Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty''

We demonstrate that the recent paper by Jana and Roy entitled ''Non-Hermitian quantum mechanics with minimal length uncertainty'' [SIGMA 5 (2009), 083, 7 pages, arXiv:0908.1755] contains various misconceptions. We compare with an analysis on the same topic carried out previously...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications
Date:2009
Main Authors: Bagchi, B., Fring, A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Інститут математики НАН України 2009
Online Access:https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/149130
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Journal Title:Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Cite this:Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty'' / B. Bagchi, A. Fring // Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications. — 2009. — Т. 5. — Бібліогр.: 2 назв. — англ.

Institution

Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
_version_ 1859706655655067648
author Bagchi, B.
Fring, A.
author_facet Bagchi, B.
Fring, A.
citation_txt Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty'' / B. Bagchi, A. Fring // Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications. — 2009. — Т. 5. — Бібліогр.: 2 назв. — англ.
collection DSpace DC
container_title Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications
description We demonstrate that the recent paper by Jana and Roy entitled ''Non-Hermitian quantum mechanics with minimal length uncertainty'' [SIGMA 5 (2009), 083, 7 pages, arXiv:0908.1755] contains various misconceptions. We compare with an analysis on the same topic carried out previously in our manuscript [arXiv:0907.5354]. In particular, we show that the metric operators computed for the deformed non-Hermitian Swanson models differs in both cases and is inconsistent in the former.
first_indexed 2025-12-01T02:22:33Z
format Article
fulltext Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications SIGMA 5 (2009), 089, 2 pages Comment on “Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty”? Bijan BAGCHI † and Andreas FRING ‡ † Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Calcutta, 92 Acharya Prafulla Chandra Road, Kolkata 700 009, India E-mail: BBagchi123@rediffmail.com ‡ Centre for Mathematical Science, City University London, Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, UK E-mail: A.Fring@city.ac.uk Received August 18, 2009; Published online September 17, 2009 doi:10.3842/SIGMA.2009.089 Abstract. We demonstrate that the recent paper by Jana and Roy entitled “Non-Hermitian quantum mechanics with minimal length uncertainty” [SIGMA 5 (2009), 083, 7 pages, arXiv:0908.1755] contains various misconceptions. We compare with an analysis on the same topic carried out previously in our manuscript [arXiv:0907.5354]. In particular, we show that the metric operators computed for the deformed non-Hermitian Swanson models differs in both cases and is inconsistent in the former. Key words: non-Hermitian Hamiltonians; deformed canonical commutation relations; mini- mal length 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 81Q10; 46C15; 81Q12 It is known for some time that the deformations of the standard canonical commutation relations between the position operator P and the momentum operator X will inevitably lead to a minimal length, that is a bound beyond which the localization of space-time events are no longer possible. In a recent manuscript [1] we investigated various limits of the q-deformationed relations [X, P ] = i~qf(N)(αδ + βγ) + i~(q2 − 1) αδ + βγ ( δγX2 + αβ P 2 + iαδXP − iβγPX ) , in conjunction with the constraint 4αγ = (q2 + 1), with α, β, γ, δ ∈ R and f being an arbitrary function of the number operator N . One may consider various types of Hamiltonian systems, either Hermitian or non-Hermitian, and replace the original standard canonical variables (x0, p0), obeying [x0, p0] = i~, by (X, P ). It is crucial to note that even when the undeformed Hamiltonian is Hermitian H(x0, p0) = H†(x0, p0) the deformed Hamiltonian is inevitably non-Hermitian H(X, P ) 6= H†(X, P ) as a consequence of the fact that X and/or P are no longer Hermitian. Of course one may also deform Hamiltonians, which are already non-Hermitian when undeformed H(x0, p0) 6= H†(x0, p0). In both cases a proper quantum mechanical description requires the re-definition of the metric to compensate for the introduction of non-Hermitian variables and in the latter an additional change due to the fact that the Hamiltonian was non-Hermitian in the first place. In a certain limit, as specified in [1], X and P allow for a well-known representation of the form X = (1+τp2 0)x0 and P = p0, which in momentum space, i.e. x0 = i~∂p0 , corresponds to the one used by Jana and Roy [2], up to an irrelevant additional term i~γ̃P . (Whenever constants with the same name but different meanings occur in [2] and [1] we dress the former with a tilde.) ?This paper is a contribution to the Proceedings of the 5-th Microconference “Analytic and Algebraic Me- thods V”. The full collection is available at http://www.emis.de/journals/SIGMA/Prague2009.html mailto:BBagchi123@rediffmail.com mailto:A.Fring@city.ac.uk http://dx.doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2009.089 http://dx.doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2009.083 http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1755 http://arxiv.org/abs/0907.5354 http://www.emis.de/journals/SIGMA/Prague2009.html 2 B. Bagchi and A. Fring The additional term can simply be gauged away and has no physical significance. Jana and Roy have studied the non-Hermitian displaced harmonic oscillator and the Swanson model. As we have previously also investigated the latter in [1], we shall comment on the differences. The conventions in [2] are HJR(a, a†) = ωa†a + λa2 + δ̃(a†)2 + ω 2 with λ 6= δ̃ ∈ R and a = (P − iωX)/ √ 2m~ω, a† = (P + iωX)/ √ 2m~ω, whereas in [1] we used HBF(X, P ) = P 2 2m + mω2 2 X2 + iµ{X, P} with µ ∈ R as a starting point. Setting ~ = m = 1 it is easy to see that the models coincide when λ = −δ̃ and µ = δ̃ − λ. The Hamiltonians exhibit a “twofold” non-Hermiticity, one resulting from the fact that when λ 6= δ̃ even the undeformed Hamiltonian is non-Hermitian and the other resulting from the replacement of the Hermitian variables (x0, p0) by (X, P ). The factor of the metric operator to compensate for the non-Hermiticity of X coincides in both cases, but the factor which is required due to the non-Hermitian nature of the undeformed case differs in both cases ρBF = e2µP 2 and ρJR = (1 + τP 2) µ ω2τ . We have made the above identifications such that HJR(a, a†) = HBF(X, P ) and replaced the deformation parameter β used in [2] by τ employed in [1]. It is well known that when given only a non-Hermitian Hamiltonian, the metric operator can not be uniquely determined. However, as argued in [1] with the specification of the observable X, which coincides in [2] and [1], the outcome is unique and we can therefore directly compare ρBF and ρJR. The limit τ → 0 reduces the deformed Hamiltonian HJR = HBF to the standard Swanson Hamiltonian, such that ρJR and ρBF should acquire the form of a previously constructed metric operator. This is indeed the case for ρBF, but not for ρJR. In fact it is unclear how to carry out this limit for ρJR and we therefore conclude that the metric ρJR is incorrect. References [1] Bagchi B., Fring A., Minimal length in quantum mechanics and non-Hermitian Hamiltonian systems, arXiv:0907.5354. [2] Jana T.K., Roy P., Non-Hermitian quantum mechanics with minimal length uncertainty, SIGMA 5 (2009), 083, 7 pages, arXiv:0908.1755. http://arxiv.org/abs/0907.5354 http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1755 References
id nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-149130
institution Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
issn 1815-0659
language English
last_indexed 2025-12-01T02:22:33Z
publishDate 2009
publisher Інститут математики НАН України
record_format dspace
spelling Bagchi, B.
Fring, A.
2019-02-19T17:34:55Z
2019-02-19T17:34:55Z
2009
Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty'' / B. Bagchi, A. Fring // Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications. — 2009. — Т. 5. — Бібліогр.: 2 назв. — англ.
1815-0659
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 81Q10; 46C15; 81Q12
https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/149130
We demonstrate that the recent paper by Jana and Roy entitled ''Non-Hermitian quantum mechanics with minimal length uncertainty'' [SIGMA 5 (2009), 083, 7 pages, arXiv:0908.1755] contains various misconceptions. We compare with an analysis on the same topic carried out previously in our manuscript [arXiv:0907.5354]. In particular, we show that the metric operators computed for the deformed non-Hermitian Swanson models differs in both cases and is inconsistent in the former.
This paper is a contribution to the Proceedings of the 5-th Microconference “Analytic and Algebraic Methods V”.
en
Інститут математики НАН України
Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications
Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty''
Article
published earlier
spellingShingle Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty''
Bagchi, B.
Fring, A.
title Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty''
title_full Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty''
title_fullStr Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty''
title_full_unstemmed Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty''
title_short Comment on ''Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics with Minimal Length Uncertainty''
title_sort comment on ''non-hermitian quantum mechanics with minimal length uncertainty''
url https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/149130
work_keys_str_mv AT bagchib commentonnonhermitianquantummechanicswithminimallengthuncertainty
AT fringa commentonnonhermitianquantummechanicswithminimallengthuncertainty