally ordered expectation value of the operator
.
From Equation [III-85b ]
 |
[ III-87 ] |
 |
[ III-88 ] |
Therefore, if we choose
(and
)
such that
,
then
and
(squeezed states)!
[1] In what follows, for simplicity we drop the
subscripts on the operators and state vectors with the obvious meaning
that
,
,
etc...
[2] Susskind, L. and Glogower, J., Physics,1,
49 (1964)
[3] Also, it may be easily established that the matrix
elements of their commutator are given by

[4] See Section 10.4.2 in Leonard Mandel and Emil Wolf,
Optical
Coherence and Quantum Optics, Cambridge Press (1995), ISBN 0-521-417112.
[5] See Section 1.5.4 in Marlan O. Scully and M. Suhail
Zubairy, Quantum Optics, Cambridge Press (1997), ISBN 0-521-43458.
[6] The coherent state is a Harvard invention!
See R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. 131, 2766 (1963).
[7] Similarly
for the coherent state, so that
.
[8] Carruthers, P. and Nieto, M. M., Phys. Rev.
Lett.
14, 387 (1965)
[9] The Baker-Hausdorff theorem or identity may be
stated as

where

For a proof, see, for example, Charles P. Slichter's Principles
of Magnetic Resonance, Appendix A or William Louisell's Radiation
and Noise in Quantum Electronics.
[10] We can (or rather you will) show that

and

[11] See Elements of Quantum Optics, Pierre
Meystre and Murray Sargent III, Spinger-Verlag (1991), ISBN 0-387-54190-X.
[12] Of course, in general

where
[13] If this unfamiliar, see Equations [ I-20 ] and
[ I-22 ] in the lecture notes entitled The Interaction of Radiation
and Matter: Semiclassical Theory.
Back to top
This page was prepared and is maintained
by R. Victor Jones, jones@deas.harvard.edu
Last updated April 11, 2000