Continuous and discrete dynamical Schr\"odinger systems: explicit solutions
B. Fritzsche, B. Kirstein, I.Ya. Roitberg, A.L. Sakhnovich

TL;DR
This paper develops explicit solutions for continuous and discrete dynamical Schr"odinger systems with matrix potentials using a generalized Bäcklund-Darboux transformation, and explores their asymptotic behavior over time.
Contribution
It introduces a generalized Bäcklund-Darboux transformation method to construct explicit solutions for dynamical Schr"odinger systems with matrix potentials.
Findings
Constructed explicit solutions for dynamical Schr"odinger systems.
Analyzed asymptotic expansions of solutions in time.
Extended the Bäcklund-Darboux transformation to a generalized form.
Abstract
We consider continuous and discrete Schr\"odinger systems with self-adjoint matrix potentials and with additional dependence on time (i.e., dynamical Schr\"odinger systems). Transformed and explicit solutions are constructed using our generalized (GBDT) version of the B\"acklund-Darboux transformation. Asymptotic expansions of these solutions in time are of interest.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
\newsymbol\blackbox
1004
Continuous and discrete dynamical Schrödinger systems: explicit solutions
B. Fritzsche, B. Kirstein, I.Ya. Roitberg, A.L. Sakhnovich
Abstract
We consider continuous and discrete Schrödinger systems with self-adjoint matrix potentials and with additional dependence on time (i.e., dynamical Schrödinger systems). Transformed and explicit solutions are constructed using our generalized (GBDT) version of the Bäcklund-Darboux transformation. Asymptotic expansions of these solutions in time are of interest.
MSC(2010): 35Q41, 37C80, 39A12, 47B36.
Keywords: *Schrödinger equation, dynamical system, Jacobi matrix,
Bäcklund-Darboux transformation, dispersion, explicit solution.*
1 Introduction
Dynamical Dirac and Schrödinger systems play an essential role in mathematical physics and are actively studied, especially in the recent years (see, e.g., [2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 17, 21, 27, 28, 35] and numerous references therein). Continuous dynamical Schrödinger system has the form:
[TABLE]
where is an matrix function, , and is the set of natural numbers. The matrix function is called the potential of (1.1) and this potential does not depend on in our case.
In discrete dynamical Schrödinger system we use Jacobi matrices instead of since Jacobi operators “can be viewed as the discrete analogue of Sturm-Liouville operators” [34, Preface]. The corresponding system is given by the formula:
[TABLE]
where is a semi-infinite block Jacobi matrix and is a block vector
[TABLE]
Here, the blocks , and are matrices and .
Explicit solutions of dynamical systems are important as models and examples and they are also essential in applications. Various explicit solutions of time-independent systems were constructed using commutation methods [6, 11, 12, 18] and several versions of Bäcklund-Darboux transformations. Bäcklund-Darboux transformation is a well-known tool in the spectral theory and theory of explicit solutions. The original equation, which was studied by Darboux, is the Schrödinger equation
[TABLE]
Later, and especially in the last 40 years, this transformation was greatly modified, generalized and applied to a variety of linear and nonlinear equations (see, e.g., [5, 14, 19, 20, 30]).
It was shown recently in [28, 29] that the GBDT version of Bäcklund-Darboux transformation (for GBDT see [22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30] and references therein) may be successfully applied to the construction of explicit solutions of dynamical systems as well.
In the present paper, we consider the important case of continuous dynamical Schrödinger system and a more difficult case of discrete system (i.e., system (1.2)). Some preliminaries are presented in Section 2, continuous dynamical Schrödinger system is dealt with in Section 3 and system (1.2) is considered in Section 4.
The dependence of our solutions of (1.1) and (1.2) on time is described by the factor , where is a parameter matrix (generalized eigenvalue) of the GBDT transformation. Since is not necessarily self-adjoint and may have Jordan cells of different orders, the asymptotic expansion of our solutions of (1.1) and (1.2) essentially differs (see Remark 3.4) from the classical Jensen-Kato formulas (see [15] as well as further references in [7, 8]).
As usual, denotes the set of real values, is the set of natural numbers, and the complex plane is denoted by . Notation stands for the matrix which is the conjugate transpose of , we write when is a positive-definite matrix, and stands for the identity matrix. The notation means that is a diagonal or block diagonal matrix with the entries (or block entries) , and so on.
2 GBDT: preliminaries
GBDT (generalized Bäcklund-Darboux transformation) was first introduced in [22], and a more general version of GBDT for first order systems rationally depending on the spectral parameter (in particular, for systems of the form , ) was treated in [23, 30] (see also some references therein). First order system
[TABLE]
where takes values in and coefficients and have the form
[TABLE]
is equivalent to the matrix Schrödinger equation (1.4) with a self-adjoint potential . Here we present basic GBDT results for this system (see, e.g., [23, 24]). The connection with the Schrödinger equations (1.1) and (1.4) is discussed in greater detail in the next section.
Remark 2.1
We consider systems (2.1) and (1.1) on finite or infinite intervals , that is, we assume that . Without loss of generality we assume also that and speak later about parameter matrices and instead of and for some fixed . The most interesting for us is the case of the semiaxis .
In general, GBDT is determined by the choice of 5 parameter matrices (this case was treated in [24], where was not necessarily self-adjoint). However, relations (2.2) (including ) imply additional equalities:
[TABLE]
Thus the conditions of Proposition 1.4 from [23] are fulfilled, and we may use this proposition and some formulas from its proof. The following statements in this section are particular cases of [24, Theorem 2.1] (or [23, Theorem 1.2]) completed by [23, Proposition 1.4].
Hence, in the present case we use 3 parameter matrices. More precisely, we choose some initial system (2.1) (or, equivalently, the initial potential of Schrödinger equation (1.4)) and fix . Then, we fix matrices and , and an matrix such that the following matrix identity holds:
[TABLE]
Suppose that such parameter matrices are fixed and that the potential is locally summable on . Now, we can introduce matrix functions and with the values and at as the solutions of the linear differential equations
[TABLE]
where and are given by (2.2), and so . Thus, in view of , we have
[TABLE]
Notice that equations (2.5) are constructed in such a way that the identity
[TABLE]
follows (for all ) from (2.4) and (2.5). (The relation is obtained by the direct differentiation of the both sides of (2.7).) Assuming that we can define a matrix function
[TABLE]
where ( means spectrum).
Theorem 2.2
Suppose that the relation (2.4) is valid, and matrix functions and satisfy equations (2.5) where (2.2) holds. Then, in the points of invertibility of , the matrix function satisfies the system
[TABLE]
where the coefficient is given by the formula
[TABLE]
Remark 2.3
Formulas (2.2) and (2.5) yield
[TABLE]
and so for under additional condition . In particular, the condition of invertibility of from Theorem 2.2 is fulfilled automatically when and .
The matrix functions , and are well-defined in this case.
According to Theorem 2.2, the multiplication by transforms each solution of (2.1) into the solution of the system with the coefficients of given by (2.10) and (2.11). This transformation of the solutions and coefficients is called GBDT. Matrix function is the so called Darboux matrix. The right hand side of (2.8) (with the additional property (2.7) and fixed) has the form of the Lev Sakhnovich transfer matrix function [30, 31, 33].
Under the conditions of Theorem 2.2 we have also
[TABLE]
Clearly, the definition (2.11) of and formula (2.6) imply that
[TABLE]
3 Explicit solutions of the dynamical system (1.1) and GBDT of the matrix Schrödinger equation
1.
Let us write down the coefficient of the transformed system in the block form. We partition into two blocks and partition introduced in (2.11) into four blocks:
[TABLE]
Thus, in Theorem 2.2 (see (2.11)) has the form
[TABLE]
In order to rewrite (2.13) in a more convenient form, we shall need also the block representation of , and :
[TABLE]
which follows from (2.2), (2.14) and (3.2). Now, (2.13) takes the form
[TABLE]
Differentiating the second equality in (3.7) (and taking into account the first equality), we obtain
[TABLE]
Using (3.8) we derive the main theorem in this section
Theorem 3.1
Let the parameter matrices , and be chosen so that (2.4) is valid, let the potential be locally summable on , and introduce and via (2.5) where (2.2) holds.
Then, in the points of invertibility of , the matrix function
[TABLE]
satisfies the continuous dynamical Schrödinger system
[TABLE]
where is given by the formula
[TABLE]
P r o o f
. Taking into account (2.5), (2.13) and (2.2), (3.6), we calculate :
[TABLE]
In view of (3.12) (and definition (3.11) of ), we rewrite (3.8) in the form
[TABLE]
According to (3.5), we have . Therefore, (3.9) and (3.13) imply (3.10). We also note that is immediate from and formulas (2.14) and (3.11).
Remark 3.2
Under conditions and , the matrix function is invertible recall Remark 2.3. Thus, the matrix functions , , and considered in Theorem 3.1 are well-defined under these conditions.
2.
If the conditions of Theorem 3.1 and Remark 3.2 are valid, we obtain the following corollary.
Corollary 3.3
Consider dynamical Schrödinger equations on , let the conditions of Theorem 3.1 hold, and assume that . Then, the columns of the matrix function belong to i.e., these columns are squarely summable and the solutions of system (3.10) belong to for each fixed .
P r o o f
. In view of the second equality in (2.5) and the first equality in (2.12), we have
[TABLE]
Formula (3.14) implies that
[TABLE]
which proves the corollary.
Remark 3.4
For the study of the dependence on time of the solutions (3.6) and (4.24) of the discrete and continuous, respectively, Schrödinger equations, one may use the representation of in Jordan normal form:
[TABLE]
The Jordan representation above yields the equality
[TABLE]
Taking into account formula (3.9), Corollary 3.3 and representation (3.17), we see that the following asymptotics is valid generically
[TABLE]
*where is the norm in , , ,
, .*
We note that in a different way the Jordan structure of was used in [25] to study (and explain) an interesting multi-lump phenomena discovered in [1].
3.
Using considerations similar to those in Paragraph 1 of this section, we construct GBDT for matrix Schrödinger equation (1.4). Solution of system (2.1) with the coefficients given by (2.2) can be written down in the block form: w=\left[\begin{array}[]{c}y\\ \hat{y}\end{array}\right] (). Hence, we rewrite (2.1) as
[TABLE]
that is, (1.4) is fulfilled. So system (2.1), (2.2) is equivalent to the Schrödinger equation (1.4). The following proposition is a corollary of Theorem 2.2.
Proposition 3.5
Let a vector function satisfy the Schrödinger equation (1.4), where the potential is locally summable on , and assume that the conditions of Theorem 2.2 hold. Then, the vector function
[TABLE]
with , satisfies the matrix Schrödinger equation
[TABLE]
where is given by the formula (3.11).
P r o o f
. According to Theorem 2.2, we have . We rewrite this equation in terms of the blocks and of :
[TABLE]
Differentiating in the first equation above and using the second equation, we obtain Now, using (3.12), we derive
[TABLE]
Relation (3.19) is immediate from (3.11) and (3.20).
Instead of the Schrödinger equation (3.19) one can talk about Schrödinger operator with a properly defined domain.
4.
If and are known explicitly, then representations (3.9) and (3.18) provide explicit solutions of Schrödinger systems (3.10) and (3.19), respectively. In particular, and are easily constructed in the case (see [13]). For this purpose we partition into blocks: . Then, the first equation in (2.5) takes (for ) the form
[TABLE]
Remark 3.6
When , then in Theorems 2.2 and 3.1 and in Proposition 3.5 is given by the formulas and
[TABLE]
which is immediate from (3.21). According to (2.5), the matrix function is given by the formula
[TABLE]
Recall that we know that is, we choose parameter matrices , and or, equivalently, , and which determine GBDT-transformation.
4 Discrete dynamical Schrödinger system
1.
GBDT (generalized Bäcklund-Darboux transformation) was applied to important linear and nonlinear discrete systems in [9, 10, 16, 26, 30]. In particular, discrete canonical systems and non-Abelian Toda lattices were studied in [26]. Jacobi matrices corresponding to explicit solutions of matrix Toda lattices were considered in [26, Appendix]. Using some modification of the results from [26, Appendix], we construct here explicit solutions of discrete dynamical Schrödinger systems. We present also direct proofs of the corresponding modified results from [26, Appendix], whereas in [26, Appendix] several essential facts are proved indirectly (via the theory of discrete canonical systems developed in the previous sections of [26]) and some details of the proofs are omitted.
We start with introducing generalized Bäcklund-Darboux transformation (GBDT) of block Jacobi matrices. Suppose that the sets of matrices and such that
[TABLE]
are given. The corresponding initial Jacobi matrix is introduced by the relations
[TABLE]
where and (according to (4.1) and (4.7)) .
Recall that GBDT is determined by three parameter matrices. Thus, we fix , two parameter matrices and and an parameter matrix such that
[TABLE]
Everywhere in this section is given by the second equality in (4.8). Introduce matrices and for by the recursions
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
The following properties easily follow from (4.1) and (4.10): ,
[TABLE]
Therefore, taking adjoints of both parts of the first equality in (4.9) (and multiplying the result by ) we obtain an equivalent to this equality relation
[TABLE]
Remark 4.1
Setting in (4.12) and , we obtain an auxiliary linear system 10.1.9 from [32] for the matrix Toda chain, which explains the choice of the equation on in (4.9). Namely, we see that this equation is a generalized auxiliary system for Toda chain with the generalized eigenvalue .
Since and , the second equality in (4.9) yields for . Setting
[TABLE]
we define the transformed matrices and via relations
[TABLE]
Clearly for , and so for . Then, the transformation (GBDT) of the block Jacobi matrix is defined by the equalities
[TABLE]
We note that formulas (4.20) and (4.21) coincide (after removal of tildes) with the formulas (4.6) and (4.7) which define .
According to [26, Appendix], we have . Slightly modifying the proof of [26, Theorem A.1], one may derive that under condition
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
Theorem 4.2
Suppose that Jacobi matrix is given by the formulas (4.20) and (4.21), that relations (4.1), (4.8) and (4.22) are valid, and that the matrices and in (4.21) are given by (4.9)–(4.15).
Then the block vector function
[TABLE]
where is introduced in (4.23), satisfies the discrete dynamical Schrödinger system .
Theorem 4.2 is immediate from (4.23) and it remains to prove (4.23). More precisely, we prove the following theorem.
Theorem 4.3
Suppose that the relations (4.1) and (4.8) where are valid. Then the matrices and given by (4.9)–(4.15) are well-defined and satisfy relations
[TABLE]
We also have for the matrices in (4.21).
If, in addition, (4.22) holds, then the matrix of the form (4.20), (4.21) satisfies (4.23).
P r o o f
. Step 1. Taking into account the inequalities , and relations (4.9), (4.14), we explained already that and that . Therefore, the matrices and are well-defined, the inequality for in (4.25) is valid, is invertible, and is also well-defined.
Using (4.8) we show by induction that the matrix identity
[TABLE]
holds for all . Namely, let us assume that the identity
[TABLE]
is valid for some . Then, in view of the second equality in (4.9) we have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, the first equality in (4.9) and relations (4.11) imply that
[TABLE]
(Here we used also the equality , which is immediate from (4.11).) Comparing (4.27) and (4.28) we obtain (4.26).
Step 2. Next, we prove the equality
[TABLE]
Indeed, taking into account the second relation in (4.9), the equality
[TABLE]
which is immediate from (4.11), and the equalities
[TABLE]
we derive
[TABLE]
In view of the first relation in (4.9) and the equality , we rewrite (4.31) in the form
[TABLE]
Multiplying both sides of (4.32) by from the left and using again the first relation in (4.9), we see that
[TABLE]
Substituting (into (4.26)) instead of , we rewrite the result in the form
[TABLE]
After substitution of (4.34) into (4.33), we obtain
[TABLE]
Equality (4.29) follows from (4.35).
Step 3. Recall that is -unitary, that is, the relation (or, equivalently, ) in (4.11) holds. It is important to show that the transformed matrix introduced in (4.30) is -unitary as well. Taking into account (4.14) and (4.15) we rewrite (4.30) in the form
[TABLE]
Assuming that , we prove the equality
[TABLE]
We note that , where (with matrices satisfying (4.26)) is the transfer matrix function in Lev Sakhnovich form. (Compare with in (2.8).) According to [31] (see also [30, p. 24]) we have , and so the matrices () are -unitary. Thus, (4.37) implies that is -unitary. If , we have for smal values and approximate with the -unitary matrices corresponding to the GBDT-generating triples . Hence, the equality (4.37) for the case yields the -unitarity property
[TABLE]
without restriction on . It remains to show that (4.37) is valid.
Indeed, let us rewrite (4.37) in the form
[TABLE]
Using the first relation in (4.9), we rewrite (4.39) in another equivalent form
[TABLE]
Substituting the expression for from (4.29) into the second right hand term in (4.40), we obtain
[TABLE]
Therefore, using (4.36) and canceling similar terms we derive
[TABLE]
Recalling that by definition we further simplify the equality above, and so the following relation:
[TABLE]
is equivalent to (4.37). In view of (4.9) and (4.10), we have
[TABLE]
which proves (4.42). Thus, (4.37) is proved as well, and hence (4.38) holds.
In particular, (4.38) yields
[TABLE]
According to (4.30), formula (4.43) is equivalent to the equalities
[TABLE]
Therefore, the first equality in (4.25) is valid, and we also rewrite (4.30) in the form
[TABLE]
Comparing (4.45) and the first equality in (4.10), we see that the representations of and differ only by tildes in the notations.
The equality (for given by (4.21)) is immediate from the first relation in (4.25).
Step 4. Finally, let us prove (4.23). Using equalities (4.21) and the definition of in (4.23), we obtain
[TABLE]
Relations (4.29), (4.30) and (4.46), (4.47) imply that
[TABLE]
In particular, taking into account (4.22), we derive
[TABLE]
From (4.29) and (4.45) we see that
[TABLE]
According to (4.21) and (4.50) we have
[TABLE]
Now, formulas (4.48) and (4.51) yield for that
[TABLE]
Equalities (4.49) and (4.52) imply (4.23).
Acknowledgments. The research of A.L. Sakhnovich was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) under Grant No. P29177.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] M.J. Ablowitz, S. Chakravarty, A.D. Trubatch and J. Villarroel, A novel class of solutions of the non-stationary Schrödinger and the Kadomtsev–Petviashvili I equations, Phys. Lett. A 267 (2000), 132–146.
- 2[2] S. Avdonin, V. Mikhaylov and K. Ramdani, Reconstructing the potential for the one-dimensional Schrödinger equation from boundary measurements, IMA J. Math. Control Inform. 31 (2014), 137–150.
- 3[3] M. Belishev and V. Mikhailov, Inverse problem for a one-dimensional dynamical Dirac system (BC-method), Inverse Problems 30 (2014), 125013.
- 4[4] M. Boiti, F. Pempinelli and A.K. Pogrebkov, On the extended resolvent of the nonstationary Schrödinger operator for a Darboux transformed potential, J. Phys. A 39 :8 (2006), 1877–1898.
- 5[5] J.L. Cieslinski, Algebraic construction of the Darboux matrix revisited, J. Phys. A 42 (40) (2009), 404003, 40 pp.
- 6[6] P.A. Deift, Applications of a commutation formula. Duke Math. J. 45 (1978), 267–310.
- 7[7] I.E. Egorova, E.A. Kopylova, V.A. Marchenko and G. Teschl, Dispersion estimates for one-dimensional Schrödinger and Klein–Gordon equations revisited, Russian Math. Surveys 71 :3 (2016), 391–415.
- 8[8] I.E. Egorova, E.A. Kopylova and G. Teschl, Dispersion estimates for one-dimensional discrete Schrödinger and wave equations, J. Spectr. Theory 5 :4 (2015), 663–696.
