Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Completely integrable Nonintegrable
Stable and unstable manifolds in the real phase space
Amphibious Complex orbits and Dynamical Tunneling両生複素軌道と動的トンネル効果
Akira Shudo (TMU)
Collaboration with K.S. Ikeda (Ritsumeikan), Y. Ishii (Kyushu), A. Ishikawa (TMU),Y. Hanada and A. Tanaka (TMU)
stable manifold unstable manifold
Completely integrable Nonintegrable
Y. Hanada (2014)
Stable and unstable manifolds in the real phase space
Amphibious Complex orbits and Dynamical Tunneling
Akira Shudo (TMU)
in honor of Professor Petr Seba’s 60th Birthday
Collaboration with K.S. Ikeda (Ritsumeikan), Y. Ishii (Kyushu), A. Ishikawa (TMU),Y. Hanada and A. Tanaka (TMU)
Amphibious Complex orbits and Dynamical Tunneling
Akira Shudo (TMU)
in honor of Professor Petr Seba’s 60th Birthday
1D systems
H =p2
2+ V(q)
Classically, always completely integrable.
2D systems
H =p2
1
2+
p22
2+ V(q1, q2)
Classically, nonintegrable in general.
Confinement occurs not only due to energy barriers, but also dynamical barriersrestrict the classical motion
configuration space-2
-1
0
1
2
-1.0- 0.5
0.00.5
1.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.02
� 2 � 1 1 2
� 1.0
� 0.5
0.5
1.0
1D systems
H =p2
2+ V(q)
Classically, always complete integrable.
2D systems
H =p2
1
2+
p22
2+ V(q1, q2)
Classically, nonintegrable in general.
Close analogy between Dynamical localization and Anderson localization
Still exponentially small. Why flooding does not occur ?
Quantum tunneling in 1D and 2D systems
Hamiltonian systems in 1D and 2D
両生複素軌道と動的トンネル効果
Poincare section of phase space
1D systems
H =p2
2+ V(q)
Classically, always completely integrable.
2D systems
H =p2
1
2+
p22
2+ V(q1, q2)
Classically, nonintegrable in general.
Confinement occurs not only due to energy barriers, but also dynamical barriersrestrict the classical motion
configuration space-2
-1
0
1
2
-1.0- 0.5
0.00.5
1.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.02
� 2 � 1 1 2
� 1.0
� 0.5
0.5
1.0
1D systems
H =p2
2+ V(q)
Classically, always complete integrable.
2D systems
H =p2
1
2+
p22
2+ V(q1, q2)
Classically, nonintegrable in general.
Close analogy between Dynamical localization and Anderson localization
Still exponentially small. Why flooding does not occur ?
Quantum tunneling in 1D and 2D systems
Hamiltonian systems in 1D and 2D
両生複素軌道と動的トンネル効果
Poincare section of phase space
x
-V(x)
x
-V(x)
Discrete maps (more generally)
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa!
F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb are dynamically separated.
F :"
p′q′
#=
"p − V′(q)
q + p′
#
Semiclassical approach
Complex paths and quantum tunneling Instanton
Quantum tunneling in double well potentialInstanton
it
x
Quantum tunneling in multidimensions
1D double well potential
2D double well potential
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
x
-V(x)
x
-V(x)
Discrete maps (more generally)
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa!
F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb are dynamically separated.
F :"
p′q′
#=
"p − V′(q)
q + p′
#
Semiclassical approach
Complex paths and quantum tunneling Instanton
Quantum tunneling in double well potentialInstanton
it
x
Quantum tunneling in multidimensions
1D double well potential
2D double well potential
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
Quantum tunneling in multidimensions
1D double well potential
2D double well potential
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
Quantum tunneling in multidimensions
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
1D systems
H =p2
2+ V(q)
Classically, always complete integrable.
2D systems
H =p2
1
2+
p22
2+ V(q1, q2)
Classically, nonintegrable in general.configuration space
Close analogy between Dynamical localization and Anderson localization
Still exponentially small. Why flooding does not occur ?
両生複素軌道と動的トンネル効果
Poincare section of phase space
Close analogy between Dynamical localization and Anderson localization
Still exponentially small. Why flooding does not occur ?
Quantum tunneling in 1D and 2D systems
Hamiltonian systems in 1D and 2D
- Confinement occurs not only due to energy barriers, but also dynamical barriers
- Chaos appears in phase space
両生複素軌道と動的トンネル効果
Poincare section of phase space
Quantum tunneling in multidimensions
1D double well potential
2D double well potential
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
Quantum tunneling in multidimensions
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
1D systems
H =p2
2+ V(q)
Classically, always complete integrable.
2D systems
H =p2
1
2+
p22
2+ V(q1, q2)
Classically, nonintegrable in general.configuration space
Close analogy between Dynamical localization and Anderson localization
Still exponentially small. Why flooding does not occur ?
両生複素軌道と動的トンネル効果
Poincare section of phase space
Close analogy between Dynamical localization and Anderson localization
Still exponentially small. Why flooding does not occur ?
Quantum tunneling in 1D and 2D systems
Hamiltonian systems in 1D and 2D
- Confinement occurs not only due to energy barriers, but also dynamical barriers
- Chaos appears in phase space
両生複素軌道と動的トンネル効果
Poincare section of phase space
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Area-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·
# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·
# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
s ! 0,β = ∞ s ! 0,β = 2 s ! 0,β = 0.1
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Area-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Aa Bb
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Aarea-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Aarea-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
Aa Bb
Quantum Tunneling in Nonintegrable systems
Akira Shudo (TMU)
Area-preserving map and mixed phase space
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Area-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·
# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·
# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
s ! 0,β = ∞ s ! 0,β = 2 s ! 0,β = 0.1
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Area-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Aa Bb
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Aarea-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Aarea-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
Aa Bb
Quantum Tunneling in Nonintegrable systems
Akira Shudo (TMU)
Area-preserving map and mixed phase space
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Aarea-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Area-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Aa Bb
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Aarea-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Aarea-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
Aa Bb
Quantum Tunneling in Nonintegrable systems
Akira Shudo (TMU)
Area-preserving map and mixed phase space
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Area-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Aa Bb
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Aarea-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
Classical dynamics in mixed phase space
Aarea-preserving map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p − V′(q)
q + p′
"
Forbidden process in classical dynamics
Aa ∩ F−n(Bb) = ∅ for ∀n, ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.
Quantum map
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Quantum map
U = e−i!T(p)e−
i!V(q)
Propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =#· · ·# $
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
Tunneling process in quantum dynamics
K(a, b) ! 0 even ifAa,Bb(∈ R) are dynamically separated.q p
Aa Bb
Quantum Tunneling in Nonintegrable systems
Akira Shudo (TMU)
Area-preserving map and mixed phase space
Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
γ: classical orbits connecting a and b
Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
2-D autonomous Hamiltonian H(q1, q2, p1, p2)
Constant of motion: H(q1, q2, p1, p2) = E
Poincare map F : Σ !→ Σ is area-preserving (symplectic)
Action of the closed loops C
S[C] =!
Cp · dq − Hdt
Difference of action of arbitrary closed loops C and C′
S[C] − S[C′] ="
T∇ × A · d2s (A = (p, 0,−H))
Since ∇ × A = −(q, p,−1), and the Hamiltonian vector field is parallel to the tube T ,
S[C] = S[C′]
On the constant energy surface
S[C] =!
Cp · dq
instanton
2-D autonomous Hamiltonian H(q1, q2, p1, p2)
Constant of motion: H(q1, q2, p1, p2) = E
Poincare map F : Σ !→ Σ is area-preserving (symplectic)
Action of the closed loops C
S[C] =!
Cp · dq − Hdt
Difference of action of arbitrary closed loops C and C′
S[C] − S[C′] ="
T∇ × A · d2s (A = (p, 0,−H))
Since ∇ × A = −(q, p,−1), and the Hamiltonian vector field is parallel to the tube T ,
S[C] = S[C′]
On the constant energy surface
S[C] =!
Cp · dq
Completely integrable Nonintegrableinstanton
Y. Hanada (2014)
(Greene, Percival, Berretti, Marmi, · · · )
2-D autonomous Hamiltonian H(q1, q2, p1, p2)
Constant of motion: H(q1, q2, p1, p2) = E
Poincare map F : Σ !→ Σ is area-preserving (symplectic)
Action of the closed loops C
S[C] =!
Cp · dq − Hdt
Difference of action of arbitrary closed loops C and C′
S[C] − S[C′] ="
T∇ × A · d2s (A = (p, 0,−H))
Since ∇ × A = −(q, p,−1), and the Hamiltonian vector field is parallel to the tube T ,
S[C] = S[C′]
On the constant energy surface
S[C] =!
Cp · dq
Completely integrable Nonintegrable
Complexified invariant manifold and natural boundaries
instanton
Y. Hanada (2014)
(Greene, Percival, Berretti, Marmi, · · · )
Natural boundary
As β (resp. M) increases, invariant curves obtained by integrable approxima-tion well approximate KAM curves on R2.
Turning points on R2 or close to R2 become dense, which makes the leadingsemiclassical approximation invalid.
With an increase in β, invariant curves for the integrable map (g = 0, s = 0)well approximate KAM curves on R2.
Analytic continuation ofan invariant curve
2-D autonomous Hamiltonian H(q1, q2, p1, p2)
Constant of motion: H(q1, q2, p1, p2) = E
Poincare map F : Σ !→ Σ is area-preserving (symplectic)
Action of the closed loops C
S[C] =!
Cp · dq − Hdt
Difference of action of arbitrary closed loops C and C′
S[C] − S[C′] ="
T∇ × A · d2s (A = (p, 0,−H))
Since ∇ × A = −(q, p,−1), and the Hamiltonian vector field is parallel to the tube T ,
S[C] = S[C′]
On the constant energy surface
S[C] =!
Cp · dq
instanton
2-D autonomous Hamiltonian H(q1, q2, p1, p2)
Constant of motion: H(q1, q2, p1, p2) = E
Poincare map F : Σ !→ Σ is area-preserving (symplectic)
Action of the closed loops C
S[C] =!
Cp · dq − Hdt
Difference of action of arbitrary closed loops C and C′
S[C] − S[C′] ="
T∇ × A · d2s (A = (p, 0,−H))
Since ∇ × A = −(q, p,−1), and the Hamiltonian vector field is parallel to the tube T ,
S[C] = S[C′]
On the constant energy surface
S[C] =!
Cp · dq
instanton
Y. Hanada (2014)
(Greene, Percival, Berretti, Marmi, · · · )
2-D autonomous Hamiltonian H(q1, q2, p1, p2)
Constant of motion: H(q1, q2, p1, p2) = E
Poincare map F : Σ !→ Σ is area-preserving (symplectic)
Action of the closed loops C
S[C] =!
Cp · dq − Hdt
Difference of action of arbitrary closed loops C and C′
S[C] − S[C′] ="
T∇ × A · d2s (A = (p, 0,−H))
Since ∇ × A = −(q, p,−1), and the Hamiltonian vector field is parallel to the tube T ,
S[C] = S[C′]
On the constant energy surface
S[C] =!
Cp · dq
Completely integrable Nonintegrableinstanton
Y. Hanada (2014)
(Greene, Percival, Berretti, Marmi, · · · )
2-D autonomous Hamiltonian H(q1, q2, p1, p2)
Constant of motion: H(q1, q2, p1, p2) = E
Poincare map F : Σ !→ Σ is area-preserving (symplectic)
Action of the closed loops C
S[C] =!
Cp · dq − Hdt
Difference of action of arbitrary closed loops C and C′
S[C] − S[C′] ="
T∇ × A · d2s (A = (p, 0,−H))
Since ∇ × A = −(q, p,−1), and the Hamiltonian vector field is parallel to the tube T ,
S[C] = S[C′]
On the constant energy surface
S[C] =!
Cp · dq
Completely integrable Nonintegrableinstanton
Y. Hanada (2014)
(Greene, Percival, Berretti, Marmi, · · · )
2-D autonomous Hamiltonian H(q1, q2, p1, p2)
Constant of motion: H(q1, q2, p1, p2) = E
Poincare map F : Σ !→ Σ is area-preserving (symplectic)
Action of the closed loops C
S[C] =!
Cp · dq − Hdt
Difference of action of arbitrary closed loops C and C′
S[C] − S[C′] ="
T∇ × A · d2s (A = (p, 0,−H))
Since ∇ × A = −(q, p,−1), and the Hamiltonian vector field is parallel to the tube T ,
S[C] = S[C′]
On the constant energy surface
S[C] =!
Cp · dq
Completely integrable Nonintegrable
Complexified invariant manifold and natural boundaries
instanton
Y. Hanada (2014)
(Greene, Percival, Berretti, Marmi, · · · )
How are disconnected regions connected ?
Complex dynamics in 1-dimensional maps
1-dimensional maps F : C !→ C
F : z′ = F(z)
Classify the orbits according to the behavior of n → ∞
I = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Fn(z) = ∞ } : Set of escaping points
K = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Fn(z) is bounded } : Filled Julia set
In particular
J = ∂K : Julia set
F = C − J : Fatou set
Note: Alternative definitions for FP, JP based on
(1) normal family, (2) equicontinuity, (3) density of periodic oribts
Complex dynamics in 1-dimensional maps
1-dimensional maps F : C !→ C
F : z′ = f (z)
Classify the orbits according to the behavior of n → ∞
IP = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Pn(z) = ∞ } : Set of escaping points
KP = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Pn(z) is bounded } : Filled Julia set
In particular
JP = ∂KP : Julia set
FP = C − JP : Fatou set
Note: Alternative definitions for FP, JP based on
(1) normal family, (2) equicontinuity, (3) density of periodic oribts
Complex dynamics in 1-dimensional maps
1-dimensional maps F : C !→ C
F : z′ = F(z)
Classify the orbits according to the behavior of n → ∞
I = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Fn(z) = ∞ } : Set of escaping points
K = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Fn(z) is bounded } : Filled Julia set
In particular
J = ∂K : Julia set
F = C − J : Fatou set
Note: Alternative definitions for FP, JP based on
(1) normal family, (2) equicontinuity, (3) density of periodic oribts
Complex dynamics in 1-dimensional maps
1-dimensional maps F : C !→ C
F : z′ = f (z)
Classify the orbits according to the behavior of n → ∞
IP = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Pn(z) = ∞ } : Set of escaping points
KP = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Pn(z) is bounded } : Filled Julia set
In particular
JP = ∂KP : Julia set
FP = C − JP : Fatou set
Note: Alternative definitions for FP, JP based on
(1) normal family, (2) equicontinuity, (3) density of periodic oribts
Complex dynamics in 1-dimensional maps
1-dimensional maps F : C !→ C
F : z′ = F(z)
Classify the orbits according to the behavior of n → ∞
I = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Fn(z) = ∞ } : Set of escaping points
K = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Fn(z) is bounded } : Filled Julia set
In particular
J = ∂K : Julia set
F = C − J : Fatou set
Note: Alternative definitions for FP, JP based on
(1) normal family, (2) equicontinuity, (3) density of periodic oribts
Complex dynamics in 1-dimensional maps
1-dimensional maps F : C !→ C
F : z′ = f (z)
Classify the orbits according to the behavior of n → ∞
IP = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Pn(z) = ∞ } : Set of escaping points
KP = { z ∈ C | limn→∞
Pn(z) is bounded } : Filled Julia set
In particular
JP = ∂KP : Julia set
FP = C − JP : Fatou set
Note: Alternative definitions for FP, JP based on
(1) normal family, (2) equicontinuity, (3) density of periodic oribts
Julia set in 1-D dynamics
・ F(z) = z2
I = { |z| > 1 }, K = { |z| ≤ 1 }, J = { |z| = 1 }
- z = 0 and z = ∞ are both attracting fixed points of F.The points z ∈ I tend to∞ and also the points z ∈ K − J converge toz = 0 monotonically.
- The orbits z ∈ J are chaotic.Putting z = e2πiθ, then the map on J can be reduced to θ %→ 2θ (mod 1).
Julia set in 1-D dynamics
・ F(z) = z2
I = { |z| > 1 }, K = { |z| ≤ 1 }, J = { |z| = 1 }
- z = 0 and z = ∞ are both attracting fixed points of F.The points z ∈ I tend to∞ and also the points z ∈ K − J converge toz = 0 monotonically.
- The orbits z ∈ J are chaotic.Putting z = e2πiθ, then the map on J can be reduced to θ %→ 2θ (mod 1).
Julia set in 1-D dynamics
・ F(z) = z2
I = { |z| > 1 }, K = { |z| ≤ 1 }, J = { |z| = 1 }
- z = 0 and z = ∞ are both attracting fixed points of F.The points z ∈ I tend to∞ and also the points z ∈ K − J converge toz = 0 monotonically.
- The orbits z ∈ J are chaotic.Putting z = e2πiθ, then the map on J can be reduced to θ %→ 2θ (mod 1).
・ F(z) = z2 + c
Julia set in 1-D dynamics
・ F(z) = z2
I = { |z| > 1 }, K = { |z| ≤ 1 }, J = { |z| = 1 }
- z = 0 and z = ∞ are both attracting fixed points of F.The points z ∈ I tend to∞ and also the points z ∈ K − Jconverge to z = 0 monotonically.
- The orbits z ∈ J are chaotic.Putting z = e2πiθ, then the map on J can be reduced toθ %→ 2θ (mod 1).
・ F(z) = z2 + c
The behavior around z = 0
Theorem (Koenigs) F(z) is holomorphic near z = 0 and has theTaylor expansion
F(z) = λz + c2z2 + · · · (0 < |λ| < 1)
Then there exists a conformal map φ : U → C which satisfies thefunctional equation (Schroder equation)
φ!F(z)"= λφ(z) (z ∈ U)
where U is a neighborhood of z = 0.
Note : If |λ| > 1, then one can show the same assertion by consideringthe inverse function.
z = 0 z = ∞
The behavior around z = 0
Theorem (Koenigs) F(z) is holomorphic near z = 0 and has theTaylor expansion
F(z) = λz + c2z2 + · · · (0 < |λ| < 1)
Then there exists a conformal map φ : U → C which satisfies thefunctional equation (Schroder equation)
φ!F(z)"= λφ(z) (z ∈ U)
where U is a neighborhood of z = 0.
Note : If |λ| > 1, then one can show the same assertion by consideringthe inverse function.
z = 0 z = ∞
Julia set in 1-D dynamics
・ F(z) = z2
I = { |z| > 1 }, K = { |z| ≤ 1 }, J = { |z| = 1 }
- z = 0 and z = ∞ are both attracting fixed points of F.The points z ∈ I tend to∞ and also the points z ∈ K − J converge toz = 0 monotonically.
- The orbits z ∈ J are chaotic.Putting z = e2πiθ, then the map on J can be reduced to θ %→ 2θ (mod 1).
Julia set in 1-D dynamics
・ F(z) = z2
I = { |z| > 1 }, K = { |z| ≤ 1 }, J = { |z| = 1 }
- z = 0 and z = ∞ are both attracting fixed points of F.The points z ∈ I tend to∞ and also the points z ∈ K − J converge toz = 0 monotonically.
- The orbits z ∈ J are chaotic.Putting z = e2πiθ, then the map on J can be reduced to θ %→ 2θ (mod 1).
Julia set in 1-D dynamics
・ F(z) = z2
I = { |z| > 1 }, K = { |z| ≤ 1 }, J = { |z| = 1 }
- z = 0 and z = ∞ are both attracting fixed points of F.The points z ∈ I tend to∞ and also the points z ∈ K − J converge toz = 0 monotonically.
- The orbits z ∈ J are chaotic.Putting z = e2πiθ, then the map on J can be reduced to θ %→ 2θ (mod 1).
・ F(z) = z2 + c
Julia set in 1-D dynamics
・ F(z) = z2
I = { |z| > 1 }, K = { |z| ≤ 1 }, J = { |z| = 1 }
- z = 0 and z = ∞ are both attracting fixed points of F.The points z ∈ I tend to∞ and also the points z ∈ K − Jconverge to z = 0 monotonically.
- The orbits z ∈ J are chaotic.Putting z = e2πiθ, then the map on J can be reduced toθ %→ 2θ (mod 1).
・ F(z) = z2 + c
The behavior around z = 0
Theorem (Koenigs) F(z) is holomorphic near z = 0 and has theTaylor expansion
F(z) = λz + c2z2 + · · · (0 < |λ| < 1)
Then there exists a conformal map φ : U → C which satisfies thefunctional equation (Schroder equation)
φ!F(z)"= λφ(z) (z ∈ U)
where U is a neighborhood of z = 0.
Note : If |λ| > 1, then one can show the same assertion by consideringthe inverse function.
z = 0 z = ∞
The behavior around z = 0
Theorem (Koenigs) F(z) is holomorphic near z = 0 and has theTaylor expansion
F(z) = λz + c2z2 + · · · (0 < |λ| < 1)
Then there exists a conformal map φ : U → C which satisfies thefunctional equation (Schroder equation)
φ!F(z)"= λφ(z) (z ∈ U)
where U is a neighborhood of z = 0.
Note : If |λ| > 1, then one can show the same assertion by consideringthe inverse function.
z = 0 z = ∞
Complex dynamics in 2-dimensional maps
Quantum tunneling in multidimension ?
How are disconnected regions connected ?
2-dimensional maps F : C2 !→ C2
F :!
z′1
z′2
"=
!f (z1, z2)g(z1, z2)
"
Orbits are classified according to the behavior of n → ±∞
I± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | limn→∞
F±n(z1, z2) = ∞ }K± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | lim
n→∞F±n(z1, z2) is bounded in C2 }
In particular
K = K+ ∩ K− : filled Julia set
J± = ∂K± : forward (resp. backward) Julia set
J = J+ ∩ J− : Julia set
Complex dynamics in 2-dimensional maps
Quantum tunneling in multidimension ?
How are disconnected regions connected ?
Complex dynamics in 2-dimensional maps
Quantum tunneling in multidimension ?
How are disconnected regions connected ?
2-dimensional maps F : C2 !→ C2
F :!
z′1
z′2
"=
!f (z1, z2)g(z1, z2)
"
Here the orbits are classified according to the behavior of n → ∞
I± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | limn→∞
P±n(z1, z2) = ∞ }K± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | lim
n→∞P±n(z1, z2) is bounded in C2 }
In particular
J = ∂K+ ∩ ∂K− : Julia set
K = K+ ∩ K− : filled Julia set
J± = ∂K± : forward (resp. backward) Julia set
J = J+ ∩ J− : Julia set
Complex dynamics in 2-dimensional maps
Quantum tunneling in multidimension ?
How are disconnected regions connected ?
2-dimensional maps F : C2 !→ C2
F :!
z′1
z′2
"=
!f (z1, z2)g(z1, z2)
"
Orbits are classified according to the behavior of n → ±∞
I± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | limn→∞
F±n(z1, z2) = ∞ }K± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | lim
n→∞F±n(z1, z2) is bounded in C2 }
In particular
K = K+ ∩ K− : filled Julia set
J± = ∂K± : forward (resp. backward) Julia set
J = J+ ∩ J− : Julia set
Complex dynamics in 2-dimensional maps
Quantum tunneling in multidimension ?
How are disconnected regions connected ?
Complex dynamics in 2-dimensional maps
Quantum tunneling in multidimension ?
How are disconnected regions connected ?
2-dimensional maps F : C2 !→ C2
F :!
z′1
z′2
"=
!f (z1, z2)g(z1, z2)
"
Here the orbits are classified according to the behavior of n → ∞
I± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | limn→∞
P±n(z1, z2) = ∞ }K± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | lim
n→∞P±n(z1, z2) is bounded in C2 }
In particular
J = ∂K+ ∩ ∂K− : Julia set
K = K+ ∩ K− : filled Julia set
J± = ∂K± : forward (resp. backward) Julia set
J = J+ ∩ J− : Julia set
Complex dynamics in 2-dimensional maps
Quantum tunneling in multidimension ?
How are disconnected regions connected ?
2-dimensional maps F : C2 !→ C2
F :!
z′1
z′2
"=
!f (z1, z2)g(z1, z2)
"
Orbits are classified according to the behavior of n → ±∞
I± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | limn→∞
F±n(z1, z2) = ∞ }K± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | lim
n→∞F±n(z1, z2) is bounded in C2 }
In particular
K = K+ ∩ K− : filled Julia set
J± = ∂K± : forward (resp. backward) Julia set
J = J+ ∩ J− : Julia set
Complex dynamics in 2-dimensional maps
Quantum tunneling in multidimension ?
How are disconnected regions connected ?
Complex dynamics in 2-dimensional maps
Quantum tunneling in multidimension ?
How are disconnected regions connected ?
2-dimensional maps F : C2 !→ C2
F :!
z′1
z′2
"=
!f (z1, z2)g(z1, z2)
"
Here the orbits are classified according to the behavior of n → ∞
I± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | limn→∞
P±n(z1, z2) = ∞ }K± = { (z1, z2) ∈ C2 | lim
n→∞P±n(z1, z2) is bounded in C2 }
In particular
J = ∂K+ ∩ ∂K− : Julia set
K = K+ ∩ K− : filled Julia set
J± = ∂K± : forward (resp. backward) Julia set
J = J+ ∩ J− : Julia set
Stable and unstable manifold theorem
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)
q + p′
"( V(q) : polynomial )
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Note : Ws(p) and Wu(p) are both locally 1-dimensional complex (2-dimensional
real) manifold in C2.
Stable and unstable manifold theorem
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)
q + p′
"( V(q) : polynomial )
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Note : Ws(p) and Wu(p) are both locally 1-dimensional complex (2-dimensional
real) manifold in C2.
Stable and unstable manifold theorem
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)
q + p′
"( V(q) : polynomial )
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Note : Ws(p) and Wu(p) are both locally 1-dimensional complex (2-dimensional
real) manifold in C2.
Stable and unstable manifold theorem
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)
q + p′
"( V(q) : polynomial )
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Note : Ws(p) and Wu(p) are both locally 1-dimensional complex (2-dimensional
real) manifold in C2.
Bedford E and Smillie J :Invent. Math. 103 (1991) 69-99; J. Amer. Math. Soc. 4 (1991) 657-679; Math. Ann. 294 (1992) 395-420;J.Geom.Anal. 8 (1998) 349-383; Annal. sci. de l′Ecole norm. super. 32 (1999) 455-497; American Journal o fMathematics 124 (2002) 221-271; Ann.Math. 148 (1998) 695-735; Ann.Math. 160 (2004) 1-26
Bedford E, Lyubich E and Smillie JInvent.Math. 112 (1993) 77-125; Invent.Math. 114 (1993) 277-288
Bedford E and Smillie J : J. Amer.Math. Soc. 4 (1991) 657-679Bedford E and Smillie J : Math. Ann. 294 (1992) 395-420Bedford E, Lyubich E and Smillie J : Invent.Math. 112 (1993) 77-125Bedford E, Lyubich E and Smillie J : Invent.Math. 114 (1993) 277-288Bedford E and Smillie J : J.Geom.Anal. 8 (1998) 349-383Bedford E and Smillie J : Annal. sci. de l′Ecole norm. super. 32 (1999) 455-497Bedford E and Smillie J : American Journal o f Mathematics 124 (2002) 221-271
Bedford E and Smillie J : Ann.Math. 148 (1998) 695-735Bedford E and Smillie J : Ann.Math. 160 (2004) 1-26
Stable and unstable manifold theorem
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)
q + p′
"( V(q) : polynomial )
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Note : Ws(p) and Wu(p) are both locally 1-dimensional complex (2-dimensional
real) manifold in C2.
Stable and unstable manifold theorem
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)
q + p′
"( V(q) : polynomial )
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Note : Ws(p) and Wu(p) are both locally 1-dimensional complex (2-dimensional
real) manifold in C2.
Bedford E and Smillie J :Invent. Math. 103 (1991) 69-99; J. Amer. Math. Soc. 4 (1991) 657-679; Math. Ann. 294 (1992) 395-420;J.Geom.Anal. 8 (1998) 349-383; Annal. sci. de l′Ecole norm. super. 32 (1999) 455-497; American Journal o fMathematics 124 (2002) 221-271; Ann.Math. 148 (1998) 695-735; Ann.Math. 160 (2004) 1-26
Bedford E, Lyubich E and Smillie JInvent.Math. 112 (1993) 77-125; Invent.Math. 114 (1993) 277-288
Bedford E and Smillie J : J. Amer.Math. Soc. 4 (1991) 657-679Bedford E and Smillie J : Math. Ann. 294 (1992) 395-420Bedford E, Lyubich E and Smillie J : Invent.Math. 112 (1993) 77-125Bedford E, Lyubich E and Smillie J : Invent.Math. 114 (1993) 277-288Bedford E and Smillie J : J.Geom.Anal. 8 (1998) 349-383Bedford E and Smillie J : Annal. sci. de l′Ecole norm. super. 32 (1999) 455-497Bedford E and Smillie J : American Journal o f Mathematics 124 (2002) 221-271
Bedford E and Smillie J : Ann.Math. 148 (1998) 695-735Bedford E and Smillie J : Ann.Math. 160 (2004) 1-26
p
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Stable and unstable manifold theorem
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)
q + p′
"( V(q) : polynomial )
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Note : Ws(p) and Wu(p) are both locally 1-dimensional complex (2-dimensional
real) manifold in C2.
p
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Note :
1. This theorem holds even in the system with mixed phase space.
2. Ws(p) and Wu(p) are both locally 1-dimensional complex( = 2-dimensional real) manifold in C2.
p
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Stable and unstable manifold theorem
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)
q + p′
"( V(q) : polynomial )
Theorem (Bedford-Smillie 1991) For any unstable periodic orbits p,
Ws(p) = J+ and Wu(p) = J−
where Ws(p) (resp.Wu(p)) denotes stable (resp. unstable) manifold for p and
J± = ∂K± is called the forward (backward) Julia set.
Here, K± = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | ∥Fn(p, q)∥ is bounded (n → ±∞) }
Note : Ws(p) and Wu(p) are both locally 1-dimensional complex (2-dimensional
real) manifold in C2.
Quantum tunneling in double wells
Quantum tunneling in multidimensions
1D double well potential
2D double well potential
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious complex orbits and flooding
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when they stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular chaotic states and floodthe entire region.
-
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
initial setA
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
γ1 γ2 γ3
γ′1 γ′2 γ′3
γ′′1 γ′′2 γ′′3
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
γ1 γ2 γ3
γ′1 γ′2 γ′3
γ′′1 γ′′2 γ′′3
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
γ1 γ2 γ3
γ′1 γ′2 γ′3
γ′′1 γ′′2 γ′′3
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
γ1 γ2 γ3
γ′1 γ′2 γ′3
γ′′1 γ′′2 γ′′3
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
γ1 γ2 γ3
γ′1 γ′2 γ′3
γ′′1 γ′′2 γ′′3
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
γ1 γ2 γ3
γ′1 γ′2 γ′3
γ′′1 γ′′2 γ′′3
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
γ1 γ2 γ3
γ′1 γ′2 γ′3
γ′′1 γ′′2 γ′′3
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
γ1 γ2 γ3
γ′1 γ′2 γ′3
γ′′1 γ′′2 γ′′3
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
initial setA natural boundary
p p′ p′′
Ws(p) Ws(p′) Ws(p′′)
Since Ws(p) = J+ for any p,
Ws(p) =Ws(p′) =Ws(p′′) = · · ·
γ1 γ2 γ3
γ′1 γ′2 γ′3
γ′′1 γ′′2 γ′′3
Dynamics (classical, quantum and semiclassical)Area-presering map
F :!
p′q′
"=
!p + V′(q)q + T′(p′)
"
Quantum propagator
K(a, b) = ⟨b|Un|a⟩ =# +∞
−∞· · ·# +∞
−∞
$
j
dqj
$
j
dpj exp%
i!
S({qj}, {pj})&
|a⟩ : initial state |b⟩ : final state
Semiclassical approximation (Van-Vleck, Gutzwiller)
Ksc(a, b) ='
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
( i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
)
A = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | A(p, q) = a } : initial set
B = { (p, q) ∈ C2 | B(p, q) = b } : final set
If Fn(A) ∩ B = ∅, then γ should be complex.
Note:the final form does not change if the smoothing function ‘ tanh’ is replaced by ‘ arctan’.Quasi-periodic kicked rotors
(Casati-Guarneri-Shepelyansky 1989, Chabe et al 2008)
(Hufnagel-Ketzmerick-Otto-Schanz, 2002, Backer-Ketzmerick-Monasta, 2005)
Arbitrary itineracy p→ p′ → p′′ → · · ·is possible after reaching R2.
Propagator:
K(a, b) = ⟨b|U|a⟩ =!· · ·
! "
j
dqj
"
j
exp#
i!
S({qj}, {pj})$
Semiclassical approximation
Ksc(a, b) =%
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
#i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
$
Natural boundary
initial state a
Quantum tunneling in double wells
Quantum tunneling in multidimensions
1D double well potential
2D double well potential
Quantum tunneling and complex paths
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious complex orbits and flooding
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
Tunneling orbits and Julia sets
Semiclassical sum
Ksc(a, b) =!
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
" i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
#
Theorem (AS, Y. Ishii and K.S. Ikeda) For polynomial maps F,
(i) If F is hyperbolic and htop(F|R2) = log 2, then C = J+
(ii) If F is hyperbolic and htop(F|R2) > 0, then C = J+
(iii) If htop(F|R2) > 0, then J+ ⊂ C ⊂ K+
Here htop(P|R2) is topological entropy confined on R2, and semiclassicallycontributing complex orbits are introduced as
C ≡ $(q, p) ∈M∞ | Im Sn(q, p) converges absolutely at (q, p)
%
( Proof ) apply the convergent theory of current (Bedford-Smillie)
Tunneling orbits and Julia sets
Semiclassical sum
Ksc(a, b) =!
γ
A(γ)n (a, b) exp
" i!
S(γ)n (a, b)
#
Theorem (AS, Y. Ishii and K.S. Ikeda) For polynomial maps F,
(i) If F is hyperbolic and htop(F|R2) = log 2, then C = J+
(ii) If F is hyperbolic and htop(F|R2) > 0, then C = J+
(iii) If htop(F|R2) > 0, then J+ ⊂ C ⊂ K+
Here htop(P|R2) is topological entropy confined on R2, and semiclassically con-tributing complex orbits are introduced as
C ≡ $(q, p) ∈M∞ | Im Sn(q, p) converges absolutely at (q, p)
%
( Proof ) apply the convergent theory of current (Bedford-Smillie)
Semiclassical wavefunction hypothesis
For generic non-integrable systems (mixed systems), eigenfunctions localizeexclusively on the ergodic or the integrable component.
Localized states (either on torus or chaotic region)
Amphibious states (extended over torus and chaotic region)
Semiclassical wavefunction hypothesis
For generic non-integrable systems (mixed systems), eigenfunctions localizeexclusively on the ergodic or the integrable component.
Localized states (either on torus or chaotic region)
Amphibious states (extended over torus and chaotic region)
dynamical localization Anderson localization
(momentum space) (con f iguration space)
delocalized localized critical
ε ξ n log Ptorusn ⟨p2⟩
“Ray and wave chaos in asymmetric resonant optical cavities”JU Nockel and AD Stone, Nature 385, 45 (1997)
N(p) p |ψ(p)|2
t = iτ
“Eigenstates ignores regular and chaotic phase space structures”L.Hufnagel, R.Ketzmerick, M.F.Otto and H.Schanz, PRL, 89, 154101-1 (2002)
“Flooding of chaotic eigenstates into regular phase space islands”A.Backer, R.Ketzmerick, A.G.Monasta, PRL, 94, 045102-1 (2005)
ε = 0.5
Snapshots of wavefunction— below and above the transition point —
Violation of semiclassical eigenfunction hypothesis ?
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
Area-preserving map
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) = ap + d1 � d2
+1
2
�ap � � + d1
⇥tanh b(p � pd)
+1
2
��ap + � + d2
⇥tanh b(p + pd)
V �(q) = K sin q
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) =1
2ap{tanh b(p + L) � tanh b(p � L)}
+1
2(ap � �){tanh b(p � pd) � tanh b(p + pd)}
V �(q) = K sin q
T �(p) = T �0(p) + ⇥T �
noise(p)
Area-preserving map
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) = ap + d1 � d2
+1
2
�ap � � + d1
⇥tanh b(p � pd)
+1
2
��ap + � + d2
⇥tanh b(p + pd)
V �(q) = K sin q
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) =1
2ap{tanh b(p + L) � tanh b(p � L)}
+1
2(ap � �){tanh b(p � pd) � tanh b(p + pd)}
V �(q) = K sin q
T �(p) = T �0(p) + ⇥T �
noise(p)
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
1.0×1075×1060
log 10
Pnto
rus
n
L=2π (cl)
initial state
Survival probability in the torus region:
P torusn =
� pb
pa
|�n(p)|2dp
pa pb
Survival probability in the torus region:
P torusn =
� pb
pa
|�n(p)|2dp
pa pb
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
P torusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
P torusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
P torusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
P torusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
1.0×1075×1060
log 10
Pnto
rus
n
L=2π (cl)
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
1.0×1075×1060
log 10
Pnto
rus
n
L=2π (cl)L=∞ (qm)Area-preserving map
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) = ap + d1 � d2
+1
2
�ap � � + d1
⇥tanh b(p � pd)
+1
2
��ap + � + d2
⇥tanh b(p + pd)
V �(q) = K sin q
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) =1
2ap{tanh b(p + L) � tanh b(p � L)}
+1
2(ap � �){tanh b(p � pd) � tanh b(p + pd)}
V �(q) = K sin q
T �(p) = T �0(p) + ⇥T �
noise(p)
Area-preserving map
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) = ap + d1 � d2
+1
2
�ap � � + d1
⇥tanh b(p � pd)
+1
2
��ap + � + d2
⇥tanh b(p + pd)
V �(q) = K sin q
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) =1
2ap{tanh b(p + L) � tanh b(p � L)}
+1
2(ap � �){tanh b(p � pd) � tanh b(p + pd)}
V �(q) = K sin q
T �(p) = T �0(p) + ⇥T �
noise(p)
initial state
Survival probability in the torus region:
P torusn =
� pb
pa
|�n(p)|2dp
pa pb
Survival probability in the torus region:
P torusn =
� pb
pa
|�n(p)|2dp
pa pb
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
P torusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
P torusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
P torusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
P torusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Flooding induced by destructing coherence in the chaotic region
Why flooding does not occur ?
Amphibious nature of complex orbits
- Exponentially many complex orbits connect regular states a and chaoticstates b.
- The orbits behave as regular orbits when wander stay in the regular region,while they become chaotic after reaching the chaotic sea.
-
Complex orbits contributing to semiclassical propagator
γ : classical orbits connecting a and b
γ is approximated by Ws(p)
γ′ is approximated by Ws(p′)
γ′′ is approximated by Ws(p′′)
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
1.0×1075×1060
log 10
Pnto
rus
n
L=2π (cl)
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
1.0×1075×1060
log 10
Pnto
rus
n
L=2π (cl)L=∞ (qm)
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
1.0×1075×1060
log 10
Pnto
rus
n
L=2π (cl)L=∞ (qm)L=6π (qm)L=4π (qm)L=2π (qm)
Area-preserving map
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) = ap + d1 � d2
+1
2
�ap � � + d1
⇥tanh b(p � pd)
+1
2
��ap + � + d2
⇥tanh b(p + pd)
V �(q) = K sin q
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) =1
2ap{tanh b(p + L) � tanh b(p � L)}
+1
2(ap � �){tanh b(p � pd) � tanh b(p + pd)}
V �(q) = K sin q
T �(p) = T �0(p) + ⇥T �
noise(p)
Area-preserving map
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) = ap + d1 � d2
+1
2
�ap � � + d1
⇥tanh b(p � pd)
+1
2
��ap + � + d2
⇥tanh b(p + pd)
V �(q) = K sin q
f :
⇤p�
q�
⌅=
⇤p � V �(q)q + T �(p�)
⌅
where
T �(p) =1
2ap{tanh b(p + L) � tanh b(p � L)}
+1
2(ap � �){tanh b(p � pd) � tanh b(p + pd)}
V �(q) = K sin q
T �(p) = T �0(p) + ⇥T �
noise(p)
L
initial state
noise
noise
Survival probability in the torus region:
P torusn =
� pb
pa
|�n(p)|2dp
pa pb
Survival probability in the torus region:
P torusn =
� pb
pa
|�n(p)|2dp
pa pb
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
Ptorusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
P torusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
P torusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
Strong correlation between dynamical tunneling and dynamical localization
Survival probability in the regular region (classical) (quantum)
P torusn =
! pb
pa
Pn(p)dp
P torusn =
! pb
pa
|ψn(p)|2dp
SummarySummary
- Instanton disappears due to the presence of natural boundaries in genericmultidimensional systems.
- Classically disconnected regions are connected via orbits in the Julia set.
- The orbits in the Julia set are ergodic and have amphibious nature.
- Exponentially many orbits potentially exist behind the tunneling process fromregular to chaotic regions but they are blocked by dynamical localizationin the chaotic region.
- Flooding occurs if quantum interference effects are suppressed eitherby adding noise or by coupling the systems to invoke the Anderson transitionin the chaotic region.