# Untitled Document

Quantum particle constrained to a curved surface

in the presence of a vector potential.

Mario Encinosa and Ray H. O’Neal

Department of Physics

Florida A$`\&`$M University, Tallahassee, Florida

Abstract

The Schrodinger equation for a charged particle constrained to a curved surface in the presence of a vector potential is derived using the method of forms. In the limit that the particle is brought infinitesimally close to the surface, a term arises that couples the component of the vector potential normal to the surface to the mean curvature of the surface.

PACS numbers: 03.65.Ge,3.65 -w

It is often stated that the quasifree electrons of a nanostructure are confined to very nearly two dimensional regions . A heterojunction well, for one example, confines electrons to a layer much smaller than the lateral dimensions of the device , so that the physics of the object may be discussed in terms of standard two dimensional quantum mechanical models . Here we are interested if the reduction to lower dimensionality (even if only approximately realized) via constraints can result in novel effects when a charged particle is subject to a static vector potential. There are none for a flat surface from elementary considerations; however, it has been shown that when a particle in three dimensional space is constrained to a two dimensional curved surface, curvature terms enter the Schrodinger equation (or the path integral) for the particle . In this letter, the methods of  are extended to include a vector potential.

Let $`d`$ be the standard exterior derivative operator that provides a mapping from $`p`$ forms to $`p+1`$ forms appropriate to a coordinate system $`(q_1,q_2,q)`$. The minimal substitution rule for the covariant derivative of a negatively charged particle in the presence of a vector potential  gives

$$\frac{1}{i}D\frac{1}{i}\left[d+ieA\right]$$
$`(1)`$   
In the absence of a scalar potential, A is

$$A=A_1\sigma _1+A_2\sigma _2+A_3\sigma _3$$
$`(2)`$   
with $`\sigma _i`$ one forms derived from applying $`d`$ to the Monge form $`𝐱(q_1,q_2,q)`$ for a given coordinate system. For $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ a zero form function, the Schrodinger equation in this notation (in natural units) becomes

$$\frac{1}{2}[DD\mathrm{\Psi }]=i\mathrm{}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{t}$$
$`(3)`$   
with $``$ the Hodge star operator. In a gauge with $`dA=0`$, eq.(3) may be written in the familiar form

$$\frac{1}{2}\left[dd+2ieAd(AA)\right]\mathrm{\Psi }=i\mathrm{}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{t}.$$
$`(4)`$   
Because the main interest here is in regions near to and on surfaces, $`𝐱`$ is set equal to a surface part with coordinates $`(q_1,q_2)`$ plus a part everywhere normal to the surface with coordinate $`q`$,

$$𝐱(q_1,q_2,q)=𝐫(q_1,q_2)+q𝐞_3$$
$`(5)`$   
so that

$$d𝐱=d𝐫+dq𝐞_3+qd𝐞_3$$

$$=\sigma _1𝐞_1+\sigma _2𝐞_2+\sigma _3𝐞_3.$$
$`(6)`$   
To avoid unneccessary complexity, consider an axially symmetric surface given by the set of points that satisfy the surface part of eq. (5),

$$𝐫(\rho ,\varphi )=\rho \mathrm{cos}\varphi 𝐢+\rho \mathrm{sin}\varphi 𝐣+S(\rho )𝐤.$$
$`(7)`$   
In terms of a local basis, points near the surface can be written either in terms of eq.(5) or in terms of a local set of unit vectors as (subscripts on $`S`$ denote differentiation)

$$𝐱(\rho ,\varphi ,q)=𝐫(\rho ,\varphi )+q𝐞_3=\frac{1}{Z}\left[(\rho +SS_\rho )𝐞_1+(S\rho S_\rho +q)𝐞_3\right]$$
$`(8)`$   
with

$$Z=\sqrt{1+S_{\rho }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}},$$
$`(9)`$   
$$𝐞_1=\frac{1}{Z}\left[\mathrm{cos}\varphi 𝐢+\mathrm{sin}\varphi 𝐣+S_\rho 𝐤\right],$$
$`(10)`$   
$$𝐞_2=\mathrm{sin}\varphi 𝐢+\mathrm{cos}\varphi 𝐣,$$
$`(11)`$   
and

$$𝐞_3=\frac{1}{Z}\left[S_\rho \mathrm{cos}\varphi 𝐢S_\rho \mathrm{sin}\varphi 𝐣+𝐤\right].$$
$`(12)`$   
The one forms for this system can be read off from

$$d𝐱=d\rho Z\left[1\frac{qS_{\rho \rho }}{Z^3}\right]𝐞_1+d\varphi \rho \left[1\frac{qS_\rho }{Z\rho }\right]𝐞_2+dq𝐞_3\sigma _1𝐞_1+\sigma _2𝐞_2+\sigma _3𝐞_3.$$
$`(13)`$   
It is possible to write eq.(4) in this geometry, but there is little to be gained by writing the general expression in full detail since our primary interest here is the modification of eq.(4) when the particle is constrained to the surface. A constraint that brings the particle to the surface can be thought of as being effected by a large confining potential everywhere normal to the surface, i.e., a local function of $`q`$ in the $`𝐞_3`$ direction. The usual choice  for this term is

$$V_n(q)=\frac{1}{2}\omega ^2q^2$$
$`(14)`$   
with eventually $`\omega \mathrm{}`$ and $`q0`$. As the particle approaches the surface, we anticipate a decoupling of the wavefunction into tangential and normal degrees of freedom

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\rho ,\varphi ,q)\chi _t(\rho ,\varphi )\chi _n(q).$$

A consistent relation for the norm is obtained by insisting on the condition 

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }|^2FdSdq=|\chi _t|^2dS|\chi _n|^2dq,$$
$`(15)`$   
so that

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{\chi _t\chi _n}{\sqrt{F}}$$
$`(16)`$   
with

$$F=1+2q_3H+q_3^2K$$
$`(17)`$   
and H, K the mean and Gaussian curvatures of the surface. Their explicit forms are given by

$$H=\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{S_\rho }{Z\rho }+\frac{S_{\rho \rho }}{Z^3}\right],$$
$`(18)`$   
and

$$K=\frac{S_\rho S_{\rho \rho }}{\rho Z^4}.$$
$`(19)`$   
The ansatz of eq.(16) can be inserted into eq.(4) to give the following relations for the tangential and normal functions in the $`q0`$ limit:

$$\frac{1}{2}\left[Z^2\left(\frac{^2\chi _t}{\rho ^2}+\frac{1}{\rho }\frac{\chi _t}{\rho }\right)\chi _n+\frac{1}{\rho ^2}\frac{^2\chi _t}{\varphi ^2}\chi _n+(H^2K)\chi _t\chi _n+\frac{^2\chi _n}{q^2}\chi _tZ^4S_\rho S_{\rho \rho }\frac{\chi _t}{\rho }\chi _n\right]$$

$$ie\left[\frac{A_1}{Z}\frac{\chi _t}{\rho }\chi _n+\frac{A_2}{\rho }\frac{\chi _t}{\varphi }\chi _n+A_3\frac{\chi _n}{q}\chi _tA_3H\chi _t\chi _n\right]$$

$$+\frac{e^2}{2}\left[A_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+A_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+A_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right]\chi _t\chi _n+V_n(q)\chi _t\chi _n=i\mathrm{}\frac{}{t}\chi _t\chi _n$$
$`(20)`$   
The $`(H^2K)`$ term appearing in the first grouping has been discussed elsewhere  and will not prove important for what follows. It is interesting to note that a coupling of $`A_3`$ to the mean curvature $`H`$ obtains even if a limiting procedure does not occur; it originates from a term proportional to $`\frac{F}{q}`$ and is present only if there is variation of the unit normal $`𝐞_3`$. Should the $`q0`$ condition not be imposed, higher order curvature terms would be present in eq.(20).

As an admittedly unphysical example of how the curvature term can produce a nontrivial consequence, consider a situation with $`A_1=A_2=0`$, and $`A_3,H`$ both functions of $`\rho `$ only. Next for

$$V_n(q)>>A_3\frac{}{q}ln[\chi _n(q)]$$
$`(21)`$   
a separable pair of equations obtain,

$$\frac{1}{2}\left[Z^2\left(\frac{^2\chi _t}{\rho ^2}+\frac{1}{\rho }\frac{\chi _t}{\rho }\right)\frac{m^2}{\rho ^2}\chi _tZ^4S_\rho S_{\rho \rho }\frac{\chi _t}{\rho }+(H^2K)\chi _t\right]$$

$$+ieA_3H\chi _t+\frac{e^2}{2}A_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\chi _t=E_t\chi _t$$
$`(22)`$   
and

$$\frac{1}{2}\frac{^2\chi _n}{q^2}+V_n(q)\chi _n=E_q\chi _n$$
$`(23)`$   
with $`m`$ an aziumthal quantum number. Suppose that the product of $`A_3`$ and $`H`$ over some region $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is approximately constant and zero elsewhere. Then for whatever $`\chi _t`$ results from the solving the tangential equation, the solution in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ would become

$$\chi _t\chi _t\mathrm{exp}[\pm e|A_3Ht|].$$
$`(24)`$   
Eq. (24) illustrates a peculiar situation wherein the sign of a term depending on curvature can have either dissapative or pathological behavior. Cleary this situation is not expected to persist for physically realizable systems, but it serves to show that peculiar results can obtain when studying constrained quantum systems.

In this letter, differential forms were used to derive the Schrodinger equation for a three dimensional particle constrained to a two dimensional cylindrically symmetric surface in the presence of a static vector potential. For arbitrary choices of geometry and field configuration, it is difficult to find closed form solutions of eq.(20). Nevertheless, the above discussion indicates that the interplay between surface geometry and applied fields may be important. It is worth reemphasizing that even for finite $`q`$ there is nontrivial coupling of $`A`$ to surface terms through differentiations of eq.(17). This is a manifestation of a general result; imposing constraints in three dimensional space to restrict particle dynamics to a two dimensional space gives different results than an $`a\mathrm{𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑟𝑖}`$ two dimensional model.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to acknowledge useful discussions with Ray O’Neal and Lonnie Mott.

REFERENCES

1. R. Ashoori, $`\mathrm{𝑁𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒}`$, vol. 378, pp. 413-419, 1998. 2. J. R. Chelilowsky and S. G. Louie, eds. $`\mathrm{𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑢𝑚}\mathrm{𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑦}\mathrm{𝑜𝑓}\mathrm{𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑙}\mathrm{𝑀𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑠}`$, (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Massachusetts, 1996). 3. D. Pfannkuche, R. Gerhardts, P. Maksym andV. Gudmundsson, Phys. B $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟖𝟗}`$, 6, (1993). 4. R. C. T. da Costa, Phys. Rev. A $`\mathrm{𝟐𝟑}`$, 1982 (1981). 5. R. C. T. da Costa, Phys. Rev. A $`\mathrm{𝟐𝟓}`$, 2893 (1982). 6. M. Burgess and B. Jensen, Phys. Rev. A $`\mathrm{𝟒𝟖}`$, 1861 (1993). 7. S. Matsutani, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 61, $`\mathrm{𝟓𝟓}`$, (1992). 8. S. Matsutani and H. Tsuru, J. Phys. Soc. Japan, $`\mathrm{𝟔𝟎}`$, 3640 (1991). 9. M. Encinosa and B. Etemadi, Physical Review A $`\mathrm{𝟓𝟖}`$, 77 (1998). 10. B. Skarsgard, $`\mathrm{𝐺𝑒𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑦},\mathrm{𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒𝑠}\mathrm{𝑎𝑛𝑑}\mathrm{𝐺𝑎𝑢𝑔𝑒}\mathrm{𝐹𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠}`$ (Springer Verlag, New York, 1998). 11. H. Flanders; $`\mathrm{𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙}\mathrm{𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑠}\mathrm{𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ}\mathrm{𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠}\mathrm{𝑡𝑜}\mathrm{𝑡ℎ𝑒}\mathrm{𝑃ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙}\mathrm{𝑆𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑠}`$ (Dover Books, New York, 1989). 12. M. Encinosa and B. Etemadi, Physica B, 266 , 361 (1999).