advanced27 min studyLesson 667 in Physics

Continue evolution while preserving its analytic meaning

Track the time contour, the action sign, spectral damping, and reconstruction assumptions.

On this page

What you’ll understand

  • Derive the Euclidean kinetic and potential signs.
  • Distinguish imaginary-time projection from thermal weighting.
  • State why convergence does not by itself guarantee a unitary real-time theory.

Replacing oscillations by exponential damping often makes quantum calculations manageable. The replacement is an analytic continuation with specified boundary conditions, not permission to erase every factor of i by inspection. A regulated Hamiltonian provides a clean starting point: continue its evolution into a complex-time half-plane where the spectrum is damped. The resulting Euclidean kernel can support projection and thermal calculations, but their endpoint conditions and normalization differ. Returning to real time requires more information than a convergent numerical integral alone.

Continue the operator and action together

Start with a regulated self-adjoint Hamiltonian bounded below. Real-time evolution is exp(−iHt/ℏ). Along the continuation t=−iτ with τ positive, it becomes exp(−Hτ/ℏ). Subtracting a fixed reference energy may be convenient, but changes the overall normalization and should be declared. A finite time-sliced representation carries this continuation before a formal continuum limit is attempted; exchanging continuation, integration, and regulator removal requires an analytic justification.

For a particle with real-time Lagrangian m qdot²/2−V, the continued velocity is i times the Euclidean derivative and dt=−i dτ. Consequently the Minkowski action evaluated on that contour is i times the Euclidean action with positive kinetic term plus V. Multiplication by the original i produces minus the Euclidean action in the exponent. Rotating only the time measure while leaving the velocity unchanged would give the wrong kinetic sign.

t=−iτ,e−iHt/ℏ=e−Hτ/ℏ,SM=iSE,SE=∫dτ[m2(dqdτ)2+V(q)]t=-i\tau,\qquad e^{-iHt/\hbar}=e^{-H\tau/\hbar},\qquad S_M=iS_E,\qquad S_E=\int d\tau\left[\frac m2\left(\frac{dq}{d\tau}\right)^2+V(q)\right]
The relation SM=iSE refers to the continued contour, not equality of two actions on unchanged real arguments. Actions are in J·s, τ in s, and the kernel weight is exp(−SE/ℏ).↔ Scroll wide equations horizontally.

Projection and a trace are different operations

Expand an initial state in energy eigenstates. Euclidean evolution suppresses an excitation relative to the ground state by an amplitude factor determined by the energy gap and τ. Normalizing the evolved vector therefore suppresses relative probabilities by twice that exponent. Projection requires nonzero initial overlap with the desired ground sector; a conserved symmetry can prevent that overlap. This is an imaginary-time preparation device, not unitary physical evolution preserving the original vector norm.

A thermal partition function instead traces exp(−βH), with β inverse energy and τ=βℏ. Bosonic paths are periodic around the resulting Euclidean time circle; fermionic thermal fields use antiperiodic boundary conditions. Thermal level probabilities carry exp(−βE), not the squared amplitude of an imaginary-time-evolved pure state. Confusing these constructions introduces a factor of two and can also replace a mixed thermal ensemble by a pure projected state.

cn(τ)c0(τ)=cn(0)c0(0)e−(En−E0)τ/ℏ,Z(β)=Tr⁡e−βH,τ=βℏ\frac{c_n(\tau)}{c_0(\tau)}=\frac{c_n(0)}{c_0(0)}e^{-(E_n-E_0)\tau/\hbar},\qquad Z(\beta)=\operatorname{Tr}e^{-\beta H},\quad \tau=\beta\hbar
cn are amplitudes before final normalization; E are energy eigenvalues. β has units J⁻¹. The trace and the evolved pure vector use the same semigroup but different boundary conditions and interpretations.↔ Scroll wide equations horizontally.

Convergence is necessary but not a reconstruction theorem

A positive quadratic Euclidean kinetic operator gives convergent finite bosonic integrals, but interactions, unbounded potentials, chemical potentials, or fermion determinants may spoil a positive sampling interpretation. Gauge constraints still require gauge fixing or a quotient construction. Continuum reconstruction of a unitary real-time theory requires structural conditions such as reflection positivity and appropriate regularity, not just a small Monte Carlo error. Singularities and the vacuum iε prescription determine how time-ordered real-time boundary values are recovered.

The heat lab demonstrates spectral damping in a separate equation. Reset and set mode number to 1 and diffusivity to 1, then Step twice to time 1; predict mode amplitude e⁻¹. Reset and set mode to 2 and diffusivity to 1, then Step twice; predict e⁻⁴. Its readout also gives the spatial L² norm as √π times that amplitude. This is one periodic heat-equation mode, not a Wick-rotation engine, quantum projection algorithm, or general field-theory solver.

Zoscillator(β)=∑n=0∞e−βℏω(n+1/2)=12sinh⁡(βℏω/2)Z_{\rm oscillator}(\beta)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}e^{-\beta\hbar\omega(n+1/2)}=\frac{1}{2\sinh(\beta\hbar\omega/2)}
This exact thermal oscillator formula assumes ω>0 and β>0. The zero-point energy is retained; shifting it away would multiply Z by a β-dependent overall factor.↔ Scroll wide equations horizontally.

Compare a projected vector with a thermal pair

A two-level system has energies 1 and 3 in units with ℏ=1. Start with equal amplitudes and evolve for Euclidean time 1, then normalize. Find its excited-level probability and compare with a thermal state at β=1.

  1. The Euclidean amplitudes acquire factors e⁻¹ and e⁻³. Their excited-to-ground amplitude ratio is e⁻², since the gap is 2.

  2. The normalized pure vector therefore has excited probability e⁻⁴/(1+e⁻⁴)=1/(1+e⁴)≈0.0180. Squaring amplitudes produced the factor four in this exponent.

  3. The thermal probability is instead e⁻³/(e⁻¹+e⁻³)=1/(1+e²)≈0.1192. Both favor the ground state, but they are distinct preparations and neither result follows by treating imaginary-time evolution as unitary.

The result

The normalized projected vector has excited probability about 0.0180; the β=1 thermal state has about 0.1192.

Explore the model

Interactive lab

Interactive lab · heat

Compare analytic mode damping

Reset and set n=1,κ=1, then Step twice to t=1; predict amplitude e⁻¹. Reset and set n=2,κ=1, then Step twice; predict e⁻⁴.

Compare analytic mode dampingThe exact periodic heat-equation mode is u(x,t) = exp(−κn²t) sin(nx), on [0,2π]. Playback advances physical time. The initial sine is shown separately, and the unnormalized L² norm is √π exp(−κn²t). This analytic instrument does not run a finite-difference solver or test discretization stability. Current readings: Current amplitude: 1; Spatial L² norm: 1.772; Decay rate · κn²: 3.6 /s. All parameters are adjustable with the labeled controls below.Periodic heat equation mode 3 at time 0: the amplitude is 1.0π/2π3π/22π−1−0.500.51x · periodic intervalTemperature perturbation uExact mode · n = 3
Current temperature modeInitial sineCurrent amplitude
Current amplitude
1
Spatial L² norm
1.772
Decay rate · κn²
3.6 /s
t = 0 s

The exact periodic heat-equation mode is u(x,t) = exp(−κn²t) sin(nx), on [0,2π]. Playback advances physical time. The initial sine is shown separately, and the unnormalized L² norm is √π exp(−κn²t). This analytic instrument does not run a finite-difference solver or test discretization stability. Parameter changes pause playback and recompute the model at the current elapsed time. Reset restores both parameters and returns time to zero. Playback starts paused. Adjust either parameter, then choose Play or Step.

Look forThe readout’s L² norm is √π times amplitude. This is an exact periodic heat mode, not analytic continuation or a quantum path-integral computation.

Check your understanding

Under t=−iτ for a stable particle Hamiltonian, what happens to the kinetic contribution in the Euclidean weight?

Try it yourself

For a harmonic oscillator choose βℏω=ln4. Find the partition function with zero-point energy retained and the thermal ground-state probability.

Take a moment to make a prediction or work it out on paper. Open a hint when you need one.

Give me a hint

Sum the geometric Boltzmann series; the ratio between adjacent weights is 1/4.

Compare with the solution

The ground weight is exp[−(ln4)/2]=1/2. The sum is (1/2)/(1−1/4)=2/3. The normalized ground probability is (1/2)/(2/3)=3/4. Dropping zero-point energy would change Z to 4/3 while leaving the normalized level probabilities unchanged.

Take it with you

  • Wick rotation continues an operator and contour with their boundary prescription.
  • Imaginary-time amplitudes and thermal probabilities have different normalization rules.
  • Euclidean convergence alone does not establish a positive measure or unitary reconstruction.

Read further

Original sources and deeper explanations to follow at your own pace.

Optional progress, saved in this browser when available. Revisit any lesson at any time.

Lesson not marked complete.