4.6 Article

Nonequilibrium quantum thermodynamics of determinantal many-body systems: Application to the Tonks-Girardeau and ideal Fermi gases

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW A
卷 102, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.102.043312

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [DP170101423, DP190101515]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We develop a general approach for calculating the characteristic function of the work distribution of quantum many-body systems in a time-varying potential, whose many-body wave function can be cast in the Slater determinant form. Our results are applicable to a wide range of systems including an ideal gas of spinless fermions in one dimension, the Tonks-Girardeau (TG) gas of hard-core bosons, as well as a one-dimensional gas of hard-core anyons. In order to illustrate the utility of our approach, we focus on the TG gas confined to an arbitrary time-dependent trapping potential. In particular, we use the determinant representation of the many-body wave function to characterized the nonequilibrium thermodynamics of the TG gas and obtain exact and computationally tractable expressions- in terms of Fredholm determinants-for the mean work, the work probability distribution function, the nonadiabaticity parameter, and the Loschmidt amplitude. When applied to a harmonically trapped TG gas, our results for the mean work and the nonadiabaticity parameter reduce to those derived previously using an alternative approach. We next propose to use periodic modulation of the trap frequency in order to drive the system to highly non-equilibrium states by taking advantage of the phenomenon of parametric resonance. Under such driving protocol, the nonadiabaticity parameter may reach large values, which indicates a large amount of irreversible work being done on the system as compared to sudden quench protocols considered previously. This scenario is realizable in ultracold atom experiments, aiding fundamental understanding of all thermodynamic properties of the system.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据