text:
# EVN observations of candidate Compact Symmetric Objects

## 1 Introduction

Compact Symmetric Objects (CSOs) form a class of radio sources with distinctive radio properties. They are very powerful and compact sources with overall size $`<`$ 1 kpc, dominated by lobe/jet emission on both sides of the central engine, and are thought to be relatively free from beaming effects (Wilkinson et al. 1994). Their small size is likely due to their youth ($`<`$ 104 yr). This hypothesis has been largerly accepted after the detection and the estimate of the separation speed of the micro hot-spots in a couple of CSOs (Owsianik and Conway 1998, and Owsianik et al. 1998). Since then, expansion velocities of the outer edges have been detected or suspected in a handful of other CSOs (Fanti 2000 and references therein).

A unification scenario assumes that CSOs evolve into Medium-size Symmetric Objects (MSO), which, in turn, evolve into Large Symmetric Objects (LSO), i.e. large FRII radio sources (Fanti et al. 1995, Readhead et al. 1996ab, Snellen et al. 2000). The monitoring of the structural changes over time seems one of the more promising ways to understand the evolution of these objects, and a larger number of CSOs suitable for these repeated observations is desirable.

Most confirmed CSOs and CSO candidates are commonly found to have a global convex radio spectrum peaking at GHz frequencies, thus belonging to the class of the GHz Peaked Spectrum (GPS) radio sources.

These latter objects are known to show structures resolved only with VLBI. Only about 10% of them shows faint extended radio emission on scales of a few tens of kpc, while $``$90% of them is entirely contained within the extent of the narrow-line region ($`<`$ 1 kpc) of the host galaxy (Stanghellini et al. 1998). GPS radio sources are usually identified with galaxies at low or intermediate redshifts (z$`<`$ 1), and quasars at higher redshifts (O’Dea et al. 1991, Snellen et al. 1999), and they make up a significant fraction ($``$10%) of the bright centimeter wavelength selected radio sources.

Many GPS radio sources have no optical counterpart yet, and these empty fields are most likely distant galaxies, too faint to be detected. Stanghellini et al. (1997a, 1998) find a strong correlation between the milliarcsecond (mas) morphology and the optical host in bright GPS sources. Galaxies are generally associated with CSOs while quasars have more often core-jet or complex morphology.

There are a few tens of sources in known GPS samples, and many more are in candidate lists; several of these sources have either no or poor VLBI images. In order to increase the number of known CSOs, we selected from the lists of known bright GPS samples (O’Dea et al. 1991, de Vries et al. 1997, Stanghellini et al. 1998, Dallacasa et al. 2000) the sources accessible to the EVN without enough structural information in the literature to permit a proper classification yet. Scheduling the radio sources to be observed in the allotted time we gave a higher priority to objects with known double morphology at a single frequency.

We report here the results of the two first observing runs. In a first session at 1.6 GHz with the EVN and MERLIN we observed 5 sources. At this frequency we could detect the presence of extended steep spectrum emission, determine the total angular size of the source, and possibly determine the low frequency spectral shape of the components, when other images at higher frequencies were available. Five further radio sources were observed at 2.3/8.4 GHz with the EVN plus 3 antennae commonly used in geodesy experiments. These simultaneous observations at 2 frequencies are best suited to detect the cores.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

### 2.1 EVN + MERLIN at 1.66 GHz

EVN Observations were carried out in two separate VLBI experiments. The first observation has been done on 13 November 1999 at 1.66 GHz using the MKIII recording system, with a total bandwith of 28 MHz, in left circular polarization, with the antennae of Effelsberg, Westerbork, Jodrell, Cambridge, Onsala, Medicina, Noto, Torun, Nanshan and Sheshan. Snapshot observations for a total of 5.2 hours of observing time were made for the sources 1345+125, 1404+286 (OQ208), 1518+047, 1604+315, and 1751+278. The MERLIN array simultaneously observed those sources with 7 antennae (Defford, Cambridge, Knockin, Darnhall, MK2, Lovell and Tabley) at the same frequency. The EVN 1.66 GHz data were correlated at the MPIfR MKIII correlator.

The MERLIN data were calibrated in a standard way and the images have been made using the DIFMAP package (Shepherd 1997). We only show the MERLIN image of 1345+125 as the other objects are pointlike at the resolution of about 150 mas. The MERLIN images of the remaining sources are shown in Zhang et al. (2001).

### 2.2 EVN + GEO at 2.3 and 8.4 GHz

The second observation has been done on 29 May 2000 at 2.3/8.4 GHz using the MKIV recording system with a bandwith of 16 MHz in each frequency, in right circular polarization. The EVN antennae involved in this experiment which gave useful data were Effelsberg, Westerbork, Onsala, Medicina, Noto, Yebes, plus the geodetic antennae of Matera, Ny-Alesund, Wettzel. Nanshan and Sheshan failed to give fringes because of problems in their recent upgrade to MKIV formatting system. Snapshot observations for a total of 7.9 hours of observing time were taken for 1333+589, 1427+109, 1509+054, 1526+670, and 1734+508. The 2.3/8.4 GHz data were correlated at the MKIV correlator at JIVE. This is one of a very few EVN experiment making use of several geodetic antennae, and their inclusion in the array has proven to be very useful with a major improvement in the NS resolution and UV coverage.

The Astronomical Image Processing System (AIPS) developed by the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), has been used for editing, a-priori calibration, fringe-fitting, imaging and self-calibration. Several iterations of phase self-calibration were performed until we converged to an acceptable solution. Then one or more iterations of amplitude and phase-calibration were applied. We also used the IBLED and CLIP tasks in AIPS for editing the data before the first phase-calibration and/or after the first amplitude calibration because of the dispersion of the data on some baselines. The main source of errors of the flux densities estimated in our final VLBI images is the absolute flux density scale which is assumed to have uncertainties of $``$10%.

The sizes and the flux densities of the components given in Tables 2 and 3 have been obtained with a gaussian fit using the task JMFIT in AIPS.

## 3 Results and comments on individual sources

In this section we present the results from our VLBI observations. Basic information on the target sources is presented in Table 1. Table 2 and Table 3 summarize the parameters derived from the images. In the following we present each source and comment on the results of the present observations.

### 3.1 Images at 1.66 GHz

#### 3.1.1 1345+125 (J1347+1217, 4C12.50)

1345+125 at z=0.122, is one of the nearest bright GPS radio sources. The radio source is associated with a galaxy (mr=15.5) lying at the center of a group. The optical image shows 2 well-resolved nuclei separated by 2” (4 kpc), with the radio source associated with the westernmost one (Stanghellini et al. 1993, Evans et al. 1999). The double nucleus, the irregular isophotes, the presence of a tail, and a number of close smaller companions indicates that 1345+125 is likely to be in process of a merging, which had triggered the radio activity (Heckman et al. 1986).

The 5 GHz radio image (Stanghellini et al. 1997a) shows a well defined structure visible in Fig. 1a, where component A is tentatively identified as the core, B and C are prominent knots in a jet, D is a mini-lobe, and E is tentatively identified as a much weaker counter lobe or jet. The whole radio emitting region is confined in less than 150 pc. Our image is the first 1.66 GHz VLBI image of 1345+125. We can identify the jet components (B, C), and the lobes (D, E), while the candidate core (A) is not present, likely self absorbed. For comparison, we convolved the 5 GHz image in Stanghellini et al. (1997a) and the 2.3 GHz image in Fey et al. (1996) with the restoring beam of our 1.66 GHz image, and show the three images in Fig.1a, superimposed as contours to the same full resolution 5 GHz grey scale image. The image registration has been performed on the basis of the position of the southernmost component, likely free from optical depth effects and with the hypothesis that its proper motion relative to the other components B and C is small (like in the hot spots of CSOs).

We find that A becomes weaker at 2.3 GHz and vanishes at 1.66 GHz. We set a very conservative upper limit of 40 mJy for the flux density of this component at 1.66 GHz. Component A has therefore an inverted spectrum, is most probably the core and hence 1345+125 is a CSO.

The source in our MERLIN image seems slightly resolved in the N-S direction (Fig. 1b). A fit with a gaussian on the image gives a size of about 50 mas. Considering that the angular size measured on an extended region is roughly twice the half maximum width given by the gaussian fit, it is consistent with the size seen in the EVN image.

#### 3.1.2 1404+286 (J1407+2827, OQ208, Mkn668)

The compact radio source at a redshift of 0.077 is one of the closest bright GPS galaxies. With mr=14.6, the optical image presented by Stanghellini et al. (1993) shows the presence of companions in the galactic envelope and a tail of low brightness emission in N-S direction, suggesting that the galaxy is dynamically disturbed.

The radio source has been considered in terms of a CSO structure (Stanghellini et al. 2000). It has a weak core at 15 GHz, two-sided faint and short jets and double asymmetric mini-lobes located within 10 mas, giving a projected size of less than 10 pc. The two micro hot-spots of this radio source seem to increase their distance at a rate of around 0.15c, comparable to what already found in other CSOs, yelding a dynamical age of a few centuries (Stanghellini et al. 2000). This radio source has been extensively studied at VLBI resolution, but we included it in our observations at 1.66 GHz because of its remarkable spectral properties at lower frequencies. Actually, Kameno et al. (2000) report a very inverted spectrum below the peak frequency of the weaker south-western region of this source based on VSOP observations. They consider the extremely inverted spectrum inconsistent with synchrotron self-absorption (SSA), and propose a process of free-free absorption (FFA) to explain the radio spectral shape. Our 1.66 GHz image (Fig. 2a) shows two components, a strong NE one (958 mJy) and a weak SW one (14 mJy). Although there is a dirty beam sidelobe close to the position of the southwest component, adding a source of uncertainty to its flux density measure, our estimate of the lobe flux densities from ground VLBI observations is consistent with that of Kameno et al. (2000).

We show the spectra of the two regions resolved by our observations in Fig. 2b where the values at 2.3/8.4 and 5 GHz are from Fey et al. (1996) and Stanghellini et al. (1997b) respectively. We get a slope of the SW component between 1.6 and 2.3 GHz of $`\alpha `$=-3.8$`\pm `$0.7, confirming a spectral shape for this component incompatible with simple SSA.

Our MERLIN image gives a pointlike source with no evidence of diffuse emission at the MERLIN scale at a level of 3 $`\times `$ the r.m.s. noise of 3 mJy.

#### 3.1.3 1518+047 (J1521+0430, 4C04.51)

This object at redshift 1.296 is identified with a quasar of magnitude mR=22.2 (Stickel & Kühr, 1996). 1518+047 is a strong radio source with P5GHz=1027.9 W/Hz, and is one of the first examples of a double source at mas resolution. Its morphology is discussed by Mutel et al. (1985), Phillips & Mutel (1982). They imaged the source with the U.S. VLBI Network at 1.67 GHz, 5 GHz and 610 MHz (Mutel et al. 1985, Mutel & Hodges, 1986). At 5 GHz, the source is resolved into two micro lobes, and each lobe further resolved into two/three components. Dallacasa et al. (1998) also resolve the source in two lobes at 2.3/8.4 GHz EVN observations. Our 1.66 GHz EVN image (Fig. 3a) also shows two lobes, with a hint of a jetlike emission (D) associated with the component C, also visible at other frequencies. The resolution of our data did not allow to model components B and D convincingly, but we fitted the main components A and C as reported in Table 2. The spectra of the 2 components are pretty similar (Fig. 3b) and this source is very likely a CSO even if a compact core has not been detected yet. The MERLIN image which has a rms noise of 8 mJy/beam does not reveal any additional emission.

#### 3.1.4 1604+315 (J1606+3124)

A galaxy with mr=22.7 at redshift 1.5 estimated photometrically (as reported by Heckman et al. 1994), is close to the radio position; although very faint, it shows a complex optical morphology elongated in the E-W direction. Other faint objects are present a few arcseconds away, suggesting 1604+315 is a member of a cluster (Stanghellini et al. 1993). Our VLBI image shows no details (Fig.4). This source is present in the VLBA calibrator list (Peck et al. 1998) showing a possible core-jet morphology. No extended emission has been detected in our MERLIN image with a rms noise of 1.6 mJy/beam.

#### 3.1.5 1751+278 (J1753+2750)

This object is identified as a galaxy with mR=21.7 and redshift 0.86 estimated photometrically (as reported by Heckman et al. 1994), it is faint and extended (O’Dea et al. 1990), with a possible companion (O’Dea et al. 1996).

No previous VLBI morphology information is available for this source. Our VLBI image at 1.66 GHz (Fig. 5) exhibits a compact dominant component (A), a secondary compact component to south-west (B), from which a trail of radio emission points to west (C), then probably to north-west, where just a hint of emission is visible (D). No extended emission has been detected in our MERLIN image with rms noise of 1.8 mJy/beam.

This source is classified as a GPS source on the basis of a flux density limit of 0.25 Jy at 408 MHz (Spoelstra et al. 1985). In the literature three values of the flux density of this source at 1.4 GHz are found, which are 0.52$`\pm `$0.06 Jy (Condon et al. 1983, and references therein), 0.647$`\pm `$0.030 Jy (White et al. 1992), and 0.6253$`\pm `$0.0188 Jy (NVSS value). The flux density at 365 MHz is 0.685$`\pm `$0.069 Jy (Douglas et al. 1996), so the flux density limit at 408 MHz seems wrong, (or the source is highly variable at low frequency). Given the spectral flattening of this source above 1.6 GHz, the lack of a peak in the spectrum, and its possible variability, the source could be a flat spectrum or a compact steep spectrum (CSS), rather than a GPS radio source and we will not consider it in the discussion of the results.

### 3.2 Images at 2.3 and 8.4 GHz

#### 3.2.1 1333+589 (J1335+5844, 4C58.26)

This radio source has a peak flux density of 0.75 Jy at 4.9 GHz; In the optical it is an empty field (Stickel & Kühr, 1994). This object belongs to the CJ1 sample (the first Caltech–Jodrell Bank survey), and has been already imaged with VLBI at 1.67 GHz (Thakkar et al. 1995) and 5 GHz (Xu et al. 1995). The source is clearly resolved into two compact components at both forementioned frequencies, and this morphology is confirmed in our 2.3/8.4 GHz images. As shown in Fig. 6a and Fig. 6b, the two components are separated by 12.8$`\pm `$0.1 mas, and no jetlike feature has been detected between them. We show in Fig. 6c the spectra of the components using our images and the data at 1.67 and 5 GHz mentioned above.

The northern component show a rising spectrum at all frequencies, indicating it is more compact. It is possible that it is the core of the radio emission and this object being a core-jet radio source. Indeed this source is not considered a CSO in Taylor (1996), Polatidis et al. (1999), and Peck & Taylor (2000), who have examined all candidates in the PR, CJ1 and CJ2 surveys with multi-frequency VLBA observations. We think it is also possible that the rising spectrum reflects a very compact micro-hotspot, smaller than in the southern lobe, and the radio source still would be a CSO.

More sensitive high resolution observations to detect any further emission should provide a better constraint for the correct morphological classification.

#### 3.2.2 1427+109 (J1430+1043)

The optical host is a quasar at z=1.710 and magnitude mB=18.5 (NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database). In the radio band this source peaks at 4.9 GHz with a flux density of 0.91 Jy. The source is not resolved in our 2.3/8.4 GHz images (not shown), and no previous VLBI morphology information is available in the literature.

#### 3.2.3 1509+054(J1511+0518)

The optical identification for this radio source is a galaxy with visual magnitude 16.2 (Dallacasa et al. 2000). The source shows a very steep spectrum with a peak flux density of 0.77 Jy at 11 GHz. Our 8.4 GHz image (Fig. 7) shows two components separated by 4.9 mas; the resolution at 2.3 GHz does not allow to separate these two components. No VLBI image is available in the literature for this source. The double morphology at 8.4 GHz makes this source a CSO candidate.

#### 3.2.4 1526+670 (J1526+6650)

The host of the source is a quasar at high redshift (z=3.02) and magnitude mr=17.2 (Hook et al. 1996). This is a CJ2 source and has been imaged at 5 GHz (Taylor et al. 1994). It is slightly elongated in our 8.4 GHz image (Fig. 8) in agreement with the 5 GHz image, and the radio emission can be modelled with two components as listed in Table 3. This object is unresolved in our 2.3 GHz image.

The spectrum of the components between 8.4 GHz and 5 GHz (Taylor et al. 1994), shows that the western, brighter component has a flatter spectral index than the eastern component, hence it is possible that this source is a core-jet object, but new observations at higher frequency and resolution are necessary to give a proper classification.

#### 3.2.5 1734+508 (J1735+5049)

A very faint (mR=23.1) optical object has been detected at the radio position, and tentatively classified as a galaxy (Stickel & Kühr, 1996). The radio source peaks at 5.9 GHz with a peak flux density of 0.99 Jy. This is a CJ1 source, resolved in two components at 5 GHz, and modelled with three gaussian components (Xu et al. 1995), Our 8.4 GHz image (Fig. 9) shows a double morphology, while it is unresolved in our image at 2.3, as at 1.6 GHz (Thakkar et al. 1995). Considering the model given by Xu et al. at 5 GHz, the northern component has a steep spectrum ($`\alpha 0.8`$), while the southern one is slightly inverted ($`\alpha 0.2`$). As for 1333+589 this source has not been considered a CSO by Taylor (1996), Polatidis et al. (1999), or Peck & Taylor (2000). Also in this case we think it is possible that an inverted spectrum is consistent either with a core or a very compact hot-spot. Until additional high resolution morphological information will be available we consider this source a CSO candidate, given its double morphology.

## 4 Discussion and conclusions

We can summarize the results from our EVN observations at 1.66, 2.3 and 8.4 GHz for 10 GPS radio sources as follows:

i) we confirm the CSO nature of 1345+125 revealing a component which is very likely to be the core.

ii) for the radio source 1404+286 we confirm from ground based VLBI observations the findings by Kameno et al. (2000) i.e. that the radio spectrum is affected by FFA rather than SSA, or maybe both. This is an important observational clue because it implies the presence of a dense ionized ambient medium somewhere between us and the strongly absorbed radio emitting region.

iii) we also found more CSO candidates which need need further observations to be confirmed.

The relationship between radio mas morphology and optical host is rather respected in the small sample considered here, although also quasars may appear in the CSO candidate list (e.g. 1518+047). Excluding 1751+278 which does not show a convex radio spectrum and it has been erroneously classified as a GPS radio source, we find that 5 galaxies (we include J1335+5844 in the galaxy group as empty fields are mostly identified with weak galaxies once sensitive optical observations become available) are confirmed or candidate CSO, one quasar is also a CSO candidate and 2 quasars are unresolved or slightly resolved objects in our images. Therefore the observations of GPS radio galaxies seem to be an efficient way to find CSOs.

The MERLIN data at 1.66 GHz do not reveal any extended emission in four of the five sources observed. Only 1345+125 is very sligthly resolved, in agreement with the size seen in the EVN image.

Since the cores are known to have highly inverted spectra, multi-frequency and especially high frequency sensitive observations are needed to confirm the CSO nature for the new CSO candidates discovered here. If they are confirmed they will be very suitable objects to monitor for separation speed, due to their small size (thus possibly faster separation velocity) and the presence of strong and compact components (hot-spots?) at their edges.

###### Acknowledgements.

Part of this work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China. L.X. wish to thank finacial supports from the CNR Istituto di Radioastronomia (Italy) and the Joint Institute of VLBI in Europe (in The Netherlands) for the work.


format: text

text:
# Geometric phases for neutral and charged particles in a time-dependent magnetic fieldpublished in J. Phys. A 35 (2002) 377-391.

## I Introduction

The motion of spin (especially spin $`1/2`$) in a rotating magnetic field is a rather classical problem in quantum mechanics, which was discussed in the textbook . Nevertheless, the problem has received much attention in recent years . The reason may be that the Schrödinger equation for the problem can be solved analytically, and thus it serves as a good example for manifesting the notions of adiabatic geometric phase, nonadiabatic geometric phase for cyclic and noncyclic motions . Moreover, it is relevant to some problems in condensed matter physics .

Cyclic solutions with special initial conditions were widely discussed in the above cited papers, for both spin $`1/2`$ and higher ones. It is well known that the nonadiabatic geometric phase for such solutions is always proportional to the solid angle subtended by the trace of the spin (more exactly, the mean value of the spin). Because the nonadiabatic geometric phase is a geometric object, and because the result holds for any cyclic solution of spin $`1/2`$ in an arbitrarily varying magnetic field , one may become confident that it is also true for higher spin. It is indeed true for special cyclic solutions in a rotating magnetic field as just mentioned. For more general cyclic solutions and more general magnetic fields, however, the result was neither proved nor refuted. In fact, the nonadiabatic geometric phase for solutions with more general initial conditions was calculated by some authors only for spin $`1/2`$ . That for higher spin was, however, not studied to our knowledge.

In this paper we will consider both neutral and charged particles. In the next section we consider neutral particles with general spin and with magnetic moment moving in a rotating magnetic field. The Schrödinger equation for the problem can be solved exactly by making use of a time-dependent unitary transformation. Solutions with special initial conditions are cyclic and has been studied in detail . When the parameters of the system are appropriately chosen, all solutions are cyclic. These solutions were not discussed in detail previously. We calculate the nonadiabatic geometric phase for such solutions. The solid angle subtended by the trace of the spin is also calculated explicitly. It turns out that the nonadiabatic geometric phase contains an extra term in addition to the ordinary one proportional to the solid angle. For spin $`1/2`$ the extra term vanishes automatically. This may be the reason why it was not found previously. For higher spin, however, it depends on the initial condition and does not vanish in general. At this stage one may wonder when this extra term does not appear for an arbitrarily varying magnetic field. This is investigated in Sec. III. We prove that a sufficient condition is that the initial state is an eigenstate of $`𝐬𝐞_0`$ where $`𝐬`$ is the spin operator and $`𝐞_0`$ is some unit vector. Though this conclusion is known in the literature , our proof seems more straightforward and simpler.

In a recent work, we have studied a charged particle moving in a central potential plus a strong rotating magnetic field . It can describe the valence electron of an alkaline atom or that of the hydrogen atom under the influence of the external magnetic field. The Schrödinger equation may be reduced to a Schrödinger-like one with a time-independent effective Hamiltonian by using an explicit time-dependent unitary transformation. Thus the evolution operator for the original Schrödinger equation was explicitly obtained, which involves no chronological product. Cyclic solutions are obtained if one takes the eigenstates of the effective Hamiltonian as initial states. These eigenstates and the nonadiabatic geometric phases of the corresponding cyclic solutions were all worked out explicitly. The nonadiabatic geometric phase turns out to be a linear combination of the two solid angles subtended by the traces of the orbit and spin angular momenta. We also studied the case without a central potential  and generalized it to the relativistic case .

Here we are interested in the more general cyclic solutions of the alkaline atomic electron in the strong rotating magnetic field. As pointed out in Ref. , these are available if the parameters of the system are appropriately chosen. However, the nonadiabatic geometric phases for such solutions were not calculated there. These are now calculated in Sec. IV. The two solid angles subtended by the traces of the orbit and spin angular momenta are also calculated explicitly. It turns out that the nonadiabatic geometric phase in this case also contains extra terms in addition to the linear combination of the two solid angles.

In Sec. V we consider the alkaline atomic electron moving in an arbitrarily varying strong magnetic field. We prove that the nonadiabatic geometric phase for cyclic solutions with special initial conditions is a linear combination of the two solid angles. In other words, no extra term appears.

A brief summary is given in Sec. VI. A formula used in the text is proved in the appendix.

## II Neutral particles in a rotating magnetic field

Before the calculations begin, let us remark here some differences between spin $`1/2`$ and higher ones. First, for any state of spin $`1/2`$, say, an initial state $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$, one can always find a unit vector $`𝐞_0`$ such that $`𝐬𝐞_0\mathrm{\Psi }_0=(1/2)\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$. In fact, $`𝐞_0=2(\mathrm{\Psi }_0,𝐬\mathrm{\Psi }_0)`$ is the unit vector to be found. From this fact and the result of Sec. III, the previous conclusion for spin $`1/2`$ that the nonadiabatic geometric phase is always proportional to the solid angle follows immediately. For higher spin, on the other hand, the situation is rather different. For a given state $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$, in general one cannot find a unit vector $`𝐞_0`$ such that $`𝐬𝐞_0\mathrm{\Psi }_0=m_s\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ ($`m_s=s,s1,\mathrm{},s`$). Let us give a simple example for spin $`3/2`$. We denote the eigenstate of $`s_z`$ as $`\chi _{m_s}^0`$, with eigenvalue $`m_s`$. Now consider the state $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0=a\chi _{3/2}^0+b\chi _{3/2}^0`$, where $`|a|^2+|b|^2=1`$ for normalization. The mean value of the spin in this state is $`(\mathrm{\Psi }_0,𝐬\mathrm{\Psi }_0)=(3|a|^23/2)𝐞_z`$ where $`𝐞_z`$ is the unit vector in the $`z`$ direction. By varying $`a`$, the absolute value of the above mean value may take any real number in the interval $`[0,3/2]`$. Suppose that one could find a unit vector $`𝐞_0`$ such that $`𝐬𝐞_0\mathrm{\Psi }_0=m_s\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ ($`m_s=\pm 3/2,\pm 1/2`$), then the mean value of the spin would be $`(\mathrm{\Psi }_0,𝐬\mathrm{\Psi }_0)=m_s𝐞_0`$, and the absolute value is $`|m_s|`$, which is obviously in contradiction with the above one. Second, even if the mean value of $`𝐬`$ in $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ is specified, say, $`(\mathrm{\Psi }_0,𝐬\mathrm{\Psi }_0)=m_s𝐞_z`$, one cannot assert that $`s_z\mathrm{\Psi }_0=m_s\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ (the inverse is of course true) unless $`m_s=\pm s`$ (this is automatically true for spin $`1/2`$). For example, for spin $`3/2`$, we have infinitely many states $`\chi =\chi _{1/2}^0`$ and $`\chi ^{}=e^{i\delta _1}\sqrt{2/3}\chi _{3/2}^0+e^{i\delta _2}(1/\sqrt{3})\chi _{3/2}^0`$ that lead to the mean value $`𝐬=𝐞_z/2`$, where $`\delta _1`$ and $`\delta _2`$ are arbitrary real numbers.

Consider a uniform magnetic field $`𝐁(t)`$ that has a constant magnitude $`B`$ and rotates around some fixed axis at a constant angle $`\theta _B`$ and with a constant frequency $`\omega `$. The rotating axis is chosen as the $`z`$ axis of the coordinate system, so the magnetic field is

$$𝐁(t)=B𝐧(t),𝐧(t)=(\mathrm{sin}\theta _B\mathrm{cos}\omega t,\mathrm{sin}\theta _B\mathrm{sin}\omega t,\mathrm{cos}\theta _B)$$
(1)
where $`B`$ and $`\omega `$ are taken to be positive without loss of generality. Then consider a neutral particle with spin $`s`$ ($`s=1/2,1,3/2,\mathrm{}`$) and magnetic moment $`𝝁=\mu 𝐬/s`$, where $`𝐬`$ is the spin operator in the unit of $`\mathrm{}`$, satisfying $`[s_i,s_j]=iϵ_{ijk}s_k`$. In the above magnetic field, it has the time-dependent Hamiltonian

$$H(t)=𝝁𝐁(t)=ϵ(\mu )\mathrm{}\omega _B𝐬𝐧(t),$$
(2)
where $`\omega _B=|\mu |B/s\mathrm{}`$ is positive and $`ϵ(\mu )`$ is the sign function. The motion is governed by the Schrödinger equation

$$i\mathrm{}_t\mathrm{\Psi }=H(t)\mathrm{\Psi }.$$
(3)
To solve this equation, we make a unitary transformation

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=W(t)\psi (t),W(t)=\mathrm{exp}(i\omega ts_z),$$
(4)
then $`\psi (t)`$ satisfies a Schrödinger-like equation

$$i\mathrm{}_t\psi =H_{\text{eff}}\psi ,$$
(5)
where the effective Hamiltonian reads

$$H_{\text{eff}}=H(0)\mathrm{}\omega s_z=ϵ(\mu )\mathrm{}\omega _B𝐬𝐧(0)\mathrm{}\omega s_z.$$
(6)
This effective Hamiltonian is time independent, so that the Schrödinger-like equation (5) is readily integrable. For the following convenience, we define the new quantities

$$\omega _S=[\omega _B^2+\omega ^2+2ϵ(\mu )\omega _B\omega \mathrm{cos}\theta _B]^{1/2},$$
(8)
$$\mathrm{sin}\theta _S=\frac{\omega _B\mathrm{sin}\theta _B}{\omega _S},\mathrm{cos}\theta _S=\frac{\omega _B\mathrm{cos}\theta _B+ϵ(\mu )\omega }{\omega _S},$$
(9)
$$𝐧_S=(\mathrm{sin}\theta _S,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0},\mathrm{cos}\theta _S).$$
(10)
In terms of these new quantities, we have

$$H_{\text{eff}}=ϵ(\mu )\mathrm{}\omega _S𝐬𝐧_𝐒.$$
(11)
Therefore the Schrödinger-like equation (5) is solved as

$$\psi (t)=U_{\text{eff}}(t)\psi (0),U_{\text{eff}}(t)=\mathrm{exp}[iϵ(\mu )\omega _St𝐬𝐧_S].$$
(12)
With the obvious relation $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=\psi (0)`$, the Schrödinger equation (3) is solved as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=U(t)\mathrm{\Psi }(0),$$
(14)
where

$$U(t)=W(t)U_{\text{eff}}(t)=\mathrm{exp}(i\omega ts_z)\mathrm{exp}[iϵ(\mu )\omega _St𝐬𝐧_S].$$
(15)
If one begins with an initial state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(t_0)`$ at the time $`t_0`$ \[but note that the time dependence of the magnetic field is still given by Eq. (1)\], then the solution reads

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=W(t)U_{\text{eff}}(tt_0)W^{}(t_0)\mathrm{\Psi }(t_0).$$
(16)
Since the evolution operator involves no chronological product, it is convenient for practical calculations. In the following discussions we will take the initial time to be $`t_0=0`$ for convenience.

First of all let us calculate the mean value of $`𝐬`$ in an arbitrary state. We define

$$𝐯(t)=\mathbf{(}\mathrm{\Psi }(t),𝐬\mathrm{\Psi }(t)\mathbf{)},$$
(17)
and denote $`𝐯_0=𝐯(0)`$. Using Eq. (12) we have

$$𝐯(t)=\mathbf{(}\mathrm{\Psi }(0),U_{\text{eff}}^{}(t)W^{}(t)𝐬W(t)U_{\text{eff}}(t)\mathrm{\Psi }(0)\mathbf{)}.$$

It is not difficult to show that

$$W^{}(t)𝐬W(t)=\mathrm{exp}(i\omega ts_z)𝐬\mathrm{exp}(i\omega ts_z)=(s_x\mathrm{cos}\omega ts_y\mathrm{sin}\omega t,s_x\mathrm{sin}\omega t+s_y\mathrm{cos}\omega t,s_z).$$
(18)
The following formula was proved in the appendix.

$`U_{\text{eff}}^{}(t)𝐬U_{\text{eff}}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}[iϵ(\mu )\omega _St𝐬𝐧_S]𝐬\mathrm{exp}[iϵ(\mu )\omega _St𝐬𝐧_S]`$ (19)
$`=`$ $`[𝐬(𝐬𝐧_S)𝐧_S]\mathrm{cos}[ϵ(\mu )\omega _St](𝐧_S\times 𝐬)\mathrm{sin}[ϵ(\mu )\omega _St]+(𝐬𝐧_S)𝐧_S.`$ (20)
Using these two formulas we can calculate $`𝐯(t)`$ once $`𝐯_0`$ is given. Let us define,

$$𝐠(t)=[𝐯_0(𝐯_0𝐧_S)𝐧_S]\mathrm{cos}[ϵ(\mu )\omega _St](𝐧_S\times 𝐯_0)\mathrm{sin}[ϵ(\mu )\omega _St]+(𝐯_0𝐧_S)𝐧_S,$$
(21)
which is an ordinary vector, not an operator. Then the result reads

$$𝐯(t)=\mathbf{(}g_x(t)\mathrm{cos}\omega tg_y(t)\mathrm{sin}\omega t,g_x(t)\mathrm{sin}\omega t+g_y(t)\mathrm{cos}\omega t,g_z(t)\mathbf{)}.$$
(22)
This is a rather complicated result, but the physical picture is clear. We observe that the three terms in $`𝐠(t)`$ are perpendicular to one another, and

$$|𝐯_0(𝐯_0𝐧_S)𝐧_S|=|𝐧_S\times 𝐯_0|=\sqrt{|𝐯_0|^2(𝐯_0𝐧_S)^2}v_0,$$
(23)
so we define three unit vectors orthogonal to one another:

$$𝐞_x^S=[𝐯_0(𝐯_0𝐧_S)𝐧_S]/v_0,𝐞_y^S=𝐧_S\times 𝐯_0/v_0,𝐞_z^S=𝐧_S,$$
(24)
which constitute a right-handed frame. In this frame $`𝐠(t)`$ takes the form

$$𝐠(t)=v_0\mathrm{cos}[ϵ(\mu )\omega _St]𝐞_x^Sv_0\mathrm{sin}[ϵ(\mu )\omega _St]𝐞_y^S+(𝐯_0𝐧_S)𝐞_z^S.$$
(25)
This is nothing different from Eq. (21). However, in this form it help us recognize the physical picture of the motion, and obviously yields $`|𝐯(t)|=|𝐠(t)|=|𝐯_0|`$ as expected. Now to get the vector $`𝐯(t)`$, one just rotates $`𝐯_0`$ around $`𝐞_z^S=𝐧_S`$ through an angle $`ϵ(\mu )\omega _St`$ (positive angle corresponds to anti-clockwise rotation) to get $`𝐠(t)`$, and then rotates $`𝐠(t)`$ around $`𝐞_z`$ through an angle $`\omega t`$. The resulted motion involves nutation as well as rotation, and the motion is not periodic in general. Note that a cyclic state leads to a periodic $`𝐯(t)`$, but the inverse is not necessarily true. Therefore to obtain a cyclic solution, one should first find a periodic $`𝐯(t)`$. Two cases with periodic $`𝐯(t)`$ are available. First, if the parameters of the system are such that $`\omega _S/\omega `$ is a rational number, then both $`\omega t`$ and $`\omega _St`$ may simultaneously become integral multiples of $`2\pi `$ at some latter time $`T`$, and we have $`𝐯(T)=𝐯_0`$, independent of the initial condition. Second, if the initial condition is such that

$$𝐯_0=m_s𝐧_S,m_s=s,s1,\mathrm{},s,$$
(26)
we have $`𝐠(t)=m_s𝐧_S`$, and

$$𝐯(t)=m_s\mathbf{(}\mathrm{sin}\theta _S\mathrm{cos}\omega t,\mathrm{sin}\theta _S\mathrm{sin}\omega t,\mathrm{cos}\theta _S\mathbf{)}.$$
(27)
In this case $`𝐯(t)`$ only makes rotation. It is obviously periodic. In the following we will see that both cases indeed correspond to cyclic solutions. It seems that no other cyclic solution can be found.

Cyclic solutions of the second kind (with special initial condition) have been previously discussed in detail . For comparison we briefly review the result. First we give the eigenstates of $`𝐬𝐧_S`$. It is not difficult to show that

$$𝐬𝐧_S=\mathrm{exp}(i\theta _Ss_y)s_z\mathrm{exp}(i\theta _Ss_y).$$
(28)
We denote the eigenstates of $`s_z`$ with eigenvalues $`m_s`$ ($`m_s=s,s1,\mathrm{},s`$) as $`\chi _{m_s}^0`$. Then the eigenstates of $`𝐬𝐧_S`$ with eigenvalues $`m_s`$ are obviously

$$\chi _{m_s}=\mathrm{exp}(i\theta _Ss_y)\chi _{m_s}^0=\underset{m_s^{}}{}D_{m_s^{}m_s}^s(0,\theta _S,0)\chi _{m_s^{}}^0,$$
(29)
where the $`D`$’s are Wigner functions.

We take the initial state to be

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{m_s}(0)=\chi _{m_s}.$$
(30)
This leads to Eqs. (26) and (27). The solution is indeed cyclic, and the nonadiabatic geometric phase in a period $`\tau =2\pi /\omega `$ was found to be

$$\gamma _{m_s}=m_s\mathrm{\Omega }_S,\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π},$$
(31)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S=2\pi (1\mathrm{cos}\theta _S)`$. We denote the solid angle subtended by the trace of $`𝐯(t)`$ by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$. Because $`𝐯(t)`$ is given by Eq. (27) in the present case, we have

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯=ϵ(m_s)\mathrm{\Omega }_S,\text{mod }4\pi ,$$

and consequently

$$\gamma _{m_s}=|m_s|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯,\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(32)
Therefore the geometric nature of the result is quite obvious. It should be remarked that the spin angular momentum precesses synchronously with the magnetic field, but at a different angle with the rotating axis.

Now we consider cyclic solutions of more general forms. If the parameters of the system are such that $`\omega _S/\omega `$ is a rational number, then all solutions are cyclic, as shown below. We denote $`\omega _S/\omega =K_S/K`$, where $`K_S`$ and $`K`$ are natural numbers, prime to each other. Let $`T=K\tau `$, then $`\omega T=2\pi K`$ and $`\omega _ST=2\pi K_S`$. In this case $`𝐯(t)`$ is periodic with period $`T`$. An arbitrary initial condition can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=\underset{m_s}{}c_{m_s}\chi _{m_s},$$
(33)
where the coefficients $`c_{m_s}`$ are arbitrary except satisfying $`_{m_s}|c_{m_s}|^2=1`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$ is normalized. Note that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$ can also be expanded in terms of the complete set $`\{\chi _{m_s}^0\}`$, it is easy to find that

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(T)=\mathrm{exp}(i\delta )\mathrm{\Psi }(0),$$
(35)
where

$$\delta =s[ϵ(\mu )2\pi K_S2\pi K],\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(36)
Therefore the state is indeed cyclic, and $`\delta `$ is the total phase change which is independent of the initial condition. Using the relation

$$W^{}(t)H(t)W(t)=H(0)=H_{\text{eff}}+\mathrm{}\omega s_z,$$
(37)
and note that $`H_{\text{eff}}`$ commutes with $`U_{\text{eff}}(t)`$, $`s_z`$ commutes with $`W(t)`$, we have

$$H(t)=\mathbf{(}\mathrm{\Psi }(0),H_{\text{eff}}\mathrm{\Psi }(0)\mathbf{)}+\mathrm{}\omega v_z(t)=ϵ(\mu )\mathrm{}\omega _S𝐯_0𝐧_S+\mathrm{}\omega v_z(t).$$

Thus the dynamic phase is

$$\beta =\mathrm{}^1_0^TH(t)𝑑t=ϵ(\mu )2\pi K_S𝐯_0𝐧_S2\pi K\mathrm{cos}\theta _S𝐯_0𝐧_S.$$
(38)
This depends on the initial condition as expected. Finally we obtain the nonadiabatic geometric phase

$$\gamma =\delta \beta =ϵ(\mu )2\pi K_S(s𝐯_0𝐧_S)2\pi K(s\mathrm{cos}\theta _S𝐯_0𝐧_S),\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(39)
In the special case when $`𝐯_0=m_s𝐧_S`$ this is consistent with the previous result (note that $`T=K\tau `$).

The next task is to calculate geometrically the solid angle $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$ subtended by the trace of $`𝐯(t)`$, and compare it with $`\gamma `$. It is easy to show that

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯=\frac{1}{|𝐯_0|}_0^T\frac{v_x(t)\dot{v}_y(t)v_y(t)\dot{v}_x(t)}{|𝐯_0|+v_z(t)}𝑑t.$$
(40)
Because of the complicated results (21) and (22), it would be difficult to calculate this straightforwardly. Let us try to get around the difficulty. It is easy to show that

$$v_x(t)\dot{v}_y(t)v_y(t)\dot{v}_x(t)=g_x(t)\dot{g}_y(t)g_y(t)\dot{g}_x(t)+\omega [g_x^2(t)+g_y^2(t)].$$
(41)
On account of the relations $`|𝐯(t)|=|𝐠(t)|=|𝐯_0|`$ and $`g_z(t)=v_z(t)`$, we have $`g_x^2(t)+g_y^2(t)=|𝐯_0|^2v_z^2(t)`$. Therefore

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯=\frac{1}{|𝐠_0|}_0^T\frac{g_x(t)\dot{g}_y(t)g_y(t)\dot{g}_x(t)}{|𝐠_0|+g_z(t)}𝑑t+\frac{1}{|𝐯_0|}_0^T\omega [|𝐯_0|v_z(t)]𝑑t,$$
(42)
where $`𝐠_0𝐠(0)=𝐯_0`$. The second integral can be calculated easily, and the first is recognized as the solid angle subtended by the trace of $`𝐠(t)`$, which is very easy to calculate in the coordinate frame expanded by $`𝐞_x^S`$, $`𝐞_y^S`$ and $`𝐞_z^S`$ \[cf Eq. (25)\]. The final result is

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯=ϵ(\mu )2\pi K_S\left(1\frac{𝐯_0𝐧_S}{|𝐯_0|}\right)+2\pi K\left(1\mathrm{cos}\theta _S\frac{𝐯_0𝐧_S}{|𝐯_0|}\right).$$
(43)
Here the first term is due to the rotation around $`𝐞_z^S=𝐧_S`$, and the second is due to the further rotation around $`𝐞_z`$. Compared with Eq. (39), we find the relation

$$\gamma =|𝐯_0|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯+(s|𝐯_0|)[ϵ(\mu )2\pi K_S2\pi K],\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(44)
Therefore $`\gamma `$ contains two terms. The first is the familiar one that is proportional to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$. The second is an extra term. If $`s=1/2`$, it is easy to show that $`|𝐯_0|=1/2`$ for any initial state, then the extra term vanishes automatically, and the above relation reduces to $`\gamma =(1/2)\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$, which is known to be valid in an arbitrary magnetic field . For higher spin, $`s|𝐯_0|`$ is in general not an integer, and the extra term cannot be dropped. For the special initial condition (30), the above relation reduces to the result (32). We will show in the next section that Eq. (32) holds in an arbitrarily varying magnetic field as long as the initial state is an eigenstate of $`𝐬𝐞_0`$ with eigenvalue $`m_s`$, where $`𝐞_0`$ is some unit vector. For the rotating magnetic field at hand, Eq. (32) holds as long as $`|𝐯_0|=m_s`$. This is a looser restriction on the initial condition. We do not know whether this is true in a more general magnetic field.

To conclude this section we remark that the relation (44) holds when $`|𝐯_0|=0`$. This can be easily verified by comparing Eq. (44) with Eq. (39) in this special case. Moreover, from Eq. (38) we see that the dynamic phase vanishes. Therefore one may regard the total phase in this case as pure geometric, though $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$ is not well defined.

## III Neutral particles in an arbitrarily varying magnetic field

As seen in the last section, the relation $`\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$ does not always hold for spin higher than $`1/2`$. Thus it may be of interest to ask when it would be valid in an arbitrarily varying magnetic field. In this section we will show that a sufficient condition is that the initial state is an eigenstate of $`𝐬𝐞_0`$ where $`𝐞_0`$ is some unit vector.

As discussed at the beginning of Sec. II, given an arbitrary state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(t)`$ of spin $`1/2`$, one can always find a unit vector $`𝐞(t)`$ such that $`𝐬𝐞(t)\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=(1/2)\mathrm{\Psi }(t)`$. This holds at all times. For higher spin, however, no similar conclusion is available. Nevertheless, we will show that if an eigenvalue equation $`𝐬𝐞_0\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=m_s\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$ holds for the initial state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$, a similar one with some appropriate unit vector $`𝐞(t)`$ would hold at all later times. The latter equation is of crucial importance since it enables us to explicitly determine the state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(t)`$ in terms of $`𝐞(t)`$ up to a phase factor. If $`𝐞(t)`$ returns to $`𝐞(0)`$ at some later time $`T`$, we obtain a cyclic solution.

We write down the Schrödinger equation in an arbitrarily varying magnetic field $`𝐁(t)=B(t)𝐧(t)`$:

$$i\mathrm{}_t\mathrm{\Psi }=H(t)\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{}\omega _B(t)𝐬𝐧(t)\mathrm{\Psi }.$$
(45)
There are two differences from the one in Sec. II. First, here $`\omega _B(t)=\mu B(t)/s\mathrm{}`$ is time dependent, and its sign may changes with time \[so we do not use $`|\mu |`$ in defining $`\omega _B(t)`$\]. Second, the unit vector $`𝐧(t)`$ is not given by Eq. (1), but varies arbitrarily. We would assume that the magnetic field varies continuously.

We take the initial state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$ of the system to be an eigenstate of $`𝐬𝐞_0`$ with eigenvalue $`m_s`$ where $`𝐞_0`$ is some unit vector, that is

$$𝐬𝐞_0\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=m_s\mathrm{\Psi }(0),m_s=s,s1,\mathrm{},s.$$
(46)
Let us define a vector $`𝐞(t)`$ by the following differential equation and initial condition.

$$\dot{𝐞}(t)=\omega _B(t)𝐧(t)\times 𝐞(t),𝐞(0)=𝐞_0.$$
(47)
Obviously, $`|𝐞(t)|`$ is time independent, so $`𝐞(t)`$ is a unit vector at any time. We are going to prove that

$$𝐬𝐞(t)\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=m_s\mathrm{\Psi }(t)$$
(48)
holds at all later times. This can be easily done by induction.

By definition, Eq. (48) is valid at $`t=0`$. We assume that it is valid at time $`t`$, what we need to do is to show that it is also true at time $`t+\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ is an infinitesimal increment of time. In fact, using Eqs. (45) and (47) we have

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(t+\mathrm{\Delta }t)=\mathrm{\Psi }(t)+i\omega _B(t)𝐬𝐧(t)\mathrm{\Psi }(t)\mathrm{\Delta }t,$$
(50)
$$𝐞(t+\mathrm{\Delta }t)=𝐞(t)\omega _B(t)𝐧(t)\times 𝐞(t)\mathrm{\Delta }t.$$
(51)
After some simple algebra, the conclusion is achieved.

Because $`𝐞(t)`$ is a unit vector, we can write

$$𝐞(t)=\mathbf{(}\mathrm{sin}\theta _e(t)\mathrm{cos}\varphi _e(t),\mathrm{sin}\theta _e(t)\mathrm{sin}\varphi _e(t),\mathrm{cos}\theta _e(t)\mathbf{)}.$$
(52)
It is not difficult to show that

$$𝐬𝐞(t)=\mathrm{exp}[i\varphi _e(t)s_z]\mathrm{exp}[i\theta _e(t)s_y]s_z\mathrm{exp}[i\theta _e(t)s_y]\mathrm{exp}[i\varphi _e(t)s_z].$$
(53)
Therefore the eigenstate of $`𝐬𝐞(t)`$ with eigenvalue $`m_s`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=\mathrm{exp}[i\alpha (t)]\mathrm{exp}[i\varphi _e(t)s_z]\mathrm{exp}[i\theta _e(t)s_y]\chi _{m_s}^0,$$
(54)
where $`\alpha (t)`$ is a phase that cannot be determined by the eigenvalue equation. However, $`\alpha (t)`$ is not arbitrary. To satisfy the Schrödinger equation, it should be determined by the other variables $`\theta _e(t)`$ and $`\varphi _e(t)`$. In fact, the above equation yields

$$\mathbf{(}\mathrm{\Psi }(t),\mathrm{\Psi }(t+\mathrm{\Delta }t)\mathbf{)}=1+i\dot{\alpha }(t)\mathrm{\Delta }tim_s\mathrm{cos}[\theta _e(t)]\dot{\varphi }_e(t)\mathrm{\Delta }t.$$
(55)
On the other hand, from Eq. (50) we have

$$\mathbf{(}\mathrm{\Psi }(t),\mathrm{\Psi }(t+\mathrm{\Delta }t)\mathbf{)}=1+i\omega _B(t)𝐯(t)𝐧(t)\mathrm{\Delta }t,$$
(56)
where $`𝐯(t)`$ is defined by Eq. (17). Comparing the two results we obtain

$$\dot{\alpha }(t)=m_s\mathrm{cos}[\theta _e(t)]\dot{\varphi }_e(t)+\omega _B(t)𝐯(t)𝐧(t).$$
(57)
The motion of $`𝐞(t)`$ is determined by the magnetic field. If the magnetic field is such that $`𝐞(t)`$ returns to its initial value at the time $`T`$, that is

$$\theta _e(T)=\theta _e(0),\varphi _e(T)=\varphi _e(0)+2\pi K,$$
(58)
where $`K`$ is an integer, then we get a cyclic solution. In fact, it is easy to show that

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(T)=\mathrm{exp}(i\delta )\mathrm{\Psi }(0),$$
(60)
where

$$\delta =\alpha (T)\alpha (0)2\pi m_sK,\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}$$
(61)
is the total phase change. Using Eqs. (57) and (58), it can be recast in the form

$$\delta =m_s_0^T[1\mathrm{cos}\theta _e(t)]\dot{\varphi }_e(t)𝑑t+_0^T\omega _B(t)𝐯(t)𝐧(t)𝑑t.$$
(62)
The second term is obviously the dynamic phase $`\beta `$. Therefore the nonadiabatic geometric phase is

$$\gamma =m_s\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐞,\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}$$
(63)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐞=_0^T[1\mathrm{cos}\theta _e(t)]\dot{\varphi }_e(t)𝑑t$$
(64)
is the solid angle subtended by the trace of $`𝐞(t)`$.

Finally notice that $`𝐯(t)`$ satisfies the same equation as $`𝐞(t)`$, and $`𝐯_0=m_s𝐞_0`$ which can be easily verified, we have $`𝐯(t)=m_s𝐞(t)`$. Consequently, Eq. (63) can be recast in the form

$$\gamma =|m_s|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯,\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(65)
This is the final result of this section. Though $`\gamma `$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$ cannot be explicitly calculated, the above relation holds regardless of the form of the magnetic field. For $`m_s=\pm s`$, this result was previously obtained in Ref. , and for general $`m_s`$ in Ref. , both by different methods from ours, but our method seems more straightforward and simpler.

It should be noted that $`𝐯(t)=0`$ when $`m_s=0`$. In this case $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$ is not well defined. However, the final result (65) remains correct because it gives the same result $`\gamma =0`$ as given by Eq. (63). This remark also applies to the result (32) in Sec. II and similar ones in the following sections. To conclude this section, we remark that for any cyclic motion one can always appropriately choose the coordinate axes such that $`\theta _e(t)`$ does not take on the values $`0`$ or $`\pi `$ during the cycle under consideration. This avoids any uncontinuous jump or ill definition of $`\varphi _e(t)`$, and renders the above demonstration sound enough.

## IV Alkaline atomic electron in a strong rotating magnetic field

In this section we consider the valence electron of the alkaline atom or that of the hydrogen atom moving in a strong rotating magnetic field given by Eq. (1). This is described by the Schrödinger equation

$$i\mathrm{}_t\mathrm{\Psi }=H(t)\mathrm{\Psi },$$
(67)
where

$$H(t)=H_0+\mu _\mathrm{B}B(𝐥+2𝐬)𝐧(t)=H_0+\mathrm{}\omega _B(𝐥+2𝐬)𝐧(t),$$
(68)
in which

$$H_0=\frac{𝐩^2}{2M}+V(r)$$
(69)
is the Hamiltonian of the electron in the central potential of the nucleus (and the other electrons in the inner shells for alkaline atoms), $`M`$ and $`\mu _\mathrm{B}`$ are respectively the reduced mass and the Bohr magneton of the electron, $`\omega _B=\mu _\mathrm{B}B/\mathrm{}>0`$, $`𝐥=𝐫\times 𝐩/\mathrm{}`$ is the orbit angular momentum operator in unit of $`\mathrm{}`$, and $`𝐬`$ the spin as before (here $`s=1/2`$). The applicability of this equation was discussed in Ref. .

The above Schrödinger equation can be solved in a way similar to that in Sec. II. This was discussed in detail in Ref. . The solution is

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=U(t)\mathrm{\Psi }(0),U(t)=W(t)U_{\text{eff}}(t),$$
(70)
where

$$W(t)=\mathrm{exp}(i\omega tj_z),U_{\mathrm{eff}}(t)=\mathrm{exp}(iH_{\text{ eff}}t/\mathrm{}),$$
(71)
where $`j_z`$ is the $`z`$-component of the total angular momentum (in unit of $`\mathrm{}`$) $`𝐣=𝐥+𝐬`$, and

$$H_{\text{eff}}=H_0+\mathrm{}\omega _L𝐥𝐧_L+\mathrm{}\omega _S𝐬𝐧_S$$
(72)
is the effective Hamiltonian. The parameters in the effective Hamiltonian are defined as

$$\omega _L=(\omega _B^2+\omega ^22\omega _B\omega \mathrm{cos}\theta _B)^{1/2},$$
(74)
$$\omega _S=(4\omega _B^2+\omega ^24\omega _B\omega \mathrm{cos}\theta _B)^{1/2};$$
(75)
$$𝐧_L=(\mathrm{sin}\theta _L,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0},\mathrm{cos}\theta _L),𝐧_S=(\mathrm{sin}\theta _S,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0},\mathrm{cos}\theta _S),$$
(76)
where

$$\mathrm{sin}\theta _L=\frac{\omega _B\mathrm{sin}\theta _B}{\omega _L},\mathrm{cos}\theta _L=\frac{\omega _B\mathrm{cos}\theta _B\omega }{\omega _L},$$
(78)
$$\mathrm{sin}\theta _S=\frac{2\omega _B\mathrm{sin}\theta _B}{\omega _S},\mathrm{cos}\theta _S=\frac{2\omega _B\mathrm{cos}\theta _B\omega }{\omega _S}.$$
(79)
Using the above solution we can calculate the mean values of $`𝐥`$ and $`𝐬`$ in an arbitrary state. We define

$$𝐮(t)=\mathbf{(}\mathrm{\Psi }(t),𝐥\mathrm{\Psi }(t)\mathbf{)},𝐯(t)=\mathbf{(}\mathrm{\Psi }(t),𝐬\mathrm{\Psi }(t)\mathbf{)},$$
(80)
and denote $`𝐮_0=𝐮(0)`$ and $`𝐯_0=𝐯(0)`$. On account of the fact that $`𝐥`$, $`𝐬`$ and $`H_0`$ commute with one another, the results can be obtained by calculations similar to those performed in Sec. II. We define

$$𝐟(t)=[𝐮_0(𝐮_0𝐧_L)𝐧_L]\mathrm{cos}\omega _Lt+(𝐧_L\times 𝐮_0)\mathrm{sin}\omega _Lt+(𝐮_0𝐧_L)𝐧_L,$$
(82)
$$𝐠(t)=[𝐯_0(𝐯_0𝐧_S)𝐧_S]\mathrm{cos}\omega _St+(𝐧_S\times 𝐯_0)\mathrm{sin}\omega _St+(𝐯_0𝐧_S)𝐧_S,$$
(83)
then the results read

$$𝐮(t)=\mathbf{(}f_x(t)\mathrm{cos}\omega tf_y(t)\mathrm{sin}\omega t,f_x(t)\mathrm{sin}\omega t+f_y(t)\mathrm{cos}\omega t,f_z(t)\mathbf{)},$$
(85)
$$𝐯(t)=\mathbf{(}g_x(t)\mathrm{cos}\omega tg_y(t)\mathrm{sin}\omega t,g_x(t)\mathrm{sin}\omega t+g_y(t)\mathrm{cos}\omega t,g_z(t)\mathbf{)}.$$
(86)
Note that the second term in $`𝐠(t)`$ has a different sign from the one in Sec. II. The physical picture is rather similar to the previous one.

We denote the common eigenstates of $`\{H_0,𝐥^2,l_z\}`$ as $`\zeta _{nlm}^0`$, with eigenvalues $`\{ϵ_{nl},l(l+1),m\}`$, where $`ϵ_{nl}`$ are the energy spectrum of the electron in the absence of the magnetic field. Then the common eigenstates of the operators $`\{H_0,𝐥^2,𝐥𝐧_L,𝐬𝐧_S\}`$ with eigenvalues $`\{ϵ_{nl},l(l+1),m,m_s\}`$ (now $`m_s=\pm 1/2`$) are

$$\phi _{nlmm_s}=\zeta _{nlm}\chi _{m_s},$$
(87)
where $`\chi _{m_s}`$ is given by Eq. (29), and

$$\zeta _{nlm}=\mathrm{exp}(i\theta _Ll_y)\zeta _{nlm}^0=\underset{m^{}}{}D_{m^{}m}^l(0,\theta _L,0)\zeta _{nlm^{}}^0.$$
(88)
The $`\phi _{nlmm_s}`$ are also eigenstates of $`H_{\text{eff}}`$ with the eigenvalues

$$E_{nlmm_s}=ϵ_{nl}+m\mathrm{}\omega _L+m_s\mathrm{}\omega _S.$$
(89)
However, these eigenvalues are not observable since $`H_{\text{eff}}`$ is not a physical quantity. The above states are complete. At a given time, any state of the system can be expressed as a linear combination of them.

As shown in Ref. , a solution with the initial condition

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_i(0)=\phi _i=\phi _{nlmm_s}$$
(90)
is a cyclic one. Here for convenience we use one subscript $`i`$ to represent all the quantum numbers $`nlmm_s`$. The nonadiabatic geometric phase was shown to be

$$\gamma _i=m\mathrm{\Omega }_Lm_s\mathrm{\Omega }_S,\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(91)
Here $`\mathrm{\Omega }_L=2\pi (1\mathrm{cos}\theta _L)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_S=2\pi (1\mathrm{cos}\theta _S)`$. We denote the solid angles subtended by the traces of the orbit and spin angular momenta by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐮`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$, respectively. For the present case $`𝐮(t)`$ and $`𝐯(t)`$ have forms similar to Eq. (27), so we have

$$\gamma _i=|m|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐮|m_s|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯,\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π},$$
(92)
and the geometric nature of the result is quite obvious. For the alkaline atomic electron at hand, $`|m_s|`$ can be replaced by $`1/2`$ since $`m_s=\pm 1/2`$. However, the above result is valid for a charged particle of general spin $`s`$ moving in the central potential plus the strong rotating magnetic field. In Sec. V we will show that this result holds in an arbitrarily varying strong magnetic field as long as the initial state is appropriately chosen. However, we will show in the following that for more general cyclic solutions the nonadiabatic geometric phase contains extra terms in addition to the linear combination of the two solid angles.

In the above we see that the initial condition $`\mathrm{\Psi }_i(0)=\phi _i`$ leads to a cyclic solution in the general case. If the parameters of the system satisfy some appropriate conditions, more cyclic solutions are available. In fact, if $`\omega _B`$, $`\omega `$ and $`\theta _B`$ are such that both $`\omega _L/\omega `$ and $`\omega _S/\omega `$ are rational numbers, we will see that any solution with the initial condition

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=\underset{mm_s}{}c_{mm_s}\phi _{nlmm_s}$$
(93)
is a cyclic one, where the coefficients $`c_{mm_s}`$ are arbitrary except satisfying $`_{mm_s}|c_{mm_s}|^2=1`$ such that the initial state is normalized. Suppose that $`\omega _L/\omega =K_2/K_1`$, $`\omega _S/\omega =K_4/K_3`$, where all the $`K`$’s are natural numbers, with $`K_2`$ and $`K_1`$ prime to each other, and the same for $`K_4`$ and $`K_3`$. We denote the least common multiple of $`K_1`$ and $`K_3`$ as $`K`$, and write

$$\omega _L/\omega =K_L/K,\omega _S/\omega =K_S/K,$$
(94)
where $`K_L=KK_2/K_1`$ and $`K_S=KK_4/K_3`$ are both natural numbers. In this case, $`\omega T`$, $`\omega _LT`$ and $`\omega _ST`$ are all integral multiples of $`2\pi `$, where $`T=K\tau `$ is now the period of $`𝐮(t)`$ and $`𝐯(t)`$. It is not difficult to show that

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(T)=\mathrm{exp}(i\delta )\mathrm{\Psi }(0),$$
(96)
where

$$\delta =ϵ_{nl}T/\mathrm{}l(2\pi K+2\pi K_L)s(2\pi K+2\pi K_S),\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(97)
Thus the solution is actually cyclic and $`\delta `$ is the total phase change which is independent of the initial condition. Currently we would like to keep the general value $`s`$ such that the result may be applied to a charged particle with more general spin. The dynamic phase can be calculated in a way similar to that in Sec. II, the result is

$$\beta =ϵ_{nl}T/\mathrm{}2\pi K_L𝐮_0𝐧_L2\pi K_S𝐯_0𝐧_S2\pi K(\mathrm{cos}\theta _L𝐮_0𝐧_L+\mathrm{cos}\theta _S𝐯_0𝐧_S).$$
(98)
This depends on the initial condition as expected. The nonadiabatic geometric phase is

$`\gamma =\delta \beta =`$ $`2\pi K(l\mathrm{cos}\theta _L𝐮_0𝐧_L)2\pi K(s\mathrm{cos}\theta _S𝐯_0𝐧_S)`$ (100)
$`(l𝐮_0𝐧_L)2\pi K_L(s𝐯_0𝐧_S)2\pi K_S,\text{mod }2\pi .`$
On the other hand, the solid angles subtended by the traces of the orbit and spin angular momenta are

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐮=2\pi K_L\left(1\frac{𝐮_0𝐧_L}{|𝐮_0|}\right)+2\pi K\left(1\mathrm{cos}\theta _L\frac{𝐮_0𝐧_L}{|𝐮_0|}\right),$$
(102)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯=2\pi K_S\left(1\frac{𝐯_0𝐧_S}{|𝐯_0|}\right)+2\pi K\left(1\mathrm{cos}\theta _S\frac{𝐯_0𝐧_S}{|𝐯_0|}\right).$$
(103)
The calculations that lead to these results are similar to those in Sec. II. From the above results and Eq. (100) it is easy to find that

$$\gamma =|𝐮_0|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐮|𝐯_0|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯+(|𝐮_0|l)(2\pi K+2\pi K_L)+(|𝐯_0|s)(2\pi K+2\pi K_S),\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(104)
Therefore, in addition to a linear combination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐮`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$, we get two extra terms in $`\gamma `$. This result holds for a charged particle with spin $`s`$ moving in the central potential plus the magnetic field. The first extra term can be dropped only when $`|𝐮_0|`$ is an integer and the second when $`|𝐯_0|s`$ is an integer. For the alkaline atomic electron, $`|𝐯_0|=s=1/2`$, so the second extra term vanishes. Because $`l`$ is an integer, we have for the alkaline atomic electron the final result

$$\gamma =|𝐮_0|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐮\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯+|𝐮_0|(2\pi K+2\pi K_L),\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(105)
For the special initial condition (90), the above results reduce to Eq. (92). In the next section we will show that the result (92) holds in an arbitrarily varying magnetic field as long as the initial state is a common eigenstate of $`\{H_0,𝐥^2,𝐥𝐝_0,𝐬𝐞_0\}`$ with eigenvalues $`\{ϵ_{nl},l(l+1),m,m_s\}`$, where $`𝐝_0`$ and $`𝐞_0`$ are some unit vectors. For the rotating magnetic field at hand, it holds as long as $`|𝐮_0|=|m|`$ and $`|𝐯_0|=|m_s|`$ (the second is automatically satisfied for $`s=1/2`$), which is a looser restriction on the initial state. We do not know whether this is true for a more general magnetic field. To conclude this section we point out that the condition (94) can be realized with $`\omega _L/\omega =1`$ and $`\omega _S/\omega =2`$, if one chooses $`\omega _B/\omega =\sqrt{3/2}`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _B=\sqrt{3}/2\sqrt{2}`$ .

## V Alkaline atomic electron in an arbitrarily varying strong magnetic field

Now we consider the alkaline atomic electron moving in an arbitrarily varying strong magnetic field. We write down the Schrödinger equation:

$$i\mathrm{}_t\mathrm{\Psi }=H(t)\mathrm{\Psi },$$
(107)
where

$$H(t)=H_0+\mathrm{}\omega _B(t)(𝐥+2𝐬)𝐧(t).$$
(108)
Compared with that in Sec. IV, there are two differences. First, $`\omega _B(t)=\mu _\mathrm{B}B(t)/\mathrm{}`$ is time dependent and may be either positive or negetive. Second, $`𝐧(t)`$ is an arbitrarily varying unit vector. It is difficult to obtain any specific solution of the above equation. However, for solutions of special initial conditions, we can establish a relation between $`\gamma `$ and the solid angles $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐮`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯`$.

Obviously, the operators in the set $`\{H_0,𝐥^2,𝐥𝐝_0,𝐬𝐞_0\}`$ commute with one another, where $`𝐝_0`$ and $`𝐞_0`$ are some unit vectors, thus they can have a complete set of common eigenstates. We take the initial state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(0)`$ of the system to be such a common eigenstate, that is

$$H_0\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=ϵ_{nl}\mathrm{\Psi }(0),𝐥^2\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=l(l+1)\mathrm{\Psi }(0),$$
(110)
$$𝐥𝐝_0\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=m\mathrm{\Psi }(0),𝐬𝐞_0\mathrm{\Psi }(0)=m_s\mathrm{\Psi }(0).$$
(111)
For the alkaline atomic electron, the last condition need not be assumed, since one can always find a unit vector $`𝐞_0`$ such that it holds with $`m_s=1/2`$ or $`1/2`$. However, we prefer to assume it so that the result may be valid for charged particles of more general spin. We define two vectors $`𝐝(t)`$ and $`𝐞(t)`$ by the following differential equations and initial conditions

$$\dot{𝐝}(t)=\omega _B(t)𝐧(t)\times 𝐝(t),𝐝(0)=𝐝_0,$$
(113)
$$\dot{𝐞}(t)=2\omega _B(t)𝐧(t)\times 𝐞(t),𝐞(0)=𝐞_0.$$
(114)
Obviously, both $`|𝐝(t)|`$ and $`|𝐞(t)|`$ are time independent, so $`𝐝(t)`$ and $`𝐞(t)`$ are unit vectors at any time. One can prove that the following eigenvalue equations hold at all times.

$$H_0\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=ϵ_{nl}\mathrm{\Psi }(t),𝐥^2\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=l(l+1)\mathrm{\Psi }(t),$$
(116)
$$𝐥𝐝(t)\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=m\mathrm{\Psi }(t),𝐬𝐞(t)\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=m_s\mathrm{\Psi }(t).$$
(117)
Because $`𝐝(t)`$ and $`𝐞(t)`$ are unit vectors, we can write

$$𝐝(t)=\mathbf{(}\mathrm{sin}\theta _d(t)\mathrm{cos}\varphi _d(t),\mathrm{sin}\theta _d(t)\mathrm{sin}\varphi _d(t),\mathrm{cos}\theta _d(t)\mathbf{)},$$
(119)
$$𝐞(t)=\mathbf{(}\mathrm{sin}\theta _e(t)\mathrm{cos}\varphi _e(t),\mathrm{sin}\theta _e(t)\mathrm{sin}\varphi _e(t),\mathrm{cos}\theta _e(t)\mathbf{)}.$$
(120)
As in Sec. III, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(t)`$ can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=\mathrm{exp}[i\alpha (t)]\mathrm{exp}[i\varphi _d(t)l_z]\mathrm{exp}[i\theta _d(t)l_y]\zeta _{nlm}^0\mathrm{exp}[i\varphi _e(t)s_z]\mathrm{exp}[i\theta _e(t)s_y]\chi _{m_s}^0,$$
(121)
where $`\alpha (t)`$ is determined by the equation

$$\dot{\alpha }(t)=m\mathrm{cos}[\theta _d(t)]\dot{\varphi }_d(t)+m_s\mathrm{cos}[\theta _e(t)]\dot{\varphi }_e(t)\mathrm{}^1H(t),$$
(122)
where the expectation value $`H(t)`$ is calculated in the state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(t)`$.

The motions of $`𝐝(t)`$ and $`𝐞(t)`$ are determined by the magnetic field. If the latter is such that both $`𝐝(t)`$ and $`𝐞(t)`$ return to their initial values at time $`T`$, then we get a cyclic solution. The nonadiabatic geometric phase can be shown to be

$$\gamma =m\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐝m_s\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐞,\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}$$
(123)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐝=_0^T[1\mathrm{cos}\theta _d(t)]\dot{\varphi }_d(t)𝑑t,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐞=_0^T[1\mathrm{cos}\theta _e(t)]\dot{\varphi }_e(t)𝑑t$$
(124)
are the solid angles subtended by the traces of $`𝐝(t)`$ and $`𝐞(t)`$.

By similar reasoning to that in Sec. III, we have $`𝐮(t)=m𝐝(t)`$ and $`𝐯(t)=m_s𝐞(t)`$, and Eq. (123) can be written as

$$\gamma =|m|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐮|m_s|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝐯,\text{mod }\text{2}\text{π}.$$
(125)
This is the final result of this section. It holds for a charged particle with spin $`s`$ moving in the central potential plus the arbitrarily varying strong magnetic field. For the alkaline atomic electron, $`|m_s|`$ may be replaced by $`1/2`$.

## VI Summary

In this paper we have studied the nonadiabatic geometric phases of neutral or charged particles moving in a time-dependent magnetic field. In Sec. II we consider a neutral particle with general spin and with magnetic moment moving in a rotating magnetic field. The nonadiabatic geometric phase for special cyclic solutions is proportional to the solid angle subtended by the trace of the spin \[cf Eq. (32)\]. This is well known. However, for more general cyclic solutions, we find that the nonadiabatic geometric phase contains an extra term. The main result of this section is Eq. (44). The extra term vanishes automatically for spin $`1/2`$, consistent with the known conclusion for spin $`1/2`$ that Eq. (32) is valid in an arbitrary magnetic field. For higher spin, however, the extra term depends on the initial condition. In Sec. III we show that the result (32) is valid for special cyclic solutions of higher spin in an arbitrarily varying magnetic field. In Sec. IV we consider a charged particle moving in a central potential plus a strong rotating magnetic field. This may describe the valence electron in an alkaline atom or that in a hydrogen atom. For special cyclic solutions, the nonadiabatic geometric phase is a linear combination of the two solid angles subtended by the traces of the orbit and spin angular momenta \[cf Eq. (92)\]. This is also a previously known result. For the more general cyclic solutions, however, extra terms are also involved in the geometric phase. The main results of this section are Eqs. (104) and (105). In Sec. V we prove that the result (92) is valid for special cyclic solutions of charged particles moving in a central potential plus an arbitrarily varying strong magnetic field.

## Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of the People’s Republic of China.

## Appendix

Here we prove Eq. (19) in a very simple way.

We define

$$𝐅(\varphi )=\mathrm{exp}(i\varphi 𝐬𝐧_S)𝐬\mathrm{exp}(i\varphi 𝐬𝐧_S).$$
(126)
Differentiation of this equation with respect to $`\varphi `$ yields

$$𝐅^{}(\varphi )=𝐧_S\times 𝐅(\varphi ),$$
(126)
and

$$𝐅^{\prime \prime }(\varphi )=𝐧_S\times [𝐧_S\times 𝐅(\varphi )]=[𝐅(\varphi )𝐧_S]𝐧_S𝐅(\varphi ).$$
(127)
From Eq. (126) we have $`[𝐅(\varphi )𝐧_S]^{}=𝐅^{}(\varphi )𝐧_S=0`$, so that $`𝐅(\varphi )𝐧_S=𝐅(0)𝐧_S=𝐬𝐧_S`$. Then Eq. (127) becomes

$$𝐅^{\prime \prime }(\varphi )+𝐅(\varphi )=(𝐬𝐧_S)𝐧_S.$$
(128)
The solution of this equation is obviously

$$𝐅(\varphi )=𝐚\mathrm{cos}\varphi +𝐛\mathrm{sin}\varphi +(𝐬𝐧_S)𝐧_S,$$
(129)
where $`𝐚`$ and $`𝐛`$ are constant vectors. From Eqs. (126) and (126) we have

$$𝐅(0)=𝐬,𝐅^{}(0)=𝐧_S\times 𝐬.$$
(130)
This determines $`𝐚`$ and $`𝐛`$, so we arrive at

$$𝐅(\varphi )=[𝐬(𝐬𝐧_S)𝐧_S]\mathrm{cos}\varphi +(𝐧_S\times 𝐬)\mathrm{sin}\varphi +(𝐬𝐧_S)𝐧_S.$$
(131)
Eq. (19) can be obtained by substituting $`\varphi =ϵ(\mu )\omega _St`$ into the above result.


text:
# Absence of weak localization in two-dimensional disordered Frenkel lattices

## Abstract

The standard one-parameter scaling theory predicts that all eigenstates in two-dimensional random lattices are weakly localized. We show that this claim fails in two-dimensional dipolar Frenkel exciton systems. The linear energy dispersion at the top of the exciton band, originating from the long-range inter-site coupling of dipolar nature, yields the same size-scaling law for the level spacing and the effective disorder seen by the exciton. This finally results in the delocalization of those eigenstates in the thermodynamic limit. Large scale numerical simulations allow us to perform a detailed multifractal analysis and to elucidate the nature of the excitonic eigenstates.

One of the most attractive problems in condensed matter physics is the localization of quasi-particles (electrons, phonons, excitons) in disordered matter. The existence or absence of the localization-delocalization transition has been found to strongly depend on the system dimensionality. The one-parameter scaling theory of localization  states that any nonzero disorder causes exponential localization of all eigenstates in one-dimensional (1D) and two-dimensional (2D) systems, regardless their energies, while in three-dimensional (3D) systems only a rather strong disorder causes the state localization. It is to be noted that there exist several exceptions to this rule. In this regard, anomalously weak localization is known to occur at the band center in 1D  and 2D  systems with off-diagonal disorder. Moreover, correlations in disorder may cause delocalization of states in 1D systems  even in the presence of strong disorder. The long-range inter-site coupling also may act as a driving force for delocalization  in any dimension. We have recently shown the absence of localization in a 1D Hamiltonian with a special type of long-range intersite interaction, resulting in a specific, non-parabolic quasi-particle energy dispersion. Remarkably, the delocalized states belong to one tail of the band .

In this work we report further progress along the lines mentioned above and demonstrate that extended states may occur in 2D disordered Frenkel systems, where the exciton eigenenergies of the ordered system scale linearly with the wavenumber at the top of the exciton band. In such a case, the level spacing decreases on increasing the system size in the same manner that the strength of effective disorder seen by the exciton \[see Eq. (9) below\]. Therefore, if the disorder is of perturbative magnitude for a given lattice size, it will remain perturbative on increasing the size, consequently allowing delocalized eigenstates.

We consider a Frenkel exciton Hamiltonian on a regular $`𝒩=N\times N`$ lattice with diagonal disorder:

$$=\underset{𝐧}{}ϵ_𝐧|𝐧𝐧|+\underset{\mathrm{𝐦𝐧}}{}J_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}|𝐧𝐦|.$$
(1)
Here, $`|𝐧`$ is the state vector of the $`𝐧`$-th excited molecule with energy $`ϵ_𝐧`$ and $`𝐧=(n_x,n_y)`$, $`n_x,n_y`$ being integers ($`N/2n_x,n_y<N/2`$, with $`N`$ even). The intersite dipole-dipole interaction is taken in the form $`J_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}=J/|𝐧𝐦|^3`$, where $`J>0`$ is the coupling between nearest-neighbor (NN) molecules in the lattice (hereafter we assume that transition dipole moments of molecules are perpendicular to the plane of the system and that their magnitudes are the same). The joint distribution function of a realization of disorder is the product of box functions of width $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ centered around zero. The quantity $`\mathrm{\Delta }/J`$ is referred to as degree of disorder.

In the excitonic representation, assuming periodic boundary conditions, the Frenkel Hamiltonian (1) takes the form

$$=\underset{𝐊}{}E_𝐊|𝐊𝐊|+\underset{\mathrm{𝐊𝐊}^{}}{}(\delta )_{\mathrm{𝐊𝐊}^{}}|𝐊𝐊^{}|,$$
(3)
where $`𝐊=(2\pi /N)(k_x,k_y)`$ runs over the first Brillouin zone, $`k_x,k_y`$ being integers ranging within the interval $`N/2k_x,k_y<N/2`$. Here $`E_𝐊`$ is the unperturbed exciton eigenenergy

$$E_𝐊=J\underset{𝐧\mathrm{𝟎}}{}\frac{1}{|𝐧|^\mathrm{𝟑}}e^{i𝐊𝐧},$$
(4)
and $`(\delta )_{\mathrm{𝐊𝐊}^{}}`$ is the inter-mode coupling matrix

$$(\delta )_{\mathrm{𝐊𝐊}^{}}=\frac{1}{𝒩}\underset{𝐧}{}ϵ_𝐧e^{i(𝐊𝐊^{})𝐧}.$$
(5)
Hereafter we keep long-range terms in (4) due to their major role. It can be shown that near the extreme points of the band $`𝐊=\mathrm{𝟎}`$ and $`𝐊=𝝅(\pi ,\pi )`$ the exciton energy spectrum takes a linear and a parabolic form, respectively :

$`E_𝐊`$ $``$ $`9.03J2\pi J|𝐊|,|𝐊|1,`$ (7)
$`E_𝐊`$ $``$ $`2.65J+0.4J|𝐊𝝅|^2,|𝐊𝝅|1.`$ (8)
From this it follows that the energy spacing close to the top of the exciton band behaves as $`N^1=𝒩^{1/2}`$, while in the vicinity of the bottom scales as $`N^2=𝒩^1`$.

Depending on the degree of disorder and the lattice size, the operator $`\delta `$ may couple the extended excitonic states $`|𝐊`$ to each other, thus resulting in their localization. Our task now is to calculate the typical fluctuation of this matrix in order to gain insight into the magnitude of the exciton inter-mode coupling. The corresponding magnitude of interest is $`\sigma _{\mathrm{𝐊𝐊}^{}}^2=|(\delta )_{\mathrm{𝐊𝐊}^{}}|^2`$, where the angular brackets indicate the average over the distribution $`_𝐧P(ϵ_𝐧)`$. After performing the average one gets

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{𝐊𝐊}^{}}\sigma \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\sqrt{𝒩}}.$$
(9)
Here $`\sigma `$ is referred to as effective degree of disorder. As we can see, the typical magnitude of the inter-mode coupling scales as $`𝒩^{1/2}=N^1`$. The most remarkable fact is that $`\sigma `$ decreases on increasing $`𝒩`$ in the same manner as the level spacing close to the top of the exciton band. This finding has a dramatic effect on the localization properties of the states within this region. Indeed, consider for example a finite lattice of size $`N\times N`$ and the two first unperturbed states with $`𝐊=\mathrm{𝟎}`$ and $`𝐊^{}=(2\pi /N,0)`$. The energy difference between them, according to Eq. (7), is $`\delta E=4\pi ^2J/N`$. Take now the degree of the disorder to be $`\mathrm{\Delta }4\pi ^2J`$. Notice that this condition is not very restrictive since in actual systems the degree of disorder is expected not to exceed the exciton bandwith ($`11.68J`$). Under this condition, the strength of the effective disorder $`\sigma =\mathrm{\Delta }/N`$, governing the exciton state mixing and thereof localization, is of perturbative magnitude, namely $`\sigma \delta E`$. What is most important, it will remain perturbative upon increasing the lattice size because both magnitudes scale similarly with $`N`$. Hence, these states will not be mixed by disorder and will remain extended over the entire lattice independent of its size. It is clear that the same conclusion can be drawn for all the states of the linear spectrum range except the degenerate ones. They are mixed by any small amount of disorder. However, since different sets of degenerate states are not coupled to each other due to the perturbative nature of the effective degree of disorder ($`\sigma \delta E`$), the above conclusion is also valid with regard to degenerate states.

Let us now turn to the parabolic range of the energy spectrum, where the level spacing decreases as $`𝒩^1=N^2`$ upon increasing the lattice size, i.e., faster than the effective degree of disorder $`\sigma `$ (the same behavior takes place for both edges of the band obtained within the NN approximation, namely taking $`J_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}=0`$ when $`|𝐧𝐦|>1`$). Now, even if one starts with a perturbative magnitude of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ at a fixed lattice size (so that $`\sigma \delta E`$), it becomes non-perturbative for larger sizes, resulting finally in localization of those eigenstates.

The results of numerical diagonalization of the Hamiltonian (1), by means of the Lanczos method , unambiguously confirm our qualitative arguments. To examine the character of the exciton eigenfunction (localized or extended) we have calculated the inverse participation ratio (IPR) of the uppermost exciton state, according to the standard definition $`\mathrm{I}PR=_𝐧|\mathrm{\Psi }_{\nu 𝐧}|^4,`$ where the sum runs over lattice sites and it is assumed that the eigenfunction $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\nu 𝐧}`$ of the $`\nu `$th eigenstate is normalized to unity. On increasing the lateral size $`N`$, the IPR scales as $`N^2`$ for delocalized states, spreading uniformly over a 2D system. On the contrary, localized states exhibit constant values for different $`N`$.

The IPR as a function of the lateral size $`N`$ is shown in Fig. 1 when the dipole-dipole interaction between all molecules is taken into account as well as within the NN approximation. The plots comprise the result of $`20`$ averages over disorder realizations and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=J`$ in all cases. The slope of the straight line, being equal to $`1.91`$ when dipole-dipole interaction is taken into account, is close to the theoretical value $`2`$. This scaling suggests the fairly extended nature of the uppermost exciton state. Notice that there is no scaling of the IPR within the NN approximation, in perfect agreement with the well-known results stating that those exciton states are localized. Figure 2 shows an increase of the IPR at a threshold value $`13J`$, suggesting the occurrence of a smooth delocalization-localization transition.

A comprehensive way to characterize the spatial distribution of eigenfunctions is the computation of the singularity spectrum, as explained in, e.g., Ref. . If we cover the system with $`(M/L)^2`$ boxes of size $`L^2`$ (in units of the lattice spacing) and define the normalized $`q`$th moments $`\mu _k(q,\delta )=\mu _k^q(\delta )/_k^{}\mu _k^{}^q(\delta )`$ (where $`\delta =L/M`$) of the probability distribution $`\mu _k(\delta )=_{n\text{box}k}|\mathrm{\Psi }_n|^2`$ of finding an exciton in the $`k`$th box, we may calculate the Lipschitz-Hölder exponents

$$\alpha (q)=\underset{\delta 0}{lim}\underset{k}{}\mu _k(q,\delta )\mathrm{ln}\mu _k(1,\delta )/\mathrm{ln}\delta $$
(10)
which take into account the scaling of the content of each box with the box size, as well as the corresponding value of the singularity spectrum

$$f(q)=\underset{\delta 0}{lim}\underset{k}{}\mu _k(q,\delta )\mathrm{ln}\mu _k(q,\delta )/\mathrm{ln}\delta .$$
(11)
The invariance of the singularity spectrum with the system size for a given value of disorder is usually taken  as a proof of the occurrence of the Anderson transition. Nevertheless strong fluctuations of the eigenstates of the system near the transition makes it difficult to calculate the $`f(\alpha )`$ curve for the threshold value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. We have calculated the singularity spectrum for values of the degree of disorder below the threshold. Figure 3 shows the broadening of the $`f(\alpha )`$ curve with increasing disorder, indicating that the excitonic eigenfunctions at the top of the band becomes progressively more and more localized. This result suggests again the occurrence of a smooth delocalization-localization transition, as in Fig. 2.

In summary, we have shown that the statement of the one-parameter scaling theory  about the weak localization in two dimensions, i.e., that any amount of disorder results in localization of all eigenstates, fails near the top of the exciton band where the quasi-particle spectrum scales linearly with the wavenumber $`|𝐊|`$. The states lying at such energy range are delocalized at moderate strength of disorder and undergo the continuous Anderson transition as the disorder degree increases. In our opinion, the failure of the one-parameter scaling theory for the conditions considered in the present work is due to the fact that this theory deals only with the size scaling of the energy spacing but pays no attention to the subsequent renormalization of the disorder (9). As it follows from our treatment, the latter effect plays a major role in localization phenomena, violating the one-parameter scaling and thus leading to the impossibility to match our results by this theory.

The authors thank E. Maciá, A. Sánchez, E. Diez, R. Römer and M. Hilke for discussions. F. D-A. and A. R. were supported by DGI-MCyT (Project MAT2000-0734). V. A. M. acknowledges support from INTAS (Project No. 97-10434).

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3