an important trend in the condensed matter physics of the last two decades , has been the use of advanced field - theoretical methods to discuss various subtle and fundamental properties of interacting many - particle systems at low temperatures .
there are several reasons for this trend .
the first reason is of course , that a traditional topic in statistical and condensed matter physics is the study of phase transitions and critical phenomena , for which the universal properties are independent of the microscopic details of the system and can therefore be determined by a field theory describing only the large - scale properties of the system of interest . since the latter
are usually solely determined by symmetry considerations , this has led to the important concept of spontaneous symmetry breaking , which has turned out to be not only highly successful in condensed matter physics , but also in high - energy physics and in particular in the standard model of elementary particles @xcite .
a second reason is that soon after the development of the renormalization group methods for critical phenomena @xcite , it was realized that the same methods can in fact be used to describe the large - scale properties of many - particle systems at any temperature and not only near the critical one .
moreover , application of the renormalization group ideas does not only lead to an understanding of the static behaviour but also of the dynamical properties @xcite . as a result
quantum field theories can be used to conveniently determine the dynamics of many - particle systems close to equilibrium , i.e. , for example the linear hydrodynamical equations of motion . in addition
, it can even be used in highly nonequilibrium situations where in general also nonlinearities play an important role .
this feature , that also the dynamics of the system can be captured by a quantum field theory , has for instance led in recent years to the study of so - called quantum phase transitions @xcite .
finally , the importance of field - theoretical methods in condensed matter physics is associated with the observation that also the effects of imperfections , i.e. , disorder , can be treated in this way @xcite .
apart from the technological importance of disorder , for example for superconducting magnets , disorder leads also to fundamentally new physics such as the phenomenon of localization @xcite . in quantum hall systems
, a combination of disorder and interaction effects give rise to the realization of various peculiar quantum fluids with fractionally charged excitations @xcite .
the application of field theories has proven to be highly successful in this case and has led to a theory of the quantum hall effect in terms of edge states that form a chiral luttinger liquid @xcite . in mesoscopic physics , the study of disorder in small electronic structures has resulted in the so - called random matrix theory @xcite , which has also been of much use in the study of the quantization of classically chaotic systems .
in this course we aim to show that quantum field theory is also very convenient for obtaining a detailed understanding of the equilibrium and nonequilibrium properties of trapped atomic gases .
after the first observations of bose - einstein condensation in 1995 @xcite , degenerate atomic gases have received again a great deal of attention and are presently the main subject of study of a large number of experimental and theoretical groups around the world .
the reason for all this excitement is , first of all , that bose - einstein condensation has never before been observed experimentally in a clear - cut manner , even though this phenomenon was already predicted by einstein in 1925 @xcite .
second , it is of fundamental interest because it is the only phase transition that occurs also in the absense of interactions and is , therefore , the textbook example for the use of statistical - physics methods . finally , the goal of achieving bose - einstein condensation turned out to be much more difficult than anticipated at first . just before the breakthrough in 1995
, it had even acquired the nature of a ` quest for the holy grail ' , since the pioneering experiments were already performed in 1980 @xcite .    from a theoretical point of view ,
a quantitative understanding of the experiments with cold atomic gases requires that we take into account the following two effects .
first , the gas is magnetically trapped in an , usually axially symmetric , harmonic oscillator potential .
this is necessary because , in order to obtain the required record low temperatures of @xmath0  nk , the gas can not be allowed to have any contact with material walls .
second , the atoms of the gas interact with each other , which in general dramatically affects the behaviour of the condensed gas , even at the relevant low densities of @xmath1  @xmath2 .
an accurate description of these degenerate gases thus requires the solution of a highly inhomogeneous many - body problem .
the theoretical challenge posed by these new quantum systems lies therein that the density of the gas is sufficiently small that it should be possible to accurately solve this many - body problem from first principles and to compare the outcome of the theory directly with experiment , i.e. , without any adjustable parameters . in our opinion ,
quantum field theory is the most simple way in which we are able to meet this challenge .
we start our development of the quantum field theory of trapped atomic gases by considering first the equilibrium properties of these gases .
we consider both bose and fermi gases , and the ultimate aim of this section is to arrive , for both cases , at an accurate description of the normal and superfluid phases of the gas .
although mixtures of bose and fermi gases are also of current interest , we do not consider them explicitly here , because they can be treated by a straightforward generalization of the theory . in section [ nft ]
we then turn to the nonequilibrium properties , which are perhaps the most interesting and certainly the least understood at present .
the reason for organizing the course in this way , is that the development of the equilibrium theory gives us an opportunity to introduce all the necessary tools that are required for a treatment of the more complicated nonequilibrium case . in particular , we present in detail the way in which we can make use of functional methods . to make also a connection with the more familiar operator language , however
, we first briefly summarize the outcome of the second quantization formalism .
the atoms of interest to us have internal degrees of freedom due to the electron and nuclear spins . in principle
this is very important , because it gives the atom a magnetic moment , which is used to trap the atoms in a magnetic field minumum . during this course , however , we restrict ourselves to atomic gases that are a mixture of at most two hyperfine states . without loss of generality
, we can then suppose to have @xmath3 identical atoms with mass @xmath4 and effective spin @xmath5 in an external potential @xmath6 . as a result ,
the time - dependent schrdinger equation we have to solve is @xmath7 where the hamiltonian is @xmath8 @xmath9_- = i\hbar$ ] , and all other commutators of the positions and momenta vanish .
the first term in the right - hand side is the sum of the one - particle hamiltonians , which includes an effective zeeman interaction that accounts for a possible difference in the hyperfine energies .
the second term represents the interactions . for simplicity
, we have assumed that the interaction @xmath10 is independent of the hyperfine states of the atoms @xmath11 and @xmath12 .
this is in general not justified for realistic atomic gases , but is valid for the specific applications that we have in mind . moreover , in section [ hft ] we also discuss the general case . finally , we have also neglected possible three - body forces .
this is a result of the fact that we are interested in dilute quantum gases , for which it is highly improbable for three atoms to simultaneously interact with each other .    without interactions the eigenstates
are , of course , given by the states @xmath13 , where the specific quantum state for each atom is exactly known . here
@xmath14 and the nonnegative integers @xmath15 , @xmath16 , and @xmath17 denote the three quantum numbers that are required to specify the one - particle eigenstates in the external potential .
the wave functions and energies of these eigenstates are @xmath18 and @xmath19 , respectively , and are found from the time - independent schrdinger equation @xmath20 in addition , the internal state @xmath21 is a shorthand notation for @xmath22 .
the many - body wave function @xmath23 , however , has to be symmetric or antisymmetric under permutations for bosonic or fermionic atoms , respectively .
therefore it is more convenient to use a properly ( anti)symmetrized version of the above basis , i.e. , the states @xmath24 with the occupation numbers @xmath25 for bosons and @xmath26 for fermions . the hilbert space of all these states , without the constraint @xmath27 , is known as the fock space .
clearly , the many - body wave function @xmath23 can be expanded in this basis as @xmath28 where @xmath29 is the amplitude for the gas to be in state @xmath24 at time @xmath30 . in this basis
the schrdinger equation becomes @xmath31 which shows that we need the matrix elements of the hamiltonian between different states in the fock space . to calculate these
most easily we introduce so - called annihilation operators @xmath32 by @xmath33 from which it follows that the creation operators @xmath34 obey @xmath35 as a result , we see that the operator @xmath36 counts the number of atoms in the state @xmath37 , i.e. , @xmath38 we have also that @xmath39_{\mp } =   [ \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{{\bf n},\alpha } ,                             \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{{\bf n}',\alpha'}]_{\mp}=0 $ ] and most importantly that @xmath40_{\mp }    = \delta_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' } \delta_{\alpha,\alpha'}~.\ ] ] in equations ( [ cr ] ) and ( [ com ] ) the upper sign refers to bosons and the lower to fermions
. this will be true throughout the course .    from these results
we can now easily show , first of all , that the basis in the fock space is given by @xmath41 with @xmath42 the vacuum state containing no atoms .
second , the hamiltonian is @xmath43 with @xmath44 the one - particle energies .
furthermore , @xmath45 is the amplitude for a collision which scatters two atoms out of the states @xmath46 and @xmath47 into the states @xmath37 and @xmath48 , as schematically shown in figure 1(a ) .
introducing the field operators @xmath49 and @xmath50 , that annihilate and create atoms in the spin state @xmath21 at position @xmath51 respectively , we can rewrite this result into @xmath52 note that , due to the ( anti)commutation relations of the creation and annihilation operators and the orthogonality of the wave functions @xmath53 , the field operators obey @xmath54_{\mp}=   [ \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\alpha}({\bf x } ) ,               \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\alpha'}({\bf x}')]_{\mp}= 0 $ ] and @xmath55_{\mp}=                       \delta({\bf x}-{\bf x}')\delta_{\alpha,\alpha'}$ ] .
moreover , it is also important for the following to note that the number operator is @xmath56 and , similarly , that the effective total spin operator is @xmath57 the density of atoms in the state @xmath21 is thus simply @xmath58 .
this completes our brief discussion of the second quantization formalism . in principle
, we could now proceed to develop an operator formulation of the quantum field theory of interest to us . since the experimentally most important observables can be expressed as appropriate products of the field operators , as we have just seen
, this would essentially amount to the study of the ( imaginary ) time evolution of the heisenberg operator @xmath59 at a fixed chemical potential @xmath60 @xcite .
put differently , the desired quantum field theory would be defined by the heisenberg equation of motion @xmath61_-~,\ ] ] and we would need to solve this equation in a sufficiently accurate approximation . as mentioned previously ,
however , we here want to develop feynman s ` path - integral ' formulation of the problem , which will turn out to be much more convenient for our purposes . to do so in a manner that is the same for both bosonic and fermionic atomic gases
, we first need to introduce some mathematical background .
we have seen that in the case of fermions , we need to make use of anticommuting creation and annihilation operators .
this automatically builds in the pauli principle in the theory , because it implies that @xmath62 and thus that the occupation numbers @xmath63 are restricted to be either @xmath64 or @xmath65 . for reasons that will become clear in a moment ,
it is in that case also convenient to introduce anticommuting complex numbers or grassmann variables .
the simplest example is to have two such grassmann variables , say @xmath66 and @xmath67 .
the set @xmath68 , and linear combinations thereof with complex coefficients , form then a so - called grassmann algebra
.    by definition we have @xmath69_+ = [ \phi,\phi^*]_+ = [ \phi^*,\phi^*]_+ = 0 $ ] and thus in particular @xmath70 .
therefore , the above set is indeed complete .
the complex conjugation in this algebra is defined by @xmath71 , @xmath72 , and @xmath73 .
moreover , we can also define an analytic function on this algebra by @xmath74 as a result , it is natural to define also a differentiation by @xmath75 to be more precise this is in fact a left differentiation and the minus sign occurs , because we need to permute @xmath67 and @xmath66 before we can differentiate with respect to @xmath66 .
so , similarly , we have @xmath76 and @xmath77    next we also need integrations over these grassmann variables . note that since @xmath78 we have only two possible integrals , namely @xmath79 and @xmath80 .
we define these by @xmath81 and @xmath82 this means that integration is equivalent to differentation .
the main reason for the above definition is that we want the integration to obey the usual rules of partial integration . in particular
, this implies that @xmath83 for any function @xmath84 .
it is clear that this condition requires that @xmath85 .
the result of @xmath86 is then solely a question of normalization .
it turns out that we are primarily interested in integrals of the form @xmath87 as we will see in section [ fi ] .
clearly , we can now also consider the grassmann algebra based on the variables @xmath88 and @xmath89 with @xmath90 .
what we will need in the following are gaussian integrals over these variables .
it is not difficult to show with the above definitions that @xmath91}~.\ ] ] if the variables @xmath88 and @xmath89 were just ordinary complex numbers we would in contrast have the result @xmath92}~.\ ] ] these last two results will be used many times in the following .
one immediate use of these grassmann variables is that we can now consider eigenstates of the annihilation operator @xmath32 , also when we are dealing with fermions .
these eigenstates are called coherent states .
consider the state @xmath93 where @xmath94 is a grassmann variable that also anticommutes with the creation and annihilation operators in our fock space .
clearly we have that @xmath95 so @xmath96 is indeed an eigenstate of @xmath32 with eigenvalue @xmath94 . in general
we can now make the states @xmath97 that obey @xmath98 .
introducing the grassmann - valued field @xmath99 , the latter two relations can be rewritten as @xmath100 and @xmath101 .
it is important to note that these coherent states are not orthonormal .
in contrast , we find that @xmath102 nevertheless they obey a closure relation , as can be seen explicitly from @xmath103 we write this from now on simply as @xmath104d[\phi]~e^{-(\phi|\phi ) } |\phi\rangle\langle\phi| = \hat{1}~.\ ] ]    the interesting observation at this point is that essentially the same formulaes also hold for bosons @xcite .
we have only a minus sign difference in @xmath105 but then it can still be easily shown that @xmath106 .
a convenient way to do so is , for instance , by noting that the commutation relation @xmath107_-                             = \delta({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' ) \delta_{\alpha,\alpha'}$ ] implies that @xmath108 acts as @xmath109 on these states .
furthermore , the same expressions hold for the overlap @xmath110 and the closure relation , if we define the integration measure by @xmath111d[\phi ] \equiv \int \prod_{{\bf n},\alpha }                       d\phi^*_{{\bf n},\alpha } d\phi_{{\bf n},\alpha}/(2\pi i)$ ] in this case .    summarizing ,
we have thus found for bosons and fermions that @xmath112 @xmath113 and @xmath104d[\phi]~e^{-(\phi|\phi ) } |\phi\rangle\langle\phi| = \hat{1}~.\ ] ] the last ingredient we need is that in terms of these coherent states the trace of an operator @xmath114 over the fock space can be expressed as @xmath115 = \int d[\phi^*]d[\phi]~e^{-(\phi|\phi ) }                   \langle\pm\phi|\hat{o}|\phi\rangle~.\ ] ] the minus sign in the fermionic case is easily understood from the fact that we then have @xmath116 , due to the anticommuting nature of the grassmann variables .
after this mathematical interlude we can now return to physics and to our goal of arriving at a unified treatment of bosonic and fermionic atomic gases .
we are interested in determining the equilibrium properties of a trapped atomic gas at some temperature @xmath117 . from statistical physics we know that all these properties can be obtained from the grand - canonical partition function @xmath118~,\ ] ] where @xmath119 and @xmath60 the chemical potential .
we thus need to evaluate this quantity .
as mentioned previously , we want to do so by making use of quantum field theory and , in addition , of feynman s path - integral approach to quantum mechanics .
we thus want to write the partition function as a functional integral over time - dependent fields @xmath120 , just like the partition function of a single particle in an external potential can be written as a functional integral over all time - dependent paths @xmath121 .
this can indeed be achieved with the coherent states that we have introduced in the previous section .
we start with using our formula ( [ trace ] ) for the trace of an operator , @xmath122d[\phi]~e^{-(\phi|\phi ) }              \langle\pm\phi| e^{-\beta(\hat{h}-\mu \hat{n } ) } |\phi\rangle~,\ ] ] and observe that we are thus faced with the task of calculating the matrix elements @xmath123 with @xmath124 and @xmath125 .
this is difficult in general but can be simplified in the following way .
we first realize that the operator @xmath126 is identical to the quantum mechanical evolution operator @xmath127 evaluated at @xmath128 .
put differently , we thus want to calculate the matrix elements of the imaginary - time evolution operator @xmath129 for @xmath130 .
to do so , we next split the time interval @xmath131 $ ] into @xmath132 pieces , with @xmath133 and @xmath134 .
so @xmath135 .
the procedure is summarized in figure 2 .
$ ] needed for feynman s path - integral formulation of the partition function . ]    at each intermediate time @xmath136 we then apply a closure relation of the coherent states .
this gives @xmath137d[\phi_m]~       e^{-(\phi_m|\phi_m ) } \right ) \prod_{m=1}^m \langle\phi_m|       e^{-\delta\tau(\hat{h}-\mu \hat{n})/\hbar } |\phi_{m-1}\rangle~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] now we can use that in the limit @xmath138 we only need to know the latter matrix elements up to order @xmath139 , because terms of order @xmath140 lead to corrections of order @xmath141 , which vanish in that limit .
hence @xmath142/\hbar ) ~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with the grand - canonical hamiltonian functional resulting from equations ( [ hamilton ] ) and ( [ number ] ) equal to @xmath143 = \sum_{\alpha } \int d{\bf x}~   \phi^*_{\alpha}({\bf x } )    \left\ { - \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                                    + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) + \epsilon_{\alpha } - \mu    \right\ } \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x } ) \hspace*{0.4 in } \\ & & \hspace*{0.85 cm } + \frac{1}{2 }    \sum_{\alpha,\alpha ' } \int d{\bf x } \int d{\bf x}'~             \phi^*_{\alpha}({\bf x } )             \phi^*_{\alpha'}({\bf x } ' ) v({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' )             \phi_{\alpha'}({\bf x } ' ) \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x})~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] since @xmath144 and @xmath145 .
thus , neglecting terms of order @xmath140 , we can again exponentiate the right - hand side of equation ( [ me ] ) , which leads in first instance to @xmath146/\hbar}~,\ ] ] and therefore for the desired matrix element of the imaginary - time evolution operator to @xmath147d[\phi_m]~       e^{-(\phi_m|\phi_m ) } \right ) \\ & & \hspace*{0.83 in } \times    \exp \left\ { \sum_{m=1}^{m } ( ( \phi_m|\phi_{m-1})-                          \delta\tau h[\phi^*_m,\phi_{m-1}]/\hbar )        \right\}~. \nonumber    \end{aligned}\ ] ] this can then be manipulated into the suggestive form @xmath148d[\phi_m]~                               \right ) \\ & & \times \exp \left\ { - \frac{1}{\hbar } \sum_{m=1}^{m } \delta\tau \left ( \hbar \frac{(\phi_m|\phi_{m})-(\phi_m|\phi_{m-1 } ) }                    { \delta\tau } + h[\phi^*_m,\phi_{m-1 } ] \right )        \right\}~. \nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ]    taking now the continuum limit @xmath138 and putting @xmath149 , we find that @xmath150d[\phi]~                       e^{-s[\phi^*,\phi]/\hbar}~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the so - called euclidean action is @xmath151 \\ & & = \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau~    \left\ { \sum_{\alpha } \int d{\bf x}~       \phi^*_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )                  \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau }                                     \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )      + h[\phi^*(\tau),\phi(\tau ) ] \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] this is essentially the desired functional integral over the complex fields @xmath120 with the boundary conditions @xmath152 and @xmath153 .
it is precisely the field theory analogue of the feynman path integral . to obtain the partition function we only need to put @xmath154 equal to @xmath155 and perform a last integration over @xmath156 and @xmath157 .
it then finally becomes @xmath158d[\phi]~ e^{-s[\phi^*,\phi]/\hbar}\ ] ] with the boundary conditions @xmath159 , i.e. , the fields are periodic in @xmath131 $ ] for bosons and antiperiodic for fermions .
note that in equation ( [ path1 ] ) we have used the same notation for the integration measure as in equation ( [ path2 ] ) , although there is in principle one more integration in the expression for the partition function .
the difference is in the continuum limit accounted for in the boundary conditions , which are in practice usually left implicite .
having arrived at an exact identity between the partition function and a functional integral , we are now going to familiarize ourselves with this identity , and with how to perform functional integrals in general , by considering the ideal quantum gases .
since the partition functions @xmath160 of the ideal quantum gases are known exactly , they are ideal test cases for our field - theoretical methods
. moreover , a thorough knowledge of the ideal quantum gases is also an important first step in understanding experiments with trapped atomic gases , because the effects of the interatomic interaction can essentially be included perturbatively .
how this perturbation theory is performed is discussed in detail in section [ ifd ] , but before we can do that we need to understand the noninteracting gases first . in that case , we have @xmath161 =   \sum_{\alpha }     \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~ \\ & & \hspace*{0.2 in } \times~ \phi^*_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )           \left\ { \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau } \right .
- \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                   + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } )                  + \epsilon_{\alpha } - \mu          \right\ } \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] and the partition function is a gaussian integral , which explains why we were interested in gaussian integrals in section [ gv ]
. it will be illustrative to evaluate this partition function in three different ways .      in the first way
, we perform the evaluation of the trace involved in the definition of the partition function at the end of the calculation , and start by considering the matrix element @xmath162 as the functional integral @xmath163d[\phi_{{\bf n},\alpha } ] \right)~    \exp \left\ { \sum_{{\bf n},\alpha }         \phi^*_{{\bf n},\alpha}(\hbar\beta )                                \phi_{{\bf n},\alpha}(\hbar\beta )        \right\ }          \nonumber \\   & & \times \exp \left\{- \frac{1}{\hbar } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau    \sum_{{\bf n},\alpha }     \phi^*_{{\bf n},\alpha}(\tau )          \left ( \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau }                   + \epsilon_{{\bf n},\alpha } - \mu          \right ) \phi_{{\bf n},\alpha}(\tau )         \right\}~ ,                                 \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] which is the product for each @xmath164 and @xmath165 of the path integral @xmath166d[\phi]~    \exp \left\ { \phi^*(\hbar\beta ) \phi(\hbar\beta )               - \frac{1}{\hbar } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau~     \phi^*(\tau )          \left ( \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau }                   + \epsilon - \mu \right ) \phi(\tau )         \right\ }                                 \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with the boundary conditions @xmath167 and @xmath168 .
it clearly corresponds to the matrix element @xmath169 for one particular value of @xmath164 and @xmath165 .
we calculate this matrix element by performing a shift in the integration variables , i.e. , @xmath170 and @xmath171 , where @xmath172 obeys the ` classical ' equations of motion @xmath173}{\delta \phi^*(\tau ) }    \right|_{\phi=\phi_{\rm cl } } = \left ( \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau }                   + \epsilon - \mu \right ) \phi_{\rm cl}(\tau ) = 0\ ] ] and similarly for @xmath174 .
the solutions with the correct boundary solutions are @xmath175 and @xmath176 , leading to the path integral @xmath177d[\xi]~    \exp \left\ { - \frac{1}{\hbar } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau~     \xi^*(\tau ) \left ( \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau }                   + \epsilon - \mu \right ) \xi(\tau )         \right\ }                                 \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with the boundary conditions @xmath178 .
this means that the last path integral is just equal to @xmath179 and that the desired result is just the prefactor .    substituting this for each value of @xmath164 and @xmath165 , we apparently have @xmath180 and the partition function becomes the product @xmath181 this is the correct result , because from the usual thermodynamic identity @xmath182 we find @xmath183 as desired .
the second way is easier and more common in practice .
we immediately start with @xmath184d[\phi]~ e^{-s_0[\phi^*,\phi]/\hbar}\ ] ] and incorporate the boundary conditions by expanding the fields as @xmath185 where @xmath186 for bosons and @xmath187 for fermions .
these are known as the even and odd matsubara frequencies , respectively . using this expansion we have @xmath188 if we also take account of the jacobian involved in the change of integration variables .
note that the difference between the jacobians in the bosonic and fermionic case , is a consequence of the fact that for grassmann variables we have that @xmath189 instead of the result @xmath190 that we expect on the basis of ordinary complex integration .
note also that these are all again gaussian integrals , so we find in first instance @xmath191    to evaluate the sum over matsubara frequencies we need to add a convergence factor @xmath192 and finally take the limit @xmath193 .
the precise reason for this particular procedure can not be fully understood at this point but is explained in section [ ifd ] . however , doing so we indeed find that @xmath194 to see that this is correct , we differentiate the latter equation with respect to @xmath195 .
this gives us @xmath196 which can be proved by contour integration in the following way .
the function @xmath197 has poles at the even and odd matsubara frequencies with residu @xmath198 . hence , by cauchy s theorem
the left - hand side is equal to @xmath199 with @xmath200 a contour that fully encloses the imaginary axis in the direction shown in figure 3 .
adding to the contour @xmath200 the contour @xmath201 , which gives no contribution to the integral , we can again apply cauchy s theorem to obtain the desired result .
why does the integration over the contour @xmath201 vanish ?
the reason for this is that the integrant behaves as @xmath202 for @xmath203 and as @xmath204 for @xmath205 .
the integrant thus always vanishes much faster than @xmath206 on the contour @xmath201 for any @xmath207 .
the third and last method is simplest and , therefore , most common in practice .
we first rewrite the partition function as @xmath208d[\phi]~    \exp \left\ {         \sum_{\alpha } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x } \right .
\\ & & \times \left .
\sum_{\alpha ' } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau ' \int d{\bf x}'~         \phi^*_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )             g^{-1}_{\alpha,\alpha'}({\bf x},\tau;{\bf x}',\tau ' )          \phi_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' )        \right\ } \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] and see @xmath209 as a ` matrix ' both in spin space as in coordinate space .
we then know that this gaussian integral is just @xmath210^{\mp 1 } = \exp \left\ { \mp { \rm tr}[\ln ( -g^{-1 } ) ]                                            \right\}~.\ ] ] clearly , we have from the action @xmath211 $ ] that @xmath212 or equivalently that @xmath213 which means that @xmath214 is a green s function .
we come back to its physical meaning shortly .
for now we only need to see that the last equation is solved by @xmath215 thus again @xmath216    in principle , we have slightly cheated in the last step of this derivation , because equation ( [ green ] ) shows that @xmath217 the problem with this last way of calculating the functional integral is that it does not correctly account for the jacobian involved in the change of variables from imaginary time @xmath218 to the matsubara frequencies @xmath219 . however , this problem can be avoided by calculating never a single determinant , but always the ratio of two determinants . in this manner the effect of the jacobian is exactly cancelled .
we will see some examples of how this works in sections [ hft ] and [ sc ] .
we now return to the physical meaning of the above green s function . to see its meaning , we first consider the time - ordered expectation value @xmath220 \rangle   \\ & & \equiv \theta(\tau-\tau ' )
\langle \hat{\psi}_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )            \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' ) \rangle     \pm
\theta(\tau'-\tau )    \langle \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' )            \hat{\psi}_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) \rangle~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] here the expectation value is taken in the grand - canonical ensemble and @xmath221 is the imaginary time heisenberg operator , which is defined by @xmath222 and therefore obeys the heisenberg equation of motion @xmath223_-$ ] . for the noninteracting case it reads @xmath224 as a result @xmath225 \rangle = \hbar \delta(\tau-\tau ' )   \langle [ \hat{\psi}_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) ,         \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau')]_{\mp } \rangle                                                               \hspace*{0.4 in } \\ & & \hspace*{1.8 cm } +      \left ( \frac{\hbar^2\mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m } - v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } )             - \epsilon_{\alpha } + \mu      \right ) \langle
t[\hat{\psi}_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )            \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' ) ] \rangle~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] substituting the equal - time relations that we derived in section [ sq ] , i.e. , @xmath226_{\mp } =                              \delta({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' ) \delta_{\alpha,\alpha'}$ ] , thus suggests that @xmath227 \rangle~.\ ] ]    we can actually also prove this important relation , that bridges the gap between the functional formulation of quantum field theory used here and the more familiar operator formalism .
first of all , it is clear from the slicing procedure used in our derivation of the functional integral in section [ fi ] , that it automatically leads to time - ordered expectation values .
we should , therefore , only be able to prove that @xmath228d[\phi]~     \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) \phi^*_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' )     e^{-s_0[\phi^*,\phi]/\hbar}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] this is most easily achieved in the following way .
we introduce a partition function in the presence of external currents @xmath229 and @xmath230 , where in the fermionic case these currents are also grassmann variables . the partition function is taken to be @xmath231 = \int d[\phi^*]d[\phi]~   \exp \left\ { - \frac{1}{\hbar } s_0[\phi^*,\phi ]                                     \raisebox{0.25 in } { } \right .
\\ & & \hspace*{0.15 in }    + \left .
\sum_{\alpha } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~         ( \phi^*_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) j_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )         + j^*_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) )       \right\}~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] since then we must simply prove that @xmath232    using a short - hand notation we have @xmath233 = \int d[\phi^*]d[\phi]~   \exp \left\ { ( \phi|g^{-1}|\phi ) + ( \phi|j ) + ( j|\phi ) \right\}~.\ ] ] the terms in the exponent can be rewritten as @xmath234 , which is usually called completing the square . performing a shift in the integration variables
, we then easily see that @xmath235 = z_0[0,0 ] e^{-(j|g|j ) }     = z_0[0,0 ] \exp \left\ {    - \sum_{\alpha } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x }                    \right . \hspace*{0.4 in } \\    & & \hspace*{0.08 in } \times \left .
\sum_{\alpha ' } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau '   \int d{\bf x}'~      j^*_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )           g_{\alpha,\alpha'}({\bf x},\tau;{\bf x}',\tau ' )      j_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' )     \right\}~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] which after differentiation indeed leads to the desired result .
we can now in fact calculate the expectation value of the time - ordered product of any number of operators . with the above expression for @xmath236 $ ]
one can easily prove that this results in the sum of all possible products of time - ordered expectation values of two operators .
for instance @xmath237 this is the famous wick s theorem , which plays a crucial role in the next section where we start to discuss the profound effects that interactions can have on the results obtained thusfar .
the green s function , or one - particle propagator , @xmath214 is one of the most important quantities that we want to determine theoretically , because it gives us the possibility to calculate in principle the expectation value of any one - particle observable .
it also gives us the elementary excitations of our system of interest .
for example , the average density of the spin state @xmath21 is in an ideal gas given by @xmath238 where we introduced the notation @xmath239 for the limit @xmath193 of @xmath240 .
note that this procedure is necessary due to the time - ordening involved in the definition of the green s function and the fact that the field operators do not commute at equal times .
it also gives a natural explanation for our previous use of the convergence factor @xmath192 .
moreover , from the argument of the bose or fermi distribution function , we see that the elementary excitations have an energy of @xmath241 .
if we replace in the fourier transform of the green s function , i.e. , in @xmath242 @xmath243 by @xmath244 we also see that @xmath245 has a pole at @xmath246 .
this is a general result : poles in @xmath245 correspond to the energies of the elementary excitations .
these energies in general can also have a negative imaginary components , which then correspond to the lifetime of the excitation .
the question that arises , therefore , is how to determine also the green s function for an interacting system .
this can be done in perturbation theory , as follows .
we want to calculate the expectation value @xmath247d[\phi]~     \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) \phi^*_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' )     e^{-s[\phi^*,\phi]/\hbar } \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with the action @xmath248=s_0[\phi^*,\phi]+s_{\rm int}[\phi^*,\phi]$ ] .
we now expand both the numerator and the denominator in powers of @xmath249 . up to
first order we find for the partition function @xmath250d[\phi]~e^{-s_0[\phi^*,\phi]/\hbar }    \left ( 1 - \frac{s_{\rm int}[\phi^*,\phi]}{\hbar } \right ) \\ & & \equiv z_0 \left ( 1 - \frac{1}{\hbar }                        \langle s_{\rm int}[\phi^*,\phi ] \rangle_0          \right)~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] using wick s theorem , we thus have @xmath251 \rangle_0   = \frac{1}{2 } \sum_{\alpha,\alpha ' } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau    \int d{\bf x } \int d{\bf x}'~ g_{0;\alpha,\alpha}({\bf x},\tau;{\bf x},\tau^+ ) \\ & & \hspace*{1.5 in } \times~ \frac{- v({\bf x}-{\bf x}')}{\hbar }       g_{0;\alpha',\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau;{\bf x}',\tau^+ ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.52 in } \pm \frac{1}{2 } \sum_{\alpha } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau    \int d{\bf x } \int d{\bf x}'~ g_{0;\alpha,\alpha}({\bf x}',\tau;{\bf x},\tau^+ ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{1.5 in } \times~ \frac{- v({\bf x}-{\bf x}')}{\hbar }       g_{0;\alpha,\alpha}({\bf x},\tau;{\bf x}',\tau^+)~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]        ) up to first order in the interaction . ]    to understand the general structure of the perturbation expansion , it is very convenient to represent equations ( [ z1 ] ) and ( [ z2 ] ) in terms of feynman diagrams .
the final result is shown in figure 4 , where a wiggly line corresponds to the factor @xmath252 and a thin arrowed line pointing from @xmath253 to @xmath254 represents the noninteracting green s function @xmath255 . in figure 4
we have , for clarity sake , also explicitly indicated the various coordinates and spin degrees of freedom that we have to either integrate or sum over , respectively .
it is , however , much more common in practice to suppress in feynman diagrams those degrees of freedom that have to be integrated or summed over , and denote only the degrees of freedom on which the quantity of interest depends explicitly .
for example , for the numerator of equation ( [ expec ] ) we obtain @xmath256d[\phi]~     \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) \phi^*_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' )    e^{-s_0[\phi^*,\phi]/\hbar }      \left ( 1 - \frac{s_{\rm int}[\phi^*,\phi]}{\hbar } \right ) \hspace*{0.4 in }   \\ & & = z_0 \left ( - \langle \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )                          \phi^*_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' ) \rangle_0 + \frac{1}{\hbar } \langle \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )              \phi^*_{\alpha'}({\bf x}',\tau ' ) s_{\rm int}[\phi^*,\phi ] \rangle_0          \right ) , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] whose diagrammatic equivalent is then given in figure 5 .
up to first order the interacting green s function , which is represented by a thick arrowed line , obeys the equation shown in figure 6 .
note that the so - called disconnected diagrams have exactly cancelled .
this is a general feature that happens for any expectation value , i.e. , the disconnected diagrams that occur in the numerator are always exactly cancelled by the denominator @xcite .
one can also show that the general structure of the perturbation expansion of the green s function is as in figure 7 , in which only one - particle irreducible diagrams contribute to the selfenergy @xmath257 .
these one - particle irreducible diagrams can be distinguished from the fact that they do not become disconnected if we cut a single thin arrowed line .
this is dyson s equation @xcite .
it is particularly insightful for a homogeneous gas or for a trapped gas in the weak - coupling limit , since then the one - particle states @xmath53 are not affected by the interactions and the exact one - particle propagator can be written as @xmath258 note that for realistic trapped atomic gases this weak - coupling limit is essentially always realized in the normal phase of the gas .
it is , therefore , also of some experimental interest to consider that limit in more detail first .
one then finds that the dyson equation in first instance becomes @xmath259 because @xmath260 and because we have assumed the interactions to be spin independent , we can easily convince ourselves that in perturbation theory it is always true that the selfenergy obeys @xmath261 and as a result also that up to all orders in the interaction @xmath262 . as we will see in section [ hft
] , however , nonperturbative effect can change this result due to the phenomena of spontaneous broken symmetry . ignoring the latter for the moment
, we find for each spin state the uncoupled equation @xmath263 or @xmath264 hence @xmath265 which shows that the poles in the green s function are indeed shifted by the interactions .        in our lowest order calculation
we have found for the selfenergy the diagrammatic result shown in figure 8 .
this is the most simple approximation we can think of . in the weak - coupling limit it is mathematically equal to @xmath266 the first term is known as the direct or hartree , and the second term as the exchange or fock contribution to the selfenergy . from equation ( [ self ] ) we conclude that the matrix elements of the interaction enter only in the combination @xmath267 .
clearly , this is a refection of the pauli principle , which forces the effective interaction between two fermionic atoms in the same state @xmath37 to vanish .        to make the theory selfconsistent we should use in the expression for the selfenergy not the noninteracting propegators , but precisely those that follow from the dyson equation
this is the hartree - fock approximation , which is diagrammatically given in figure 9 .
it leads in the weak - coupling limit to the new dispersion relation @xmath268 for the ` dressed ' particles or quasiparticles of the gas , where the selfenergy is essentially also found from equation ( [ self ] ) .
we only have to replace in the right - hand side @xmath269 by @xmath270 .
in this manner we have thus obtained an approximation to the interacting green s function that is nonperturbative in the interaction and effectively sums an infinite number of feynman diagrams .
of course , the hartree - fock approximation can also be used in the strong - coupling limit . in that case
it diagrammatically still corresponds to the solution of the dyson equation of figure 7 , with a selfenergy as shown in figure 9 .
however , we are then no longer allowed to assume that the exact green s function is diagonal in the eigenstates @xmath53 of the external trapping potential . to see more explicitly what this means physically , it is convenient to rederive the hartree - fock theory without making use of perturbation theory .
because the hartree - fock theory is very useful in a large number of circumstances , and because we want to illustrate a very useful technique which is nowadays often used in the literature , we are now going to reproduce the above results without making use of a diagramatic expansion .
we consider for simplicity a fermionic mixture with an equal number of atoms in two hyperfine states and start by splitting our spin - independent interaction @xmath271 into two spin - dependent parts such that one contributes only to the hartree diagram and the other only to the fock diagram . denoting a spin - dependent interaction by @xmath272
we thus want that @xmath273 with @xmath274 .
using operators in spin space , a possible solution to these equations is @xmath275 and @xmath276 where @xmath277 is the exchange operator of the spins of atoms @xmath65 and @xmath278 , and @xmath279 are the usual pauli matrices .
clearly , we now have @xmath280 = \frac{1}{2 }    \sum_{\alpha,\alpha';\beta,\beta ' } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau       \int d{\bf x } \int d{\bf x}'~ \\ & & \times \left\{\phi^*_{\alpha'}({\bf x},\tau )             \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )              v^h_{\alpha',\beta';\alpha,\beta}({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' )             \phi^*_{\beta'}({\bf x}',\tau )             \phi_{\beta}({\bf x}',\tau ) \raisebox{0.15 in } { } \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.5 in } - \left . \raisebox{0.15 in } { } \phi^*_{\alpha'}({\bf x},\tau )             \phi_{\beta}({\bf x}',\tau )              v^f_{\alpha',\beta';\alpha,\beta}({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' )             \phi^*_{\beta'}({\bf x}',\tau )             \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) \right\}~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] which we write as @xmath281 \equiv    \frac{1}{2 } ( \phi^*\phi|v^h|\phi^*\phi )    - \frac{1}{2 } ( \phi^*\phi||v^f||\phi^*\phi)~.\ ] ] we next apply a so - called hubbard - stratonovich transformation @xcite to both the hartree and the fock parts of the interaction . first the hartree part .
we note that @xmath282}$ ] can be written as a functional integral over the four real fields contained in @xmath283 as @xmath284~ \exp \left\ { \frac{1}{2\hbar } ( \kappa|{v^h}^{-1}|\kappa )           - \frac{1}{2\hbar } ( \kappa|\phi^*\phi )           - \frac{1}{2\hbar } ( \phi^*\phi|\kappa ) \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] if we put @xmath285 = 0 $ ] for a moment , we can substitute this equality in the partition function to obtain @xmath286d[\phi^*]d[\phi ] e^{-s[\kappa,\phi^*,\phi]/\hbar}$ ] with the action @xmath287 = - \frac{1}{2 } ( \kappa|{v^h}^{-1}|\kappa ) + \sum_{\alpha,\alpha ' } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~      \phi^*_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )       \left\ { \left ( \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau }   \right .
\right .
\hspace*{0.4 in } \\ & & \hspace*{1.0 cm } \left .
\left .
- \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }               + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } )               + \epsilon_{\alpha } - \mu \right )                \delta_{\alpha,\alpha ' }                       + \kappa_{\alpha,\alpha'}({\bf x},\tau )          \right\ } \phi_{\alpha'}({\bf x},\tau)~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] we see that in this manner the action for the fermions has become quadratic with a selfenergy @xmath288 .
hence , we can now integrate out the fermion fields to obtain @xmath286 e^{-s^{\rm eff}[\kappa]/\hbar}$ ] and @xmath289 = - \frac{1}{2 } ( \kappa|{v^h}^{-1}|\kappa )                                   -\hbar { \rm tr}[\ln ( -g^{-1})]~,\ ] ] with @xmath290 also a functional of @xmath291 .
up to now we have not made any approximations and have only performed an exact rewriting of the partition function .
however , the action @xmath292 $ ] contains all powers of the fields @xmath291 and is thus quite complicated .
it may therefore appear that we have not made any progress .
this is not the case , because the partition function will be largest for configurations that minimize the action @xmath292 $ ] . to make use of this observation
, we expand the action around its minimum , i.e. , we put @xmath293 and require that @xmath294/\delta\kappa_{\alpha,\alpha'}({\bf x},\tau )                                             |_{\kappa=\langle\kappa\rangle } = 0 $ ] . if we neglect the fluctuations , we find that @xmath295/\hbar}$ ] .
this will turn out to be the hartree approximation , as we will show now .
first of all we have @xmath296 substituting this in equation ( [ haction ] ) gives us for the terms linear in the fluctuations @xmath297                 - ( \delta\kappa|{v^h}^{-1}|\langle\kappa\rangle)~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] if @xmath298 is indeed a minimum of the action @xmath292 $ ] , these linear terms have to vanish , which implies that @xmath299 as promised , this is precisely the most general mathematical expression for the hartree contribution to the selfenergy in figure 9 . taking again @xmath300
, we also have that the hartree approximation to the one - particle propagator obeys @xmath301 , with @xmath302 the average total atomic density , and we obtain the usual hartree selfenergy @xmath303    now we again want to include the fock part of the interaction and treat this also by a hubbard - stratonovich transformation .
this requires introducing four real fields that depend on two spatial coordinates .
they are denoted by @xmath304 .
schematically we then use @xmath305~        \exp \left\ { - \frac{1}{2\hbar } ( \lambda||{v^f}^{-1}||\lambda )           + \frac{1}{2\hbar } ( \lambda||\phi^*\phi )           + \frac{1}{2\hbar } ( \phi^*\phi||\lambda ) \right\}~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] which leads to the total selfenergy @xmath306                                          \delta(\tau-\tau')\ ] ] and after integration over the fermion fields to the effective action @xmath307 =   - \frac{1}{2 } ( \kappa|{v^h}^{-1}|\kappa )                     + \frac{1}{2 } ( \lambda||{v^f}^{-1}||\lambda )                     - \hbar { \rm tr}[\ln ( -g^{-1})]~.\ ] ] requiring now that also @xmath308/     \delta\lambda_{\alpha,\alpha'}({\bf x},{\bf x}',\tau )                                        |_{\lambda=\langle\lambda\rangle } = 0 $ ] , then leads to the expected fock selfenergy @xmath309 in the symmetric case it simply becomes @xmath310 with @xmath311 and @xmath312 exactly the hartree - fock approximation to the off - diagonal part of the one - particle density matrix .
note that to actually perform the hartree - fock calculation in the latter case , we need to be able to determine the green s function @xmath313 .
the easiest way to do so , is by realizing that it is the green s function of the operator in the fermionic piece of the action @xmath314 $ ] obtained after the hubbard - stratonovich transformations .
if we diagonalize this operator by solving the eigenvalue problem @xmath315 the desired one - particle propagator aquires the ideal gas form @xmath316 with new one - particle energies @xmath317 and eigenstates @xmath318 that incorporate the average effect of the interactions of an atom with all the other atoms in the gas .
clearly , in the cases that the eigenstates are not affected by these so - called mean - field effects , we recover the weak - coupling results of the previous section .
although we have thus precisely reproduced our diagrammatic result , there are two important advantages in using the hubbard - stratonovich transformation .
first , it is in principle exact , and allows us to also calculate corrections to the hartree - fock approximation .
for example , if we expand @xmath319 $ ] up to quadratic order in @xmath320 and @xmath321 , and neglect all higher orders , we find the so - called generalized random phase approximation .
the latter approach actually gives us also the opportunity to study the density fluctuations and therefore the collective excitations of the gas .
we return to this important topic in section [ modes ] .
second , it allows for a beautiful way to describe phase transitions . as mentioned previously , in perturbation
theory we always find for a homogeneous gas that @xmath322 due to the same feature of @xmath323 . from a fundamental point of view
this is a result of the translational invariance of the gas and of the rotational symmetry in spin space .
however , we can imagine that in principle we can also find selfconsistent solutions that do not have this property .
we then have a spontaneous breaking of symmetry and therefore a phase transition in our system .
for example , if below a certain temperature @xmath324 , we are dealing with a transition to a charge density wave or ( wigner ) crystal . if on the other hand @xmath325 the gas is in a ferromagnetic phase . for a spin - density wave
we even have that @xmath326 . in all these cases
the hubbard - stratonovich approach used above leads in a natural way to the appropriate landau theory of the phase transition .
since the landau theory is also very useful for the understanding of superfluidity in atomic gases , which is clearly the primary goal of the present course , we use the next section to give a short introduction into this subject .      in this summary of the landau theory of phase transitions ,
we restrict ourselves in first instance to the homogeneous case because this makes the discussion more transparent .
however , at the end of the section we also briefly mention how the inhomogeneity enters the theory .
we have seen , for example in the hartree - fock theory discussed above , that the green s function @xmath327 can have a nonzero value of the average spin density @xmath328 , which is usually called the magnetization @xmath329 in this context .
this signals a phase transition to a ferromagnetic phase and the magnetization is called the order parameter of this transition . in the previous section
we have also seen how we can , in principle exactly , obtain an expression for the partition function as a functional integral over the field @xmath330 , i.e. , @xmath331~e^{-s^{\rm eff}[{\bf s}]/\hbar}~.\ ] ] we just have to integrate out the fields @xmath332 and @xmath333 . for space and time independent values of the magnetization
@xmath5 the action @xmath334 $ ] is @xmath335 , where @xmath336 is the landau free - energy density and @xmath337 is the total volume of system . because of the symmetry of @xmath248 $ ] under rotations of the spin
, this free - energy density must also be rotationally invariant and can therefore only depend on the magnitude of @xmath5 , which we denote by @xmath338 .
if a phase transition occurs the behaviour of @xmath339 can essentially fall only into two categories .    at temperatures very high compared to the critical temperature @xmath340 ,
the system is fully disorded and the free energy @xmath339 must have a single minimum at @xmath341 to make sure that the order parameter @xmath342 is zero .
bringing the temperature closer to @xmath340 , however , the free energy can develop a second local minimum .
as long as the free energy in this second local minimum is higher than the minimum at @xmath341 , the equilibrium value of @xmath342 will still be zero and no phase transition has occured .
lowering the temperature further , the value of the free energy in the second minimum decrease until , precisely at the critical temperature @xmath340 , it is equal to the free energy at @xmath341 . for temperatures below this critical one
the second minimum has actually become the global minimum of the free energy , which implies that @xmath343 and we are in the ordered phase . in this scenario
the order parameter has always a discontinuity at the critical temperature . as a result
, this corresponds to a discontinuous , or first - order , phase transition .
the behaviour of the free energy and the order parameter is illustarted in figure 10 .
this should be compared with the behaviour of the free energy and the order parameter for a continuous , i.e. , second or higher order , phase transition , which is quite different and depicted in figure 11 .
now the landau free energy @xmath339 has always a single minimum , which for temperatures above @xmath340 is at @xmath341 but at temperatures below the critical temperature shifts to a nonzero value of @xmath338 .
in particular , the order parameter thus shows no discontinuity at @xmath340 .        in the case of a second - order phase transition
, we conclude that near the critical temperature @xmath342 is very small . as a result we can then expand the landau free - energy density in powers of @xmath338 .
because the free energy must also be symmetric under @xmath344 , we have @xmath345 with @xmath346 and @xmath347 . thus if @xmath348 we have @xmath349 and @xmath350 . but for @xmath351 , @xmath352 becomes negative and we have @xmath353 note that the free - energy density in this minimum is @xmath354 and has a discontinuity in its second derivative with respect to the temperature . historically , this is the reason why the corresponding phase transition was named to be of second order .
in fact , the landau theory of second order phase transitions is slightly more involved , because it also considers slow spatial fluctuations in @xmath5 . since a uniform rotation of @xmath5 costs no energy , we must have that the free energy is @xmath355 = \int d{\bf x}~    \left ( \gamma ( \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$ } { \bf s}({\bf x}))^2                  + \alpha(t ) |{\bf s}({\bf x})|^2                  + \frac{\beta}{2 } |{\bf s}({\bf x})|^4 \right)\ ] ] and @xmath356~e^{-\beta f_l[{\bf s}]}$ ] .
landau theory now esentially corresponds to minimizing @xmath357 $ ] and taking only quadratic fluctuations into account .
taking also higher order fluctuations into account turns out to be very difficult .
it requires renormalization group methods , which we are not going to treat here and that can be found in the literature @xcite .
the effects of these fluctuation corrections to landau theory are generally known as critical phenomena .
interestingly , they do not occur in first - order phase transitions .
more importantly for our purposes is , however , that for atomic gases the fluctuations are only important in a small temperature interval around the critical temperature . for many applications
it is , therefore , possible to neglect them .
what usually can not be negected is the effect of the inhomogeneity of the gas . in the context of landau theory that implies that the coefficients @xmath352 , @xmath358 and @xmath359 in equation ( [ lfe ] ) become also
dependend on the spatial position in the trapping potential .
we will see several examples of this feature in the following .
we finally want to consider two important second - order phase transitions , that are purely due to quantum effects and can be conveniently treated with the methods that we have developed sofar .
moreover , they occur very often in nature , for example in metals , in liquid helium and recently of course also in atomic gases of rubidium @xcite , lithium @xcite , sodium @xcite and hydrogen @xcite .
let us first consider the last case , which is associated with a gas of spin - less bosons . for the low temperatures of interest the action is @xmath151 \\ & & = \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~   \phi^*({\bf x},\tau )    \left\ { \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial\tau }         - \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }         + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) - \mu    \right\ } \phi({\bf x},\tau )                                 \nonumber \\ & & + \frac{1}{2 }    \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x } ~ v_{{\bf 0 } }             \phi^*({\bf x},\tau ) \phi^*({\bf x},\tau )               \phi({\bf x},\tau ) \phi({\bf x},\tau)~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath271 is taken to be equal to @xmath360 . the justification for this simplificaties is , roughly speaking , that the thermal de broglie wavelength @xmath361 of the atoms is much larger than the range of the interatomic interaction . in this system
the phase transition of interest is bose - einstein condensation .
the associated order parameter is @xmath362 , since for time independent @xmath363 the above action has presicely the form of a landau theory with a ` free - energy ' of @xmath364 \\ & & = \int d{\bf x}~       \left ( \frac{\hbar^2}{2 m } |\mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}\phi({\bf x})|^2             + ( v^{\rm ex}({\bf
x})-\mu ) |\phi({\bf x})|^2              + \frac{v_{{\bf 0}}}{2 } |\phi({\bf x})|^4      \right)~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] we conclude that in lowest order the critical temperature is determined by @xmath365 , because then the configurations @xmath366 precisely make a vanishing contribution to the quadratic part of the ` free energy ' .
this condition makes sense , because it is exactly the condition that we have a bose - einstein condensation in the ideal case : in the ideal bose gas the number of particles in the one - particle ground state is @xmath367 , which indeed diverges for @xmath368 .    to determine the corrections to this result we now explicitly substitute @xmath369 into our functional integral .
it is for lateron important to realize that to consistently define the fluctuations @xmath370 in this manner , we also have to require that @xmath371 the physical reason behind this condition is that @xmath370 should contain all the configurations that are orthogonal to @xmath372 . in principle , therefore , it should also contain configurations that in effect only multiply @xmath372 by a global phase .
such fluctuations lead to the phenomena of phase ` diffusion ' and are discussed in section [ pd ] . in full detail
we find after the above substitution that @xmath373 = \hbar\beta f_l[\phi_{\bf 0}^*,\phi_{\bf 0 } ]                       + s_0[{\phi'}^*,\phi ' ] + s_{\rm int}[{\phi'}^*,\phi']~,\ ] ] where the linear and quadratic terms are given by @xmath374   \\               & & = \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~      { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau )        \left\ { - \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) - \mu + v_{{\bf 0 } } |\phi_{\bf 0}({\bf   x})|^2       \right\ } \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } )                         \nonumber \\ & & + \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~ \phi'({\bf x},\tau )        \left\ { - \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) - \mu + v_{{\bf 0 } } |\phi_{\bf 0}({\bf   x})|^2       \right\ } \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } )                       \nonumber \\       & & + \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~ { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau )                                                             \nonumber \\        & & \hspace*{0.85 in } \times \left\ { \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial\tau }         - \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                 + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) - \mu                 + 2v_{{\bf 0}}|\phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x})|^2      \right\ } \phi'({\bf x},\tau )                            \nonumber \\ & & + \frac{1}{2 } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~     v_{{\bf 0 } } ( \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x}))^2 { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau )                         { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau )          \nonumber \\ & & + \frac{1}{2 } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~     v_{{\bf 0 } } ( \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x}))^2                         \phi'({\bf x},\tau ) \phi'({\bf x},\tau)~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] and the cubic and quartic terms by @xmath375 =   \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~        v_{{\bf 0 } } \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } ) { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau )                  { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau ) \phi'({\bf x},\tau ) \hspace{0.4 in } \\ & & \hspace*{0.1 in } + \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~     v_{{\bf 0 } } \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } ) { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau )                  \phi'({\bf x},\tau )                   \phi'({\bf x},\tau )                     \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.1 in } + \frac{1}{2 } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~     v_{{\bf 0 } } { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau ) { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau )                 \phi'({\bf x},\tau ) \phi'({\bf x},\tau)~ , \nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ] respectively .    in the bogoliubov approximation
we neglect the last three interaction terms @xcite .
furthermore , to make sure that @xmath376 or @xmath377 , we need to require that the terms linear in @xmath378 and @xmath379 drop out of the action @xmath380 $ ] . clearly , this implies that @xmath381 which is the same result as obtained from minimizing the landau ` free - energy ' @xmath382 $ ] . in the context of trapped atomic gases ,
this equation is known as the gross - pitaevskii equation @xcite .
it determines the macroscopic wave function of the condensate .
the reason for calling @xmath372 the macroscopic wave function follows from the fact that the total density of the gas now obeys @xmath383 the total number of condensate atoms thus equals @xmath384 . as equation ( [ dens ]
) shows , it is in general always smaller that the total number of atoms in the gas due to the effect of the fluctuations .
note that in our present formulation the average @xmath385 physically describes not only the depletion of the condensate due to the usual thermal fluctuations known from the ideal bose gas , but also due to the interactions , i.e. , purely due to quantum fluctuations .
assuming that we have solved for the gross - pitaevskii equation , the fluctuation corrections are in the bogoliubov theory determined by a quadratic action of the form @xmath386 \\ & & = - \frac{\hbar}{2 } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~     \left [ { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau ) , \phi'({\bf x},\tau ) \right ] \cdot { \bf g}^{-1 } \cdot \left [   \begin{array}{c } \phi'({\bf x},\tau ) \\ { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau ) \end{array } \right]~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the associated green s function @xmath387 has now a matrix structure because not only the normal average @xmath388 but also the anomalous average @xmath389 is now unequal to zero .
we thus have that @xmath390 \cdot       \left [ { \phi'}^*({\bf x}',\tau ' ) , \phi'({\bf x}',\tau ' ) \right ]    \right\rangle~.\ ] ] from equation ( [ s0 ] ) we in fact find that in the bogoliubov approximation @xmath391 \delta({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' ) \delta(\tau-\tau')~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with the noninteracting green s function @xmath392 defined by @xmath393\ ] ] and , of course , @xmath394 this is clearly only the lowest order result for the green s function , because a perturbative treatment of @xmath395 $ ] leads , in the same way as in section [ ifd ] , to higher order corrections .
in general , the dyson equation is , however , always of the form @xmath396^{-1 } = \left [ \begin{array}{cc } g_0^{-1 } & 0 \\ 0 & g_0^{-1 } \end{array } \right ] - \left [ \begin{array}{cc } \sigma_{11 } & \sigma_{12 } \\
\sigma_{21 } & \sigma_{22 } \end{array } \right]~.\ ] ] the off - diagonal elements are again called anomalous , since they vanish in the normal phase of the gas .
diagrammatically the dyson equations for @xmath397 and @xmath398 are shown in figure 12 .
the selfenergy in the bogoliubov approximation is @xmath399 \delta({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' ) \delta(\tau-\tau')~.~~\end{aligned}\ ] ] because we have completely negelected the cubic and quartic terms in the action to obtain this selfenergy , the bogoliubov approach is only valid if the fluctuations are sufficiently small .
physically , this impies that the deplection of the condensate must be small .
it can , therefore , not be applied to liquid helium , but is expected to be valid for a weakly - interacting atomic gas at such low temperature that it essentially only consists of a condensate . under these conditions the bogoliubov theory not only predicts the condensate density profile @xmath400 but also the collective modes of the condensate .
both these predictions have been accurately verified in recent experiments @xcite .
theoretically , the eigenfrequencies of the collective modes are again determined by the poles in the one - particle green s function . to understand more clearly how these can be determined
, we first consider a homogeneous bose gas .    in a box with volume @xmath401
the one - particle states are most easily characterized by the wavevector @xmath402 and equal to @xmath403 .
the one - particle energies are thus @xmath404
. moreover , the gross - pitaevskii equation reduces to @xmath405 in that case , because the landau ` free - energy ' is minimized for a macroscopic wave function that is independent of the position in the box . making use of this fact , equation ( [ gb ] )
can immediately be solved by a fourier transformation .
the result is @xmath406~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] clearly there are poles in @xmath407 if the determinant of the right - hand side is zero or if @xmath408 this is the famous bogoliubov dispersion of the collective excitations .
note that to finish the calculation we still have to obtain the condensate density @xmath409 .
this is determined by the total density of the gas , which obeys @xmath410 with @xmath411 the density of the ` above ' condensate particles . by inverting the right - hand side of equation ( [ gbf ] ) , we find that the noncondensate density is equal to @xmath412 for a given density and temperature
, the last two equations thus fully determine the condensate density .
note that equation ( [ ncd ] ) explicitly shows that the condensate is indeed depleted both by thermal as well as quantum effects .
the generalization to the inhomogeneous case is straightforward .
first we again have to solve the gross - pitaevskii equation at a fixed chemical potential . given the condensate wave function , we can then calculate the collective mode frequencies by finding the poles of @xmath387 , or equivalently but more conveniently , the zero s of @xmath413 .
clearly , the latter are located at @xmath414 , where @xmath415 is found from the eigenvalue problem @xmath416 \cdot         \left [          \begin{array}{c } u_{\bf n}({\bf x } ) \\
v_{\bf n}({\bf x } )         \end{array }       \right ] \hspace*{0.4 in } \\ = \hbar\omega_{\bf n }   \left [ \begin{array}{cc } 1 & 0 \\ 0 & - 1   \end{array } \right ] \cdot       \left [          \begin{array}{c } u_{\bf n}({\bf x } ) \\ v_{\bf n}({\bf x } )         \end{array }       \right]~ \nonumber          \end{aligned}\ ] ] and we introduced the operator @xmath417 .
this is de bogoliubov - de gennes equation that has recently been applied with great succes to the collective modes of a bose condensed rubidium and sodium gas @xcite .
note that a special solution with @xmath418 is given by @xmath419                           = [ \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x}),-\phi^*_{\bf 0}({\bf x})]$ ] . as a result we can , by making use of the fact that the left - hand side of the bogoliubov - de gennes equation involves a hermitian operator , easily proof that all the solutions obey @xmath420 as required by the condition in equation ( [ ort ] ) .
moreover , we can similary show that the solutions with @xmath421 can always be normalized as @xcite @xmath422    physically , the zero frequency solution @xmath423 describes the dynamics of the global phase of the condensate @xcite .
because of the so - called @xmath424 symmetry of the action , i.e. , its invariance under the simultaneous phase changes @xmath425 and @xmath426 , this solution is essentially of no importance to the thermodynamic properties of a macroscopic gas sample and is therefore usually neglected .
nevertheless , it has from a fundamental point of view some interesting consequences , as we will see in section [ pd ] . knowing all the eigenstates of @xmath413 we can then easily perform the inversion and
finally again determine the density profile of the noncondensed atoms . keeping the physical significance of the zero frequency mode in mind
, we ultimately find , @xmath427 which may be compared with equation ( [ ncd ] ) .    at temperatures near absolute zero
, we have as a good approximation that @xmath428 and the bogoliubov theory applies
. however at nonzero temperatures we thermally excite particles and @xmath429 becomes nonzero .
if we treat the effect of the noncondensate part of the gas in the hartree - fock approximation , we find that @xmath395 $ ] on average adds @xmath430 =   2 \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~        v_{{\bf 0 } }   n'({\bf x } ) { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau ) \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } ) \\ & & + 2 \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~            v_{{\bf 0 } } n'({\bf x } ) \phi'({\bf x},\tau ) \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } )                   \nonumber \\ & & + 2 \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~        v_{{\bf 0 } }   n'({\bf x } ) { \phi'}^*({\bf x},\tau ) \phi'({\bf x},\tau ) ~ ,         \nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ] to the action @xmath380 $ ] . in figure 13
we indicate how this can be understood diagramatically .
performing the same analysis as before , we conclude that the gross - pitaevskii equation is modified to @xmath431 and the normal selfenergies are changed into @xmath432 .
the bogoliubov - de gennes equation for the elementary excitations is , therefore , now given by @xmath433 \cdot         \left [          \begin{array}{c } u_{\bf n}({\bf x } ) \\
v_{\bf n}({\bf x } )         \end{array }       \right ] \hspace*{0.4 in } \\
= \hbar\omega_{\bf n }   \left [ \begin{array}{cc } 1 & 0 \\ 0 & - 1   \end{array } \right ] \cdot       \left [          \begin{array}{c } u_{\bf n}({\bf x } ) \\ v_{\bf n}({\bf x } )         \end{array }       \right]~. \nonumber          \end{aligned}\ ] ]    these last two equations in combination with equation ( [ ncda ] ) are known as the popov theory in the recent literature @xcite .
it is much studied at present in the context of bose - einstein condensation in atomic gases , and has been applied with succes to the equilibrium density profile of the gas below the critical temperature @xcite .
it has also been used to determine the collective mode frequencies of the gas at nonzero temperatures , however , with much less success @xcite .
the reason for the failure of the popov theory in this case is that the bogoliubov - de gennes equation in equation ( [ bdgt ] ) describes physically only the motion of the condensate in the presence of a static noncondensed cloud and not the dynamics of the noncondensed cloud itself .
how that can be achieved is discussed lateron in section [ modes ] , when we have obtained a better understanding of the nonequilibrium theory .
now we briefly want to make a connection to the interaction parameter @xmath434 used in the bogoliubov and popov theories and the specific two - body scattering properties of the atomic gas of interest in a particular experiment .          in the previous section we mentioned that the bogoliubov theory , and to a certain extent also the popov theory , agree very well with experiment .
it is clear , however , that to apply these theories to an actual experiment we need to know the interaction parameter @xmath434 . in the case of atomic gases
it is indeed possible to perform an _ ab initio _ calculation of this quantity , something which for instance can not be done for liquid helium .
the reason why @xmath434 can be determined for atomic gases , is that under the experimental conditions of interest the densities are always so low that we only need to consider all two - body processes taking place in the gas and we can neglect three - body and higher - body processes .
this implies physically that we only have to calculate and add the quantum mechanical amplitudes for two atoms to scatter of each other an arbitrary number of times .
diagrammatically the procedure can essentially be summarized by the t - matrix equation in figure 14 , because by iteration of this equation we easily see that we are indeed summing all two - body interacion processes .        denoting the total momentum of the two incoming particles by @xmath435 and the sum of the two matsubara frequencies by @xmath436 , the t - matrix equation in figure 14
can , with our knowledge of how to perform the matsubara sum in the right - hand side , easily be shown to be mathematically equivalent to @xmath437 it is immediately solved by @xmath438 note that this is a somewhat formal result , because the momentum sum in the right - hand side has an ultra - violet divergence , which from a field - theoretical point of view requires a renormalization procedure .
the physical reason for the divergence is that we have used the approximate potential @xmath439 instead of the actual interactomic potential @xmath271 .
the argument for using the @xmath440-function approximation was that the thermal de broglie wavelength of the atoms is for the ultra - low temperatures of interest always much larger than the typical range of the interaction .
we now see that this argument is not fully correct , because if we calculate corrections in perturbation theory , we have to deal with momentum sums which are not always restricted to momenta of order @xmath441 and are therefore sensitive to the precise details of the interaction potential .    to cure this disease
we note that if we put in equation ( [ tmatrix ] ) the bose occupation numbers equal to zero , we precisely get the t - matrix or lippmann - schwinger equation @xcite for two atoms interacting with the potential @xmath439 . furthermore
, if the atoms interact with the potential @xmath271 the solution of the corresponding lippmann - schwinger equation is known from elementary scattering theory to be equal to @xmath442 for small incoming momenta and energies , where @xmath443 is the @xmath338-wave scattering length .
we thus conclude that we must interpret @xmath444 as being equal to @xmath445 and , therefore , that the desired t - matrix in principle obeys @xmath446    to obtain an accurate theory for a trapped atomic bose gas that includes the effect of all two - body processes , we should now use instead of @xmath434 the above t - matrix in the bogoliubov or popov theories .
of course , in the normal phase the same is true for the hartree - fock theory .
if the temperature is not too close to the critical temperature for bose - einstein condensation , it turns out that @xmath447 and we arrive at the conclusion that for an application to realistic atomic gases we must replace everywhere in section [ sf ] the interaction parameter @xmath434 by @xmath442 . for temperatures close to the critical temperature , this is however no longer true and the bose distribution functions have a nonnegligible effect of the t - matrix @xcite . the theory that , by using ` dressed ' one - particle propagators in figure 14 , selfconsistently includes these effects of the medium on the scattering properties of the atoms is known as the many - body t - matrix theory .
it results in an effective interaction that , to avoid confusion , is denoted by @xmath448 in section [ cf ] .
as we will see then , it plays a crucial role if we want to arrive at a consistent discription of condensate formation in an atomic bose gas .
finally , we want to briefly discuss the bardeen - cooper - schrieffer or bcs theory of superconductivity @xcite , which has received considerable attention recently in connection with ongoing experiments with the fermionic isotope of lithium . the reasons for this will become clear shortly .
we are in that case dealing with effective spin @xmath449 fermions and the action is taken to be @xmath151 \\ & & = \sum_{\alpha=\uparrow,\downarrow } \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~   \phi^*_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau )    \left\ { \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial\tau }         - \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m } - \mu    \right\ } \phi_{\alpha}({\bf x},\tau ) \nonumber \\ & & + \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~ v_{\bf 0 }             \phi^*_{\uparrow}({\bf x},\tau )              \phi^*_{\downarrow}({\bf
x},\tau )               \phi_{\downarrow}({\bf x},\tau )               \phi_{\uparrow}({\bf x},\tau)~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] note that the use of a single chemical potential implies that we only consider the optimal case of an equal density in each hyperfine state .
this situation is optimal in the sense that , for unequal densities in each hyperfine state , it is no longer possible to pair up all the atoms in the gas . as a result
the critical temperature of the gas drops dramatically , and in general becomes experimentally inaccessible .
the effect is to a large extent analogous to putting superfluid @xmath450he in an homogeneous magnetic field .
furthermore , we in first instance consider the homogeneous case , because we want to illustrate in this section the local - density approximation to include the effect of the external trapping potential .
physically , this approximation treats the gas as consisting of a large number of independent gases that are in diffusive equilibrium with each other .
such an approach only works if the correlation length of the gas is much smaller than the typical length scale associated with changes of the external potential .
fortunately , this is almost always the case for realistic trapped atomic gases and for that reason the local - density approximation is often used in practice .
the bcs theory is the theory of bose - einstein condensation of so - called cooper pairs .
this means that the order parameter is @xmath451 , in analogy with the order parameter @xmath362 for the bose case just discussed .
furthermore , it requires that the interaction parameter @xmath434 is negative , since otherwise the formation of pairs would not be energetically favorable . from now on we assume , therefore , that this is the case .
the condensate of cooper pairs can also be nicely treated with a hubbard - stratonovich transformation .
we now introduce a complex field @xmath452 and use @xmath453d[\delta]~    \exp \left\ { \frac{1}{\hbar }      \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~ \left (       \frac{|\delta({\bf x},\tau)|^2}{v_{\bf 0 } }      \right .
\nonumber \\ & & + \left . \left . \raisebox{0.2 in } { }        \delta^*({\bf x},\tau )                \phi_{\downarrow}({\bf x},\tau )                \phi_{\uparrow}({\bf x},\tau )      + \phi^*_{\uparrow}({\bf x},\tau )               \phi^*_{\downarrow}({\bf x},\tau )              \delta({\bf
x},\tau )     \right ) \raisebox{0.25 in } { } \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] this leads to a partition function with the action @xmath454 = - \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~       \frac{|\delta({\bf x},\tau)|^2}{v_{\bf 0 } } \\ & & - \frac{\hbar}{2 }    \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~     \left [ \phi^*_{\downarrow}({\bf x},\tau ) ,           \phi_{\uparrow}({\bf x},\tau ) \right ] \cdot { \bf g}^{-1 }   \cdot \left [ \begin{array}{c } \phi_{\downarrow}({\bf x},\tau ) \\
\phi^*_{\uparrow}({\bf x},\tau ) \end{array } \right]~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath455 \delta({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' ) \delta(\tau-\tau')~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] and the noninteracting green s function @xmath392 is defined by @xmath456\ ] ] and @xmath457    we thus see that the fermionic part has exactly the same matrix structure as in the case of a condensed bose gas , only the selfenergy is now @xmath458 = \frac{1}{\hbar } \left [   \begin{array}{cc } 0   &   \delta({\bf x},\tau ) \\ \delta^*({\bf x},\tau ) & 0    \end{array } \right ] \delta({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' ) \delta(\tau-\tau')~.~~\ ] ] if we again integrate out the fermion fields , we get the effective action @xmath459 =           - \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~              \frac{|\delta({\bf x},\tau)|^2}{v_{\bf 0 } }           - \hbar { \rm tr}[\ln ( -{\bf g}^{-1})]~,\ ] ] which we can expand in powers of @xmath460 by using @xmath461 and therefore @xmath462 = - \hbar { \rm tr}[\ln ( -{\bf g}_0^{-1 } ) ]    + \hbar \sum_{m=1}^{\infty } \frac{1}{m }                             { \rm tr}[({\bf g}_0 \mbox{\boldmath $ \sigma$})^m]~.\ ] ] explicite calculation @xcite shows that for space and time independent @xmath460 we obtain a ` free - energy ' density of the form of the landau - theory of second - order phase transitions , i.e. , @xmath463 with as expected @xmath464 here @xmath465 is the density of states of a single spin state at the fermi energy @xmath466 and the critical temperature is given by @xmath467 if we use the same renormalization procedure as in section [ ap ] to eliminate the interaction parameter @xmath434 in favor of the negative @xmath338-wave scattering length @xmath443 .    below @xmath340
we thus have a nonzero average @xmath468 . using this in the green s function for the fermions and neglecting fluctations
, we find in momentum space that @xmath469\ ] ] and therefore poles in @xmath470 if @xmath471 this disperion relation has clearly a gap of magnitude @xmath472 at the fermi surface . as a consequence @xmath472
is known as the bcs gap parameter .
note that the critical temperature below which the gap becomes nonzero depends exponentally on the parameter @xmath473 . for typical atomic gases
this is a quantity which is much larger than one , and the bcs transition is experimentally inaccesible .
the only exception at the moment appears to be @xmath474li , with its anomalously large and negative triplet scattering length of @xmath475 @xcite .
this explains the present interest in spin - polarized atomic lithium .    in view of this exciting possibility
, we have recently studied the equilibrium properties of atomic lithium is a harmonic oscillator potential @xmath476 , with a trapping frequency of @xmath477 hz @xcite . to incorporate the effect of the external potential we have , as mentioned above , applied the local - density approximation .
the result is shown in figure 15 .
note that the use of the local - density approximation implies that we perform the above outlined homogeneous calculation for each point in space with a chemical potential that is equal to @xmath478 the third term in the right - hand side represents the mean - field effect of the hartree contribution to the selfenergy of the fermions . since our hubbard - stratonovich procedure is in principle exact , it is not immediately clear why such a term must be included in the theory .
it can , however , be shown that it arises from the fluctuations of the bcs gap parameter . with this remark
, we end our development of the equilibrium field theory of trapped atomic gases .
we now turn our attention to the nonequilibrium field theory .     and energy gap @xmath479 for a @xmath474li atomic gas consisting of @xmath480 atoms in each spin state a ) at @xmath481 nk , b ) at @xmath482 nk , slightly below @xmath340 , and c ) at @xmath483 nk . the left scale of each plot refers to the density and the right scale to the energy gap .
the dotted line in c ) shows the density distribution for an ideal fermi gas with the same number of particles and at the same temperature . ]
as we have already seen several times , the equlibrium field theory gives us also information on dynamical properties of the gas by means of the substitution @xmath484 or equivalently @xmath485 .
however , the popov theory of bose - einstein condensation has shown us that we have to be very careful with this procedure , because we may not always end up with the correct physics needed for a discription of a particular experiment .
it is for these cases that a truly nonequilibrium field theory is required and the development of such a theory is the topic of section [ qkt ] . before embarking on that ,
however , we first consider two important dynamical problems where the equilibrium theory does give us all the answers .      in a bose gas with effectively attractive interactions ,
i.e. , with a negative scattering length @xmath443 , a condensate will always have the tendency to collapse to a high density state due to the gain in energy that can be obtained in this way @xcite . the most important question in this context
is , therefore , if a condensate can exist sufficiently long to be experimentally observed . neglecting the variation of the noncondensate density on the size of the condensate @xcite , we know from the popov theory that the dynamics of the collapse is , apart from an unimportant shift in the chemical potential , determined by the gross - pitaevskii equation @xcite @xmath486 more precisely , this determines only the semiclassical dynamics . if we also want to study the quantum fluctuations , which is necessary if we are also interested in how the condensate tunnels through the macroscopic energy barrier , it is most convenient to calculate the grand canonical partition function of the condensate @xcite . quantizing the gross - pitaevskii equation we obtain for this partition function the functional integral @xmath487d[\phi]~                       \exp \left\ { - \frac{1}{\hbar } s[\phi^*,\phi ] \right\}~,\ ] ] over the complex field @xmath363 and with the euclidian action @xmath488 =                                 \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~        \phi^*({\bf x},\tau ) \left ( \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau }              + \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m } \right .
\\ & & + \left .
v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) -
\mu                 + \frac{2\pi a\hbar^2}{m }                     |\phi({\bf x},\tau)|^2 \right ) \phi({\bf x},\tau)~.   \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] as always for bose systems , the integration is only over fields that are periodic on the imaginary time axis .
although it has recently been shown by freire and arovas that the tunneling process can also be studied in terms of the complex field @xmath363 @xcite , we believe that it leads to somewhat more physical insight if we use instead the fields @xmath489 and @xmath490 that correspond to the density and phase fluctuations of the condensate , respectively .
they are introduced by performing the canonical variable transformation @xcite @xmath491 in the functional integral for the partition function . as a result
we find @xmath492d[\theta]~                 \exp \left\ { - \frac{1}{\hbar } s[\rho,\theta;\mu ] \right\}~,\ ] ] with @xmath493 =     \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~      \left ( i\hbar \rho({\bf x},\tau )                    \frac{\partial \theta({\bf x},\tau)}{\partial \tau } \right .
\\ & & + \frac{\hbar^2 \rho({\bf x},\tau)}{2 m }                           ( \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$ } \theta({\bf x},\tau))^2           + \frac{\hbar^2}{8m\rho({\bf x},\tau ) }                           ( \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$ } \rho({\bf x},\tau))^2                           \nonumber \\ & & + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x})\rho({\bf x},\tau ) - \mu\rho({\bf x},\tau )         + \left . \frac{2\pi a\hbar^2}{m } \rho^2({\bf x},\tau ) \right)~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] next , we notice that this action is only quadratic in the phase fluctuations
. the field @xmath490 can therefore be integrated over exactly , because it only involves the evaluation of a gaussian integral .
compared to ordinary gaussian integrals there is , however , one slight complication which is associated with the fact that @xmath490 are phase variables .
this implies that the periodicity of the original field @xmath363 only constraints the phase field @xmath490 to be periodic up to a multiple of @xmath494 . to evaluate the grand canonical partition function in equation  ( [ gr ] )
we must therefore first integrate over all fields @xmath490 that obey the boundary condition @xmath495 and subsequently sum over all possible integers @xmath12 . because these different boundary conditions only affect the zero - momentum part of @xmath490 we first have to evaluate the sum @xmath496~
\exp \left\ { -i \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau~ n_{\bf 0}(\tau )                          \frac{\partial \theta_{\bf 0}(\tau)}{\partial \tau }          \right\}~ ,                                              \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath497 the number of condensate particles . after performing a partial integration on the integral in the exponent
, we can carry out the path integration over @xmath498 to obtain @xmath499~.                                            \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] as expected , the integration over the global phase of the condensate leads to the constraint of a constant number of condensate particles , i.e. , @xmath500 .
moreover , we have @xmath501 , which restricts the number of condensate particles to an integer . putting all these results together
, we see that the integration over the zero - momentum part of @xmath489 is only a sum over the number of condensate particles and we have that @xmath502 here we introduced the canonical partition function of the condensate , which is apparently equal to the functional integral @xmath503d[\theta]~                    \exp \left\ { - \frac{1}{\hbar } s[\rho,\theta;0 ] \right\}\ ] ] over all the nonzero momentum components of the density and phase fields .    the integration over the nonzero momentum components of the phase field @xmath490 is easily performed , because it now involves an ordinary gaussian integral . introducing the green s function for the phase fluctuations @xmath504 by @xmath505
we immediately obtain the desired effective action for the density field @xmath506 = \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x } \int d{\bf x}'~      \left(-\frac{\hbar}{2 } \frac{\partial \rho({\bf x},\tau ) }                                   { \partial \tau }               g({\bf x},{\bf x}';\rho )                              \frac{\partial \rho({\bf x}',\tau ) }                                   { \partial \tau }      \right )   \\       & & + \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~               \left (                 \frac{\hbar^2}{8m\rho({\bf x},\tau ) }                               ( \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$ } \rho({\bf x},\tau))^2                 + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) \rho({\bf x},\tau ) \right .
\nonumber \\       & & \hspace*{2.4 in } + \left .
\frac{2\pi a\hbar^2}{m } \rho^2({\bf x},\tau )               \right)~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] being an action for the density fluctuations of the condensate , @xmath507 $ ] also describes all the collisionless modes of the condensate .
this is important for our purposes , because the mode which becomes unstable first , determines precisely how the condensate collapses .
moreover , it determines the probability with which the collapse is going to take place , both for quantum and thermal fluctuations , since the energy barrier is smallest in that direction of the configuration space .
it should be noted that as long as we can neglect the interaction between the condensate and the thermal cloud , the action @xmath507 $ ] describes also the collective modes of a gas with positive scattering length . for various other theoretical approaches that have been applied under these conditions
see , for example , refs .
the actual measurements of the collective mode frequencies have been performed by jin _
_ @xcite and mewes _ et al .
_ @xcite and are at sufficiently low temperatures indeed in good agreement with the theoretical predictions @xcite .
we expect the same to be true for a gas with effectively attractive interactions and , therefore , the action @xmath507 $ ] to be a good starting point for the following discussion .    to obtain the collisionless modes explicitly
we consider first the case of an ideal bose gas by putting @xmath508 .
for the ideal bose gas we expect the gaussian profile @xmath509 to describe an exact mode of the condensate .
the reason is that in the noninteracting case we can make a density fluctuation by taking one particle from the condensate and putting that in one of the excited states of the external potential .
the corresponding density fluctuation obeys @xmath510 for the experimentally relevant case of an isotropic harmonic oscillator @xcite it is more convenient to use instead of the cartesian quantum numbers @xmath164 , the two angular momentum quantum numbers @xmath511 and @xmath4 and the quantum number @xmath512 that counts the number of nodes in the radial wave function @xmath513 .
the density fluctuation then becomes @xmath514 with @xmath515 the excitation energy and @xmath516 the size of the condensate wave function . comparing this now with the expansion of the gaussian profile in equation  ( [ gprof ] ) around the groundstate density profile , which is obtained by substituting @xmath517
, we find that @xmath518 has precisely the same form as a density fluctuation in which one particle is taken from the condensate and put into the harmonic oscillator state with quantum numbers @xmath519 .
the frequency of this so - called ` breathing ' mode described by the gaussian density profile must therefore be equal to @xmath520 .    to proof that this is indeed correct , we need to evaluate the effective action @xmath507 $ ] , and hence the green s function @xmath504 , for a gaussian density profile .
substituting such a profile in equation  ( [ geq ] ) immediately leads to @xmath521 , with @xmath522 the latter equation can be solved , if we can solve the eigenvalue problem @xmath523 this turns out to be an easy task , because substituting @xmath524 gives essentially the radial schrdinger equation for an isotropic harmonic oscillator with frequency @xmath525 , i.e. , @xmath526 the desired eigenfunctions are therefore @xmath527 , with @xmath528 the properly normalized harmonic oscillator states with the energies @xmath529 , and the corresponding eigenvalues are @xmath530 .
introducing finally the ` dual ' eigenfunctions @xmath531 , the green s function @xmath532 is given by @xmath533 note that prime on the summation sign indicates that the sum is over all quantum numbers except @xmath534 .
the latter is excluded because the associated eigenfunction @xmath535 is just a constant and thus does not contribute to @xmath504 , which is defined as the green s function for all phase fluctuations with nonvanishing momenta .
putting all these results together , we see that the dynamics of the collective variable @xmath536 is determined by the action @xmath537 = \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau~     \left\ { \frac{3mn_{\bf 0}}{4 } \left ( \frac{dq}{d\tau } \right)^2             + n_{\bf 0 } \left ( \frac{3\hbar^2}{4mq^2 } + \frac{3}{4}m\omega^2q^2              \right ) \right\ } \\ & & \equiv \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau~     \left\ { \frac{1}{2 } m^ * \left ( \frac{dq}{d\tau } \right)^2 + v(q )      \right\}~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] that is equivalent to the action of a particle with effective mass @xmath538 in a potential @xmath539 .
as expected from our previous remarks , this potential has a minimum for @xmath540 and can be expanded near its minimum as @xmath541 it thus comfirms that the gaussian profile describes a breathing mode with frequency @xmath520 around an equilibrium density profile that is given by @xmath542 .
our next task is to investigate how interactions affect this result .
considering again only gaussian density profiles , the action @xmath543 $ ] is again that of a particle with effective mass @xmath538 but now in the potential @xcite @xmath544 the physically most important feature of this potential is that it is unbounded from below , since @xmath545 if @xmath546 .
hence , the condensate indeed always has the tendency to collapse to the high - density state @xmath547 .
however , if the number of condensate particles is sufficiently small , or more precisely if @xcite @xmath548 the condensate has to overcome a macroscopic energy barrier before it can collapse . under these conditions
the condensate is therefore really metastable and can in principle be observed experimentally .
the most important question in this respect is of course : how metastable is the condensate ? within the gaussian approximation this question
is easily answered , because then the dynamics of the condensate is equivalent to the dynamics of a particle in an unstable potential , as we have just seen .
we therefore only need to evaluate the wkb - expression for the tunnneling rate @xcite and compare this to the rate of decay due to thermal fluctuations by calculating also the height of the energy barrier .
the outcome of this comparison for the conditions of the experiment with atomic @xmath549li is presented in reference  @xcite and shows that , for the relatively high temperatures @xmath550 that have been obtained thusfar @xcite , the decay by means of thermal fluctuations over the energy barrier is the dominant decay mechanism of the condensate .
more important for our purposes , however , is that sufficiently close to the maximum number of condensate particles @xmath551 the collective decay of the condensate discussed above is always much more probable than the decay due to two and three - body collisions that lead to a spin - flip or the formation of @xmath549li molecules , respectively . as a result
the collapse of the condensate should be observable within the finite lifetime of the gas .
in fact , on the basis of this separation of time scales we expect the condensate to go through a number of growth and collapse cycles @xcite .
physically this picture arises as follows .
starting from a gas with a number of atoms @xmath552 , the condensate will initially grow as a response to evaporative cooling .
however , if the number of condensate atoms starts to come close to @xmath551 , the condensate fluctuates over the energy barrier and collapses in a very short time of @xmath553 @xcite . during the collapse the condensate density increases rapidly and two and three - body inelastic processes
quickly remove almost all the atoms from the condensate .
after this has occurred the condensate grows again from the noncondensed part of the gas and a new growth and collapse cycle begins .
it is only after many of these cycles that enough atoms are removed for the gas to relax to an equilibrium with a number of condensate particles that is less than @xmath554 .
this is shows quantitatively in figure 16 for the experimental conditions of interest .     in response to evaporative cooling .
the long - time decay of the condensate is due to two and three - body inelastic collisions . ]
a final issue which needs to be addressed at this point is the actual dynamics of the collapse and , in particular , how we must include the effect of the inelastic growth and decay processes on this dynamics .
unfortunately , the inclusion of these effects is rather complicated and we need the results of section [ cf ] to be able to correctly address this problem .
it is , however , of some interest because sackett _ et al .
_ have recently observed that after a single collapse there remains a remnant of the condensate with about 10% of the initial number of atoms @xcite . at present , it is an important open problem to theoretically understand the magnitude of this remnant .
as we have just seen explicitly , a particularly interesting consequence of the finite size of the gas is that quantum fluctuations play a much more important role .
although this is especially true for the case of attractive interactions that we considered in section [ nsl ] , it is also true for a bose gas with repulsive interactions .
a striking example in this respect is the phenomenon of phase ` diffusion ' , which was recently discussed by lewenstein and you @xcite .
we rederive their results for a trapped bose gas in a moment , but first consider also the same phenomenon for a neutral and homogeneous superconductor . in this manner
it is possible to bring out the physics involved more clearly .    using the approach of section [ sc ]
, it can be shown that at zero temperature the dynamics of the superconducting order parameter , i.e. , the bcs gap parameter @xmath555 that is proportional to the wave function of the condensate of cooper pairs , is in a good approximation determined by a time - dependent ginzburg - landau theory @xcite with the action @xmath556 =   \frac{n(0)}{4 } \int dt \int d{\bf x}~      \left\ { \frac{\hbar^2}{|\delta_0|^2 }        \left| \frac{\partial \delta}{\partial t } \right|^2 \right .
\\ & & - \left .
\frac{\hbar^2 v_f^2}{3|\delta_0|^2 }         \left| \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$ } \delta \right|^2        + 2 |\delta|^2 \left ( 1 - \frac{|\delta|^2}{2|\delta_0|^2 } \right )     \right\}~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath465 is the density of states for one spin projection at the fermi energy @xmath557 and @xmath558 is the equilibrium value of the order parameter @xcite .
writing the complex order parameter in terms of an amplitude and a phase , we immediately observe that the amplitude fluctuations are gapped @xcite and can , therefore , be safely neglected at large length scales .
the long - wavelength dynamics of the superconductor is thus dominated by the phase fluctuations , according to the action @xmath559 =   \frac{n(0)\hbar^2}{4 } \int dt \int d{\bf x}~      \left\ { \left ( \frac{\partial \theta}{\partial t } \right)^2        - \frac{v_f^2}{3 }         \left ( \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$ } \theta \right)^2     \right\}~.\ ] ] this also implies that the global phase @xmath560 of the superconductor has a dynamics that is governed by @xmath561 =    \frac{n(0)n\hbar^2}{4n } \int dt~                \left ( \frac{d \theta_{\bf 0}}{dt } \right)^2~,\ ] ] using the fact that the total volume @xmath337 of the system is given by @xmath562 .    up to now our discussion has again been semiclassical . to consider also the quantum fluctuations
, we have to quantize this theory by applying the usual rules of quantum mechanics .
doing so , we find that the wave function of the overall phase obeys a schrdinger equation @xmath563 with a ` diffusion ' constant that can easily be shown to be equal to the quantity @xmath564 @xcite and is , most importantly for our purposes , proportional to @xmath565 . in the thermodynamic limit @xmath566 a state with a well defined stationary phase is clearly a solution and we are then dealing with a system having a spontaneously broken @xmath424 symmetry .
however , for a finite ( and fixed ) number of particles the global phase can not be well defined at all times and always has to ` diffuse ' in accordance with the above schrdinger equation .
note also that in the groundstate the phase is fully undetermined and @xmath567 .
maybe surprisingly , the same calculation is somewhat more complicated for a bose gas because the amplitude fluctuations of the order parameter can not be neglected even at the largest length scales .
however , taking these amplitude fluctuations into account properly , we nevertheless arrive at an action that is equivalent to equation  ( [ phase ] ) and hence again leads to the phenomenon of phase ` diffusion ' .
we start again from the action @xmath568 $ ] for the condensate .
the difference with the previous subsection is , however , that now we are not so much interested in the dynamics of the density but in the phase dynamics instead .
therefore we now want to integrate over the density field @xmath489 .
this can not be done exactly and we therefore here consider only the strong - coupling limit , which was also treated by lewenstein and you @xcite . in that limit
we are allowed to neglect the gradient of the average density profile @xcite and the action @xmath568 $ ] is for the longest wavelengths well approximated by @xmath569 =      \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau \int d{\bf x}~      \left ( i\hbar \rho({\bf x},\tau )                    \frac{\partial \theta({\bf x},\tau)}{\partial \tau } \right .
\\     & & + \left .
v^{\rm ex}({\bf x})\rho({\bf x},\tau ) - \mu\rho({\bf x},\tau )                + \frac{2\pi a\hbar^2}{m } \rho^2({\bf x},\tau ) \right)~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] in equilibrium the average density profile of the condensate thus obeys @xmath570 performing now the shift @xmath571 , we find for the zero - momentum part of the action @xcite @xmath572 =   \hbar\beta e_{\bf 0}(\mu )     + \int_0^{\hbar\beta } d\tau       \left ( i\hbar \delta n_{\bf 0 } \frac{d \theta_{\bf 0}}{d\tau }            + \frac{2\pi a\hbar^2}{mv_{\bf 0}(\mu ) } ( \delta n_{\bf 0})^2   \right)~,\ ] ] where @xmath573 and @xmath574 correspond , respectively , to the energy and the volume of the condensate in the so - called thomas - fermi approximation @xcite .
moreover , @xmath575 represents the fluctuations in the total number of condensate particles in that same approximation , implying that the density fluctuations @xmath576 are only nonzero in that region of space where the condensate density does not vanish .    performing now the integration over the number fluctuations @xmath577 and the usual wick rotation to real times @xmath485
, we immediately see that the effective action for the global phase of the condensate has precisely the same form as in equation  ( [ phase ] ) , i.e. , @xmath578 = \frac{mv_{\bf 0}(\mu)}{8\pi a } \int dt~                                   \left ( \frac{d\theta_{\bf 0}}{dt } \right)^2~.\ ] ] the appropriate ` diffusion ' constant is therefore equal to @xmath579 , which can easily be shown to be equal to @xmath580 if we make use of the fact that in the thomas - fermi approximation the chemical potential obeys @xmath581 and the radius of the condensate is given by @xmath582 @xcite .
hence , the ` diffusion ' constant is proportional to @xmath583 . note that if the condensate where contained in a box the ` diffusion ' constant would be proportional to @xmath584 instead .
it is important to note also that , in contrast to the case of a fermionic superfluid , we have to integrate over the amplitude fluctuations of the order parameter to arrive at a quadratic action for the phase fluctuations .
this leads to the important conclusion that for a bosonic superfluid it is impossible to be in a state with only phase fluctuations and no density fluctuations , even at the largest length scales .
for simplicity we restrict ourselves for the rest of this course to the case of a doubly - polarized atomic bose gas , which for most practical purposes can be seen as a gas of spin - less bosons @xcite .
once we have understood the quantum kinetic theory for this particular case , however , we can easily generalize to multi - component bose gases that are receiving considerable attention at present @xcite .
furthermore , the same methods can also be used for fermionic gases and have recently already been applied to the problem of cooper - pair formation in a two - component fermion gas @xcite .      in textbooks an ideal bose gas
is generally discussed in terms of the average occupation numbers of the one - particle states @xmath53 @xcite .
given the density matrix @xmath585 of the gas at an initial time @xmath586 , these occupation numbers obey @xmath587~,\ ] ] with @xmath588 and @xmath589 the usual ( heisenberg picture ) creation and annihilation operators of second quantization , respectively . because the hamiltonian of the gas @xmath590 commutes with the number operators @xmath591 ,
the nonequilibrium dynamics of the system is trivial and the average occupation numbers are at all times equal to their value at the initial time @xmath586 . if we are also interested in fluctuations , it is convenient to introduce the eigenstates of the number operators , i.e. , @xmath592 and to consider the full probability distribution @xmath593~,\ ] ] which is again independent of time for an ideal bose gas .
the average occupation numbers are then determined by @xmath594 and the fluctuations can be obtained from similar expressions .    as indicated in section [ pd ] , we are also interested in the phase dynamics of the gas . in analogy with the occupation number representation in equation  ( [ pn ] ) , we can now obtain a completely different description of the bose gas by making use of coherent states and considering the probability distribution @xmath595 $ ] .
although we expect that this probability distribution is again independent of time , let us nevertheless proceed to derive its equation of motion in a way that can be generalized lateron when we consider an interacting bose gas .
first , we use that @xmath596 = \int d[\phi^*_0]d[\phi_0]~                        p[\phi_0^*,\phi_0;t_0 ]                        \frac{|\langle\phi;t|\phi_0;t_0\rangle|^2 }                             { \langle\phi;t|\phi;t\rangle                                \langle\phi_0;t_0|\phi_0;t_0\rangle}~.\ ] ] this is a particularly useful result , because the time dependence is now completely determined by the matrix element @xmath597 for which the functional integral representation is well known from our discussion in section [ fi ] .
it is given by a ` path ' integral over all complex field evolutions @xmath598 from @xmath586 to @xmath30 .
more precisely we have @xmath599d[\psi]~ \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar } s_+[\psi^*,\psi ] \right\}~,\ ] ] with the forward action @xmath600 $ ] given by @xmath601           = \sum_{\bf
n }      \left\ { -i\hbar \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ) \psi_{\bf n}(t )                                   \raisebox{0.2 in } { } \right .
\\ & & \hspace*{0.6 in } + \left .
\int_{t_0}^{t } dt_+~ \psi^*_{\bf n}(t_+ )           \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t_+ }                                - \epsilon_{\bf n } \right )                                        \psi_{\bf
n}(t_+ ) \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] in the same manner the matrix element @xmath602 can be written as a ` path ' integral over all possible field configurations @xmath603 evolving backward in time from @xmath30 to @xmath586 , i.e. , @xmath604d[\psi]~ \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar } s_-[\psi^*,\psi ] \right\}~,\ ] ] with a backward action @xmath605 = \sum_{\bf n }      \left\ { -i\hbar \psi^*_{\bf n}(t_0 ) \psi_{\bf n}(t_0 )      \raisebox{0.2 in } { } \right .
\\ & & \hspace*{0.6 in } + \left .
\int_{t}^{t_0 } dt_-~ \psi^*_{\bf n}(t_- )           \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t_- }                             - \epsilon_{\bf n } \right )                                   \psi_{\bf n}(t_- ) \right\ } \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.1 in } = \sum_{\bf n }      \left\ { -i\hbar \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ) \psi_{\bf n}(t )     \raisebox{0.2 in } { } \right .
\nonumber \\      & & \hspace*{0.6 in } + \left .
\int_{t}^{t_0 } dt_-~ \psi_{\bf n}(t_- )           \left ( -i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t_- }                                - \epsilon_{\bf n } \right )                                       \psi^*_{\bf n}(t_- ) \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    putting all these results together , we see that the probability distribution @xmath595 $ ] can in fact be represented by a functional integral over all fields @xmath606 that evolve backwards from @xmath30 to @xmath586 and then forward in time from @xmath586 to @xmath30 . absorbing the factor
@xmath607 $ ] into the measure of the functional integral , we thus arrive at the desired result that @xmath608 =      \int_{\psi({\bf x},t)=\phi({\bf x})}^{\psi^*({\bf x},t)=\phi^*({\bf x } ) }               d[\psi^*]d[\psi]~                        \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar } s[\psi^*,\psi ] \right\}~,\ ] ] where the total ( backward - forward ) action in first instance obeys @xmath609 = s_-[\psi^*,\psi ] + s_+[\psi^*,\psi ]     = -i\hbar \sum_{\bf n } \left (          \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ) \psi_{\bf n}(t ) -                                   |\phi_{\bf n}|^2 \right ) \hspace{0.4 in } \\    & & + \sum_{\bf n } \int_{{\cal c}^t } dt'~ \left\ { \frac{1}{2 } \left (        \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ' ) i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t ' }         \psi_{\bf n}(t ' )       - \psi_{\bf n}(t ' ) i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t ' }          \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ' ) \right ) \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{2.55 in } - \left . \raisebox{0.2 in } { }           \epsilon_{\bf n } \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ' )                                     \psi_{\bf n}(t ' )   \right\}~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] and the integration along the schwinger - keldysh contour @xmath610 is defined by @xmath611 @xcite .
note also that in equation  ( [ prob2 ] ) we have explicitly specified the boundary conditions on the functional integral .
it is interesting to mention that these boundary conditions are essentially dictated by the topological terms in the action @xmath612 $ ] , which is a general feature of the path - integral formulation of quantum mechanics due to the fact that the quantum theory should have the correct ( semi)classical limit @xcite .
making use of the periodicity of the field @xmath606 on the schwinger - keldysh contour , the variational principle @xmath613/\delta \psi^*_{\bf n}(t_{\pm } ) = 0 $ ] indeed leads not only to the euler - lagrange equation @xmath614 which agrees with the heisenberg equation of motion @xmath615 $ ] for the annihilation operators , but also with the appropriate boundary condition @xmath616 . in the same way we find the complex conjugate results
if we require that @xmath613/\delta \psi_{\bf n}(t_{\pm } ) = 0 $ ] . substituting the boundary conditions in equation  ( [ action ] ) and performing a partial integration ,
we then finally obtain for the action @xmath617 =     \sum_{\bf n } \int_{{\cal c}^t } dt'~           \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ' ) \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t ' }                  - \epsilon_{\bf n } \right ) \psi_{\bf n}(t')~,\ ] ] which we for completeness sake also rewrite as @xmath618   \\ & & = \int_{{\cal c}^t } dt ' \int d{\bf x}~           \psi^*({\bf x},t ' ) \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t ' }               + \frac{\hbar^2 \mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }               - v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) \right )                 \psi({\bf x},t')~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    we are now in a position to derive the equation of motion , i.e. , the fokker - planck equation , for the probability distibution @xmath595 $ ] .
this is most easily achieved by performing the variable transformation @xmath619 in equation  ( [ prob2 ] ) . in this manner
the fields @xmath620 and @xmath621 that live on the backward and forward branch of the schwinger - keldysh contour , respectively , are ` projected ' onto the real time axis . moreover , at the same time we effect a separation between the ( semi)classical dynamics described by @xmath622 and the quantum fluctuations determined by @xmath623 . after the transformation we have @xmath624 \\   & & = \int_{\phi({\bf x},t)=\phi({\bf x})}^{\phi^*({\bf x},t)=\phi^*({\bf x } ) }           d[\phi^*]d[\phi ]
\int d[\xi^*]d[\xi]~            \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar } s[\phi^*,\phi;\xi^*,\xi ] \right\}~ ,           \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath625 =    \sum_{\bf n } \int_{t_0}^t dt'~ \left\ {        \phi^*_{\bf n}(t ' ) \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t ' }                   - \epsilon_{\bf n } \right ) \xi_{\bf n}(t ' )                  \right . \\ & & \hspace*{1.2 in }      + \left .
\xi^*_{\bf n}(t ' ) \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t ' }                   - \epsilon_{\bf n } \right ) \phi_{\bf n}(t ' )                           \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] because this action is linear in @xmath626 and @xmath627 , the integration over the quantum fluctuations leads just to a constraint and we find that @xmath628 =      \int_{\phi({\bf x},t)=\phi({\bf x})}^{\phi^*({\bf x},t)=\phi^*({\bf x } ) }      d[\phi^*]d[\phi]~ \\ & & \times \prod_{\bf n } \delta \left [       \left ( -i \frac{\partial}{\partial t ' }                - \frac{\epsilon_{\bf n}}{\hbar } \right )                                                 \phi^*_{\bf n}(t ' )   \cdot        \left ( i \frac{\partial}{\partial t ' }                - \frac{\epsilon_{\bf n}}{\hbar } \right )                                                 \phi_{\bf n}(t ' )                                           \right ] \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] or equivalently that @xmath629 =         \int d[\phi^*_0]d[\phi_0]~ p[\phi^*_0,\phi_0;t_0 ]        \prod_{\bf n }         \delta \left ( |\phi_{\bf n } - \phi^{\rm cl}_{\bf n}(t)|^2                                \right)~,\ ] ] where we introduced the quantity @xmath630 obeying the semiclassical equation of motion @xmath631 and the initial condition @xmath632 .
the latter equation is thus solved by @xmath633 and we conclude from a simple change of variables in equation  ( [ prob3 ] ) that for an ideal bose gas @xmath595 = p[\phi^*,\phi;t_0]$ ] , as expected .
we also see from equation  ( [ prob3 ] ) that the desired equation of motion for @xmath595 $ ] reads @xmath634 =    - \left ( \sum_{\bf
n } \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi_{\bf n } }         \epsilon_{\bf n } \phi_{\bf n } \right ) p[\phi^*,\phi;t ] \\    & & \hspace*{0.8 in } + \left ( \sum_{\bf n } \frac{\partial}{\partial               \phi^*_{\bf n } }         \epsilon_{\bf n } \phi^*_{\bf n } \right ) p[\phi^*,\phi;t]~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] this is indeed the correct fokker - planck equation for an ideal bose gas @xcite . to see that we first consider @xmath635d[\phi]~ \phi_{\bf n } p[\phi^*,\phi;t]$ ] .
multiplying equation  ( [ fp1 ] ) with @xmath636 and integrating over @xmath637 , we easily find after a partial integration that @xmath638 which precisely corresponds to the equation of motion of the expectation value @xmath639 $ ] in the operator formalism .
similarly , we find that @xmath640 in agreement with the result for @xmath641 $ ] .
next we consider the average of @xmath642 , for which we immediately obtain @xmath643 we expect this result to be related to the fact that in the operator formalism the occupation numbers @xmath644 are independent of time .
although this turns out to be true , to give the precise relation between @xmath645 and @xmath644 is complicated by the fact that at equal times the operators @xmath589 and @xmath588 do not commute .
however , the path - integral formulation of quantum mechanics is only capable of calculating time - ordered operator products @xcite . in our case
this implies that @xmath645 is the value at @xmath646 of @xmath647 \\ & & = \theta(t , t ' ) { \rm tr } \left [ \hat{\rho}(t_0 )
\hat{\psi}_{\bf n}(t )                               \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\bf n}(t ' ) \right ] + \theta(t',t ) { \rm tr } \left [ \hat{\rho}(t_0 )                             \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\bf n}(t ' )                             \hat{\psi}_{\bf n}(t ) \right]~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath648 the time - ordening operator on the schwinger - keldysh contour and @xmath649 the corresponding heaviside function .
since the heaviside function is equal to @xmath449 at equal times @xcite , we conclude that @xmath650 and that equation  ( [ phisquare ] ) is thus fully consistent with the operator formalism .
an intuitive understanding of the relation between @xmath645 and the occupation numbers can be obtained by noting that , since all our manipulations up to now have been exact , we expect @xmath645 to contain both classical and quantum fluctuations .
these correspond precisely to the contributions @xmath644 and @xmath449 , respectively .
finally we need to discuss the stationary solutions of the fokker - planck equation .
it is not difficult to show that any functional that only depends on the amplitudes @xmath642 is a solution .
as it stands the fokker - planck equation , therefore , does not lead to a unique equilibrium distribution .
this is not surprising , because for an isolated , ideal bose gas there is no mechanism for redistributing the particles over the various energy levels and thus for relaxation towards equilibrium .
however , the situation changes when we allow the bosons in the trap to tunnel back and forth to a reservoir at a temperature @xmath117 .
the corrections to the fokker - planck equation that are required to describe the physics in this case are considered next
. however , to determine these corrections in the most convenient way , we have to slightly generalize the above theory because with the probability distibution @xmath595 $ ] we are only able to study spatial , but not temporal correlations in the bose gas .    to study also those we follow the by now well - known procedure in quantum field theory and construct a generating functional @xmath651 $ ] for all ( time - ordered ) correlation functions .
it is obtained by performing two steps .
first , we introduce the probability distribution @xmath652 $ ] for a bose gas in the presence of the external currents @xmath653 and @xmath654 by adding to the hamiltonian the terms @xmath655 as a result we have @xmath656 =      \int_{\psi({\bf x},t)=\phi({\bf x})}^{\psi^*({\bf x},t)=\phi^*({\bf x } ) }               d[\psi^*]d[\psi]~ \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar } s[\psi^*,\psi ]                                 \right\ } \\ & & \hspace*{0.38 in }    \times \exp \left\ { i \int_{{\cal c}^t } dt ' \int d{\bf x}~ \left (              \psi({\bf x},t ' ) j^*({\bf x},t ' ) + j({\bf x},t ' ) \psi^*({\bf x},t ' )                                                   \right ) \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] second , we integrate this expression over @xmath637 to obtain the desired generating functional . hence
@xmath657 = \int d[\phi^*]d[\phi]~ p_j[\phi^*,\phi;t ]           = \int d[\psi^*]d[\psi]~ \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar } s[\psi^*,\psi ]                                 \right\ } \hspace{0.4 in } \\ & & \hspace*{0.32 in } \times \exp \left\ { i \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt \int d{\bf x}~ \left
(              \psi({\bf x},t ) j^*({\bf x},t ) + j({\bf x},t ) \psi^*({\bf x},t )                                                    \right ) \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    it is important to realize that @xmath651 $ ] is indeed independent of the time @xmath30 because of the fact that @xmath652 $ ] is a probability distribution and thus properly normalized .
we are therefore allowed to deform the contour @xmath658 to any closed contour that runs through @xmath586 .
since we are in principle interested in all times @xmath659 , the most convenient choice is the countour that runs backward from infinity to @xmath586 and then forwards from @xmath586 to infinity .
this contour is denoted by @xmath660 and also called the schwinger - keldysh contour in the following because there is in practice never confusion with the more restricted contour @xmath658 that is required when we consider a probability distribution . with this choice
it is also clear that @xmath651 $ ] is a generating functional .
indeed , equation  ( [ z ] ) shows explicitly that all time - ordered correlation functions can be obtained by functional differentiation with respect to the currents @xmath653 and @xmath654 .
we have , for instance , that @xmath661 =     \left . \frac{1}{i } \frac{\delta}{\delta j^*({\bf x},t ) } z[j , j^ * ]   \right|_{j , j^*=0}\ ] ] and similarly that @xmath662 \\   & & = \left . \frac{1}{i^2 }            \frac{\delta^2}{\delta j^*({\bf x},t ) \delta j({\bf x}',t ' ) }                                                       z[j , j^ * ]   \right|_{j , j^*=0}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] note that the times @xmath30 and @xmath663 always have to be larger or equal to @xmath586 for these identities to be valid .      inspired by the caldeira - leggett model for a particle experiencing friction @xcite ,
we take for the reservoir an ideal gas of @xmath3 bosons in a box with volume @xmath337 .
the states in this box are labeled by the momentum @xmath664 and equal to @xmath665 .
they have an energy @xmath666 , where @xmath667 accounts for a possible bias between the potential energies of a particle in the center of the trap and a particle in the reservoir .
the reservoir is also taken to be sufficiently large that it can be treated in the thermodynamic limit and is in an equilibrium with temperature @xmath117 and chemical potential @xmath60 for times @xmath668 . at @xmath586
it is brought into contact with the trap by means of a tunnel hamiltonian @xmath669 with complex tunneling matrix elements @xmath670 that for simplicity are assumed to be almost constant for momenta @xmath671 smaller that a cutoff @xmath672 but to vanish rapidly for momenta larger than this ultraviolet cutoff .
moreover , we consider here only the low - temperature regime in which the thermal de broglie wavelength @xmath673 of the particles obeys @xmath674 , since this is the most appropriate limit for realistic atomic gases .    to study the evolution of the combined system for times @xmath659 we thus have to deal with the action @xmath675 = \sum_{\bf n } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt~           \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ) \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                            - \epsilon_{\bf n } + \mu \right ) \psi_{\bf n}(t ) \\ & & + \sum_{\bf k } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt~            \psi^*_{\bf k}(t )
\left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                            - \epsilon({\bf k } ) + \mu \right ) \psi_{\bf k}(t)~ ,                           \nonumber \\ & & - \frac{1}{\sqrt{v } } \sum_{\bf n } \sum_{\bf k } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt~         \left ( t_{\bf n}({\bf k } ) \psi_{\bf n}(t ) \psi^*_{\bf k}(t )           + t^*_{\bf n}({\bf k } ) \psi_{\bf k}(t ) \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ) \right )                                                             \nonumber \end{aligned}\ ] ] if we measure all energies relative to the chemical potential and also introduce the complex field @xmath676 for the degrees of freedom of the reservoir .
however , we are only interested in the evolution of the bose gas in the trap and therefore only in the time - ordered correlation functions of this part of the system .
the corresponding generating functional @xmath677 = \int d[\psi^*]d[\psi ] \int d[\psi_r^*]d[\psi_r]~      \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar } s[\psi^*,\psi;\psi_r^*,\psi_r ]                                 \right\ } \hspace{0.4 in } \\ & & \times \exp \left\ { i \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt \int d{\bf x}~ \left
(              \psi({\bf x},t ) j^*({\bf x},t ) + j({\bf x},t ) \psi^*({\bf x},t )                                                  \right ) \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] is of the same form as the functional integral in equation  ( [ z ] ) , but now with an effective action that is defined by @xmath678 \right\ } \equiv    \int d[\psi_r^*]d[\psi_r]~            \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar } s[\psi^*,\psi;\psi_r^*,\psi_r ]   \right\}~.\ ] ] hence , our next task is to integrate out the field @xmath679 , which can be done exactly because it only requires the integration of a gaussian .    to familiarize ourselves with the schwinger - keldysh formalism , we perform the gaussian integration here in some detail . in principle , this
can of course be done explicitly by making use of the fact that the initial density matrix @xmath680 of the reservoir can be expanded in the projection operators on the coherent states by using the coefficients @xmath681 = \prod_{\bf k }      \frac{1}{n({\bf k } ) } e^ { - |\phi_{\bf k}|^2/n({\bf k } ) } ~,\ ] ] with @xmath682 the appropriate bose distribution function and @xmath119 . however , in practice it is much more easy to use a different procedure .
it is based on the observation that if we introduce the @xmath440 function on the schwinger - keldysh contour defined by@xmath683 and the green s function @xmath684 obeying @xmath685 the action @xmath686 $ ] can be written as a complete square , or more precisely as the sum of two squares @xmath687 $ ] and @xmath688 $ ] that are given by @xmath689 = \sum_{\bf n } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt~               \psi^*_{\bf n}(t )               \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                      - \epsilon_{\bf n } + \mu \right ) \psi_{\bf n}(t ) \\ & & \hspace*{0.1 in } - \frac{1}{\hbar v } \sum_{\bf n,\bf n ' } \sum_{\bf k }     \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt'~        \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ) t^*_{\bf n}({\bf k } ) g({\bf k};t , t ' )                                  t_{\bf n'}({\bf k } ) \psi_{\bf n'}(t ' ) \nonumber   \end{aligned}\ ] ] and @xmath690 \\ & & = \sum_{\bf k } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt~      \left ( \psi_{\bf k}^*(t )            - \frac{1}{\hbar\sqrt{v } } \sum_{\bf n } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt'~                   t^*_{\bf n}({\bf k } ) \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ' ) g({\bf k};t',t )      \right )                                                     \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.7 in } \times \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                            - \epsilon({\bf k } ) + \mu \right )      \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.7 in } \times \left ( \psi_{\bf k}(t )            - \frac{1}{\hbar\sqrt{v } } \sum_{\bf n } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt'~                   g({\bf k};t , t ' ) \psi_{\bf n}(t ' ) t_{\bf n}({\bf k } )            \right)~ , \nonumber      \end{aligned}\ ] ] respectively . since the first term is independent of the field @xmath679 , we only need to evaluate @xmath691d[\psi_r]~                  \exp \left ( i s_2[\psi^*,\psi;\psi_r^*,\psi_r]/\hbar \right)$ ] . performing a shift in the integration variables , we however see that this functional integral is equal to @xmath692d[\psi_r]~     \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar }             \sum_{\bf k } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt~                \psi^*_{\bf k}(t ) \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                            - \epsilon({\bf k } ) + \mu \right ) \psi_{\bf k}(t )          \right\ }   \\
= { \rm tr}[\rho_r(t_0 ) ] = 1~.   \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] as a result the effective action @xmath693 $ ] is just equal to @xmath687 $ ] , which can be slightly rewritten to read @xmath694 = \sum_{\bf n,\bf n ' }       \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt'~   \\ & & \hspace*{0.37 in } \times~ \psi^*_{\bf n}(t ) \left\ {               \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                      - \epsilon_{\bf n } + \mu \right ) \delta_{\bf n,\bf n ' }                                                       \delta(t , t ' )                     - \hbar \sigma_{{\bf n},{\bf n}'}(t , t ' )                               \right\ } \psi_{\bf n'}(t')~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with a selfenergy @xmath695 obeying @xmath696    this is our first example of an effective action describing the nonequilibrium dynamics of a bose gas .
before we can study its consequences we clearly first need to determine the green s function @xmath684 in terms of which the selfenergy is expressed .
although we know that this green s function fulfills equation  ( [ greena ] ) , we can not directly solve this equation because we do not know the appropriate boundary condition at @xmath697 . to calculate @xmath684 we therefore have to proceed differently .
it is however clear from equation  ( [ greena ] ) that @xmath684 is a property of the reservoir and we thus expect that it can somehow be related to a time - ordered correlation function of this reservior . to see that
explicitly we consider again the generating functional of these correlation functions , i.e. , @xmath698 \\   & & = \int d[\psi_r^*]d[\psi_r]~      \exp \left\ { \frac{i}{\hbar }             \sum_{\bf k } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt~               \psi^*_{\bf k}(t ) \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                            - \epsilon({\bf k } ) + \mu \right ) \psi_{\bf k}(t )                                 \right\ }                            \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.9 in }        \times \exp \left\ { i \sum_{\bf k } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt~              \left (              \psi_{\bf k}(t ) j^*_{\bf k}(t ) + j_{\bf k}(t ) \psi^*_{\bf k}(t )              \right )                \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] it is again a gaussian integral and can thus be evaluated in the same manner as before .
the result is now @xmath699 = \exp \left\ { -i \sum_{\bf k } \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt                                            \int_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } dt'~                  j^*_{\bf k}(t ) g({\bf k};t , t ' ) j_{\bf k}(t ' ) \right\}~,\ ] ] which shows by means of equation  ( [ corr ] ) that @xmath700~.\ ] ]    note first of all that this is indeed consistent with equation  ( [ greena ] ) , because the right - hand side obeys @xmath701 \\     & & = i\hbar \delta(t , t ' ) { \rm tr } \left [ \hat{\rho}_r(t_0 )                   [ \hat{\psi}_{\bf k}(t),\hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\bf k}(t ) ] \right ]                                                            \nonumber \\                    & & \hspace*{0.97 in } + { \rm tr } \left [ \hat{\rho}_r(t_0 )       t_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } \left (                         i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t } \hat{\psi}_{\bf k}(t )                              \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\bf k}(t ' ) \right ) \right ]                                                            \nonumber \\    & & = i\hbar \delta(t , t ' ) + ( \epsilon({\bf k } ) - \mu )                            { \rm tr } \left [ \hat{\rho}_r(t_0 )                              t_{{\cal c}^{\infty } } \left ( \hat{\psi}_{\bf k}(t )                               \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\bf k}(t ' ) \right ) \right ]                              \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] in the operator formalism .
moreover , from this identification we see that the desired solution fulfilling the appropriate boundary conditions is apparently @xmath702 the specific dependence on the backward and forward branches of the schwinger - keldysh contour is thus solely determined by the heaviside function @xmath649 . as a result
it is convenient to decompose the green s function into its analytic pieces @xmath703 and @xmath704 @xcite by means of @xmath705 due to the fact that we are always dealing with time - ordered correlation functions , such a decomposition turns out to be a generic feature of all the functions on the schwinger - keldysh contour that we will encounter in the following @xcite . for a general function @xmath706 , it is however also possible to have @xmath440-function singularities . if that happens the correct decomposition is @xmath707 this more general decomposition is not required here , but will be needed in section [ cf ] when we determine the effective interaction between two atoms in a gas .
having obtained the green s function of the reservoir , we can now return to our discussion of the effective action @xmath693 $ ] for the bose gas in the trap . although we have chosen to derive in equation  ( [ seff ] ) the effective action for the generating functional @xmath651 $ ] , it is straightforward to show that the effective action for the probability distribution @xmath595 $ ] is obtained by only replacing the contour @xmath708 by @xmath709 . in the following we
therefore no longer always specify all the boundary conditions on the time integration , if the precise details of this integration are not important and the discussion applies equally well to both cases . keeping this in mind
, we now again perform the transformation @xmath710 to explicitly separate the ( semi)classical dynamics from the effect of fluctuations .
it leads in first instance to @xcite @xmath711 =      \sum_{\bf n } \int_{t_0 } dt~         \phi^*_{\bf n}(t ) \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                              - \epsilon_{\bf n } + \mu \right ) \xi_{\bf n}(t ) \\ & & \hspace*{0.45 in } + \sum_{\bf n } \int_{t_0 } dt~                                                                  \xi^*_{\bf n}(t ) \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                              - \epsilon_{\bf n } + \mu \right ) \phi_{\bf n}(t )                                                           \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.45 in } -
\sum_{\bf n,\bf n ' }       \int_{t_0 } dt \int_{t_0 } dt'~             \phi^*_{\bf n}(t )                      \hbar \sigma^{(-)}_{{\bf n},{\bf n}'}(t - t ' ) \xi_{\bf n'}(t ' )                                                           \nonumber \\      & & \hspace*{0.45 in } - \sum_{\bf n,\bf n ' }       \int_{t_0 } dt \int_{t_0 } dt'~                                                                                \xi^*_{\bf n}(t )                     \hbar \sigma^{(+)}_{{\bf n},{\bf n}'}(t - t ' ) \phi_{\bf n'}(t ' )                                                  \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.45 in } - \frac{1}{2 } \sum_{{\bf n},{\bf n ' } }       \int_{t_0 } dt \int_{t_0 } dt'~                     \xi^*_{\bf n}(t )                      \hbar \sigma^{k}_{{\bf n},{\bf n'}}(t - t ' ) \xi_{\bf n'}(t')~ ,                      \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we introduced the retarded and advanced components of the selfenergy @xmath712 that affect the terms in the action that are linear in @xmath713 and @xmath714 , respectively , and also the keldysh component @xmath715 that is associated with the part quadratic in the fluctuations .    the physical content of these various components of the selfenergy is understood most clearly if we now apply again the beautiful functional - integral procedure that is due to hubbard and stratonovich .
the basic idea is to write the factor @xmath716 in the integrant of @xmath111d[\phi ] \int d[\xi^*]d[\xi]~                      \exp\left ( is^{\rm eff}[\phi^*,\phi;\xi^*,\xi]/\hbar   \right)$ ] as a gaussian integral over a complex field @xmath717 .
it is equivalent , but in practice more convenient , to just multiply the integrant by a factor @xmath65 that is written as a gaussian integral @xmath718d[\eta]~ \exp\left ( is^{\rm eff}[\eta^*,\eta]/\hbar \right)$ ] with @xmath719 \\ & & = \frac{1}{2 } \sum_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' } \int_{t_0 } dt \int_{t_0 } dt'~        \left(2 \eta^*_{\bf n}(t ) - \sum_{\bf n '' } \int_{t_0 } dt''~                \xi^*_{\bf n''}(t '' ) \hbar \sigma^k_{{\bf n}'',{\bf n}}(t''-t )       \right )                                                      \nonumber \\ & & \times~ ( \hbar\sigma^k)^{-1}_{{\bf n},{\bf n}'}(t - t ' )        \left(2 \eta_{\bf n'}(t ' ) - \sum_{\bf n '' } \int_{t_0 } dt''~                \hbar \sigma^k_{{\bf n}',{\bf n}''}(t'-t '' ) \xi_{\bf n''}(t '' )        \right ) \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] a complete square . adding this to @xmath720 $ ] the total effective action becomes @xmath721 \\ & & = \sum_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' } \int_{t_0 } dt \int_{t_0 } dt'~        \phi^*_{\bf n}(t )          \left\ { \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                         - \epsilon_{\bf n } + \mu - \eta^*_{\bf n}(t )
\right )                                  \delta_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' } \delta(t - t ' )                                                  \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{2.57 in }      - \left . \raisebox{0.2 in } { } \hbar \sigma^{(-)}_{{\bf n},{\bf n}'}(t - t ' )         \right\ } \xi_{\bf n'}(t ' )                           \nonumber \\ & & + \sum_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' } \int_{t_0 } dt \int_{t_0 } dt'~        \xi^*_{\bf n}(t )          \left\ { \left ( i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t }                         - \epsilon_{\bf n } + \mu - \eta_{\bf n}(t )
\right )                                  \delta_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' } \delta(t - t ' )                                                  \right .
\nonumber \\                                  & & \hspace*{2.5 in }      - \left . \raisebox{0.2 in } { } \hbar \sigma^{(+)}_{{\bf n},{\bf n}'}(t - t ' )         \right\ } \phi_{\bf n'}(t ' )                           \nonumber \\ & & + 2 \sum_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' } \int_{t_0 } dt \int_{t_0 } dt'~           \eta^*_{\bf n}(t ) ( \hbar\sigma^k)^{-1}_{{\bf n},{\bf n}'}(t - t ' )           \eta_{\bf n'}(t ' ) \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] and is thus linear in @xmath714 and @xmath713 .
integrating over these fluctuations we conclude from this action that the field @xmath722 is constraint to obey the langevin equations @xcite @xmath723 and @xmath724 with gaussian noise terms @xmath725 and @xmath726 that from the last term in the right - hand side of equation  ( [ snoise ] ) are seen to have the time correlations @xmath727 in the thermodynamic limit .
moreover , in that limit the retarded selfenergy is equal to @xmath728 and the advanced selfenergy can be found from the relation @xmath729 .
note that the heaviside functions in these retarded and advanced selfenergies are precisely such that eqs .
( [ lan1 ] ) and ( [ lan2 ] ) are causal , i.e. , the evolution of @xmath722 and @xmath730 depends only on their value at previous times .
this is clearly a sensible result and explains why these components of the full selfenergy enter into the terms in the action that are linear in the fluctuations .    to understand why the keldysh component enters into the terms that are quadratic in the fluctuations
is more complicated and is related to the famous fluctuation - dissipation theorem @xcite .
physically , the fluctuation - dissipation theorem ensures in our case that , due to the interactions with the reservoir , the gas in the trap now relaxes towards thermal equilibrium in the limit @xmath731 .
let us therefore study this limit in somewhat more detail .
however , before we do so we would like to mention for completeness that if we apply the above hubbard - stratonovich transformation to the functional integral for the probability distribution @xmath595$],we immediately find that analogous to equation  ( [ prob3 ] ) @xmath732 =        \int d[\eta^*]d[\eta]~ p[\eta^*,\eta ]        \int d[\phi^*_0]d[\phi_0]~ p[|\phi_0|^2;t_0 ] \\ & & \hspace*{1.9 in } \times          \prod_{\bf n } \delta \left ( |\phi_{\bf n } - \phi^{\rm cl}_{\bf n}(t)|^2                                \right)~ , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath630 now obeys the langevin equation in equation  ( [ lan1 ] ) for a particular realization of the noise @xmath725 and with the initial condition @xmath733 .
furthermore , the probability distribution for each realization of the noise is given by @xmath734 \\ & & = \exp \left\ { \frac{2i}{\hbar }     \sum_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' } \int_{t_0}^t dt ' \int_{t_0}^t dt''~           \eta^*_{\bf n}(t ' ) ( \hbar\sigma^k)^{-1}_{{\bf n},{\bf n}'}(t'-t '' )           \eta_{\bf n'}(t '' ) \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] this result shows explicitly that , as expected , the fokker - planck equation associated with the langevin equations in eqs .
( [ lan1 ] ) and ( [ lan2 ] ) is in fact the desired fokker - planck equation for the probability distribution @xmath595 $ ] .
after this slight digression , we now return to the long - time behaviour of the gas . in the long - time limit
two important simplifications occur .
looking at the expresions for the selfenergies , we see that their width as a function of the time difference @xmath735 is at most of order @xmath736 in the low - temperature regime of interest where the thermal de broglie wavelength of the particles obeys @xmath674 .
if therefore @xmath737 we are allowed to take the limit @xmath738 . taking this limit means physically that we neglect the initial transients that are due to the precise way in which the contact between the trap and the reservoir is made , and
focus on the ` universal ' dynamics that is independent of these details .
in addition , at long times the dynamics of the gas is expected to be sufficiently slow that we can neglect the memory effects altogether .
finally , we consider here first the case of a reservoir that is so weakly coupled to the gas in the trap that we can treat the coupling with second order perturbation theory . as a result we can also neglect the nondiagonal elements of the selfenergies . in total we are then allowed to put ( but see below ) @xmath739 where the fourier transform of the selfenergies is defined by @xmath740 note that this implies in general that @xmath741 , and in particular therefore that @xmath742 .    with these simplifications
our langevin equations become @xmath743 and just the complex conjugate equation for @xmath744 .
the retarded selfenergy in this equation is given by @xmath745 with @xmath746 the usual notation for the limiting procedure @xmath747 .
it clearly has real and imaginary parts that we denote by @xmath748 and @xmath749 , respectively . denoting the cauchy principle value part of an integral by @xmath750 , they obey @xmath751 and @xmath752 the interpretation of these results is quite obvious if we consider the average of the langevin equation , i.e. , @xmath753 which is solved by @xmath754 hence the real part of the retarded selfenergy @xmath748 represents the shift in the energy of state @xmath53 due to the coupling with the reservoir . indeed ,
equation  ( [ shift ] ) agrees precisely with the value of this shift in second order perturbation theory .
moreover , the fact that @xmath755 shows that the average rate of decay @xmath756 of the state @xmath53 is equal to @xmath757 , which , together with equation  ( [ decay ] ) , exactly reproduces fermi s golden rule .    from the equation of motion for the average @xmath758 we can also conclude that the right - hand side of the fokker - planck equation contains the ` streaming ' terms @xmath759                                                 \hspace*{1.5 in } \nonumber \\
+ \left ( \sum_{\bf
n } \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi^*_{\bf n } }        ( \epsilon_{\bf n } + \hbar\sigma^{(-)}_{\bf n } - \mu )                                      \phi^*_{\bf n } \right ) p[\phi^*,\phi;t]~.                                                              \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] however , there must now also be a ` diffusion ' term due to the fact that the average @xmath645 is no longer independent of time since the interactions with the reservoir can lead to changes in the occupation numbers @xmath644 . to obtain the ` diffusion ' term we thus need to determine @xmath760 .
to do so we first formally solve the langevin equation by @xmath761 multiplying this with the complex conjugate expression and taking the average , we obtain first of all @xmath762 which shows that @xmath763 moreover , the keldysh component of the selfenergy is given by @xmath764 and therefore obeys @xmath765 with @xmath766 the bose distribution function .
this is in fact the fluctuation - dissipation theorem , because it relates the strength of the fluctuations determined by @xmath767 , to the amount of dissipation that is given by @xmath768 .
as mentioned previously , the fluctuation - dissipation theorem ensures that the gas relaxes to thermal equilibrium .
this we can already see from equation  ( [ fluc ] ) , because substitution of the fluctuation - dissipation theorem leads to @xmath769 which tells us that in equilibrium @xmath770 .
in fact , we have argued that in general @xmath771 . substituting this identity in equation  ( [ fluct ] ) and realizing that @xmath772 due to the energy - conserving @xmath440 function in @xmath756 , we indeed obtain the correct rate equation for the average occupation numbers @xmath773 that might justly be called the quantum boltzmann equation for the gas , because the right - hand side contains precisely the rates for scattering into and out of the reservoir .
furthermore , equation  ( [ fluc ] ) shows that the ` diffusion ' term in the fokker - planck equation is @xmath774~ ,   \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] because the first term in the right - hand side of equation  ( [ fluc ] ) is also present without the noise and is therefore already accounted for in the ` streaming ' terms . in total
we have thus arrived at @xmath775 = - \left ( \sum_{\bf
n } \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi_{\bf n } }          ( \epsilon_{\bf n } + \hbar\sigma^{(+)}_{\bf n } - \mu )                                        \phi_{\bf n } \right ) p[\phi^*,\phi;t ] \\ & & \hspace*{0.2 in }    + \left ( \sum_{\bf
n } \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi^*_{\bf n } }        ( \epsilon_{\bf n } + \hbar\sigma^{(-)}_{\bf n } - \mu )                                      \phi^*_{\bf n } \right ) p[\phi^*,\phi;t ]                                                           \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.2 in }    - \left ( \frac{1}{2 } \sum_{\bf n }       \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \phi^*_{\bf n } \partial \phi_{\bf n } }         \hbar \sigma^k_{\bf n } \right ) p[\phi^*,\phi;t]~. \nonumber                                                                                \end{aligned}\ ] ] using again the fluctuation - dissipation theorem , it is not difficult to show that the stationary solution of this fokker - planck equation is @xmath776 = \prod_{\bf n } \frac{1}{n_{\bf n } + 1/2 }       \exp \left\ { - \frac{1}{n_{\bf n } + 1/2 } |\phi_{\bf n}|^2            \right\}~.\ ] ] although this appears to be quite reasonable , it is important to note that this result is not fully consistent because the ` streaming ' terms in equation  ( [ fp2 ] ) show that the energies of the states @xmath53 are shifted and equal to @xmath777 .
we therefore expect that the equilibrium occupation numbers are equal to the bose distribution evaluated at those energies and not at the unshifted values @xmath19 .
the reason for this inconsistency is , of course , that we have taken @xmath778 equal to @xmath779 , which was only justified on the basis of second - order perturbation theory .
we now , however , see that to obtain a fully consistent theory we must take instead @xmath780  .
this implies that to obtain the retarded selfenergy , we first have to solve for the real part @xmath781 and then substitute this into @xmath782 to obtain the imaginary part . the fluctuation - dissipation theorem then again reads @xmath783 but now with the equilibrium distribution @xmath784 . as a consequence the quantum boltzmann equation and the stationary state of the fokker - planck equation will now also contain these correct equilibrium occupation numbers @xcite .
having arrived at the fokker - planck equation of our caldeira - leggett - like toy model , we have now demonstrated the use of essentially all the theoretical tools that are required for a discussion of a weakly interacting bose gas .
before we start with this discussion , however , we want to make a final remark about the effect of the nondiagonal elements of the selfenergies .
physically , including these nondiagonal elements accounts for the change in the wave functions @xmath53 due to the interaction with the reservoir .
it can clearly be neglected if the coupling with the reservoir is sufficiently weak , or more precisely if @xmath785 is much smaller than the energy splitting @xmath786 between the states in the trap . for a quantum dot in solid - state phyisics
@xcite this is often the case and for that reason we might call our toy model a bosonic quantum dot .
however , in magnetically trapped atomic gases the average interaction energy between the atoms is already slightly below the bose - einstein condensation critical temperature larger than the typical energy splitting and the nondiagonal elements of the selfenergies are very important .
such a strong - coupling situation can , of course , also be treated in our caldeira - leggett like model .
the main difference is that we need to expand our various fields not in the eigenstates of the trapping potential @xmath53 but in the eigenstates @xmath318 of the nonlocal schrdinger equation @xmath787 \chi'_{\bf n}({\bf x } ' )                                        \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath788 are the new eigenvalues and the retarded selfenergie in coordinate space is @xmath789 . in this new basis
the nondiagonal elements of the selfenergies can now be neglected and we find essentially the same results as before .
we only need to replace @xmath790 by @xmath788 and @xmath670 by @xmath791 . neglecting the nondiagonal elements in this basis
only requires that the real part of the retarded selfenergy is much larger that its imaginary part , which is always fulfilled in our case because @xmath792 .    summarizing ,
the coherent and incoherent dynamics of the gas in the trap is for our toy model quite generally solved by @xmath793 and @xmath794 respectively . in the limit @xmath731 ,
the average of the annihilation operators @xmath758 thus always vanishes but the average occupation numbers @xmath644 relax to the equilibrium distribution @xmath795 .
although this appears to be an immediately obvious result , its importance stems from the fact that it is also true if we tune the potential energy bias @xmath667 such that at low temperatures the groundstate @xmath796 acquires a macroscopic occupation , i.e. , @xmath797 .
the gas therefore never shows a spontaneous breaking of the @xmath424 symmetry , in agreement with the notion that we are essentially dealing with an ideal bose gas in the grand - canonical ensemble @xcite .
the reason of the absense of the spontaneous symmetry breaking can also be understood from our stationary solution of the fokker - planck equation in equation  ( [ stat ] ) , which shows that the probability distribution for @xmath798 is proportional to the boltzmann factor @xmath799 in the degenerate regime of interest .
hence , the corresponding landau free energy @xmath800 never shows an instability towards the formation of a nonzero average of @xmath798 due to the fact that @xmath801 can never become less then zero .
once we introduce interactions between the atoms in the gas , this picture fully changes .
we are now in a position to discuss an interacting bose gas , because in an interacting bose gas , the gas is roughly speaking its own thermal reservoir .
the fokker - planck equation therefore turns out to be quite similar to the one presented in equation ( [ fp2 ] ) . to be more precise , however , we should mention that we aim in this section to describe the formation of a condensate in an interacting bose gas under the conditions that have recently been realized in experiments with atomic rubidium , lithium , sodium and hydrogen gases . in these experiments
the gas is cooled by means of evaporative cooling .
numerical solutions of the boltzmann equation have shown that during evaporative cooling the energy distribution function is well described by an equilibrium distribution with time dependent temperature @xmath802 and chemical potential @xmath803 , that is truncated at high energies due to the evaporation of the highest energetic atoms from the trap @xcite . moreover , in the experiments of interest the densities just above the critical temperature are essentially always such that the gas is in the weak - coupling limit , which implies in this context that the average interaction energy per atom is always much less than the energy splitting of the one - particle states in the harmonic trapping potential .
for a trapped atomic gas the appropriate one - particle states are the eigenstates @xmath53 of the external potential @xmath6 . as a result the fokker - planck equation for the interacting gas will now quite generally be given by @xmath804    = - \sum_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' }     \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi_{{\bf n } } }         \left\ { \left ( ( \epsilon_{{\bf n } } - \mu(t ) ) \delta_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' }               + \hbar\sigma^{(+)}_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' } \right ) \phi_{{\bf n } ' }                \raisebox{0.3 in } { } \right .
\\ & & \hspace*{1.4 in } + \left .
\sum_{{\bf m},{\bf m } ' }                 v^{(+)}_{{\bf n},{\bf m};{\bf n}',{\bf m } ' }                     \phi^*_{{\bf m } }                     \phi_{{\bf m } ' } \phi_{{\bf
n } ' }         \right\ } p[\phi^*,\phi;t ]                          \nonumber \\ & & + \sum_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' }    \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi^*_{{\bf n } } }         \left\ { \left ( ( \epsilon_{{\bf n } } - \mu(t ) ) \delta_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' }              + \hbar\sigma^{(-)}_{{\bf n}',{\bf n } } \right ) \phi^*_{{\bf n } ' }                \raisebox{0.3 in } { } \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{1.4 in } + \left .
\sum_{{\bf m},{\bf m } ' }                 v^{(-)}_{{\bf n}',{\bf m}';{\bf n},{\bf m } }                     \phi^*_{{\bf n } ' } \phi^*_{{\bf m } ' }                     \phi_{{\bf m } }         \right\ } p[\phi^*,\phi;t ]                          \nonumber \\ & & - \frac{1}{2 } \sum_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' }    \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \phi_{{\bf n } }                      \partial \phi^*_{{\bf n } ' } }         \left\ { \hbar\sigma^k_{{\bf n},{\bf n } ' }              + \sum_{{\bf m},{\bf m } ' }                 v^k_{{\bf n},{\bf m};{\bf n}',{\bf m } ' }                     \phi^*_{{\bf m}}\phi_{{\bf m } ' }         \right\ } p[\phi^*,\phi;t]~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] for this equation to be useful , however , we need to determine the various selfenergies and interactions . to do so ,
let us for simplicity first consider the normal state of the gas which is usually in the weak - coupling limit @xmath805 for the experiments with atomic alkali gases that are of interest here . in this regime we can neglect the nondiagonal elements of the selfenergies and also the nonlinear terms in the right - hand side of equation  ( [ fpinhom ] ) .
the fokker - planck equation then reduces to @xmath806   = - \sum_{{\bf n } }    \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi_{{\bf n } } }         ( \epsilon_{{\bf n } } + \hbar\sigma^{(+)}_{{\bf n } } - \mu(t ) )          \phi_{{\bf n } } p[\phi^*,\phi;t ] \\ & & \hspace*{0.23 in } + \sum_{{\bf n } }    \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi^*_{{\bf n } } }         ( \epsilon_{{\bf n } } + \hbar\sigma^{(-)}_{{\bf n } } - \mu(t ) )   \phi^*_{{\bf n } }              p[\phi^*,\phi;t ]                          \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.23 in } - \frac{1}{2 }
\sum_{{\bf n } }    \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \phi^*_{{\bf n } }                      \partial \phi_{{\bf n } } }          \hbar\sigma^k_{{\bf n } } p[\phi^*,\phi;t]~ ,    \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath807 and @xmath808 .
this equation looks identical to the one we derived for our caldeira - leggett toy model but describes in fact quite different physics because now the selfenergies are not due to an interaction with a reservoir but due to the interactions between the atoms themselves .
this is , however , completely hidden in the selfenergies as we show now explicitly . performing the same manipulations as in sections [ ifd ] and [ ap ] , we find in the many - body t - matrix approximation first of all that @xmath809 and similarly that @xmath810    our next task is therefore the evaluation of the various many - body t - matrix elements @xmath811 that occur in these expressions , which is easily carried out with our experience of the homogeneous gas and by noting that the lippmann - schwinger equation is in fact an operator equation that only needs to be expressed in a new basis . in terms of the appropriate matrix elements of the interatomic interaction ,
i.e. , @xmath812 the retarded and advanced components of the many - body t matrix thus obey the bethe - salpeter equation @xcite @xmath813 and the optical theorem @xmath814 finally , we also need @xmath815 and the keldysh component @xmath816 notice that the appearance of a @xmath440 function in the last three equations in practice never leads to any problems , because in the experiments with trapped atomic gases the number of particles is always so large that the critical temperature of the gas is much larger than the energy splitting of the trap and the discrete sum over states is well approximated by an integral over a continuous spectrum .
making use of the above relations we find that for the states with thermal energies the renormalized energy is given by the pseudopotential result @xmath817 with @xmath818 the density profile of the gas cloud .
for the states near the one - particle ground state there is , however , a correction given by @xmath819 and @xmath820 . in the weak - coupling limit
, the renormalization of the one - particle energies plays by definition not such an important role and we are much more interested in the imaginary part of the retarded and advanced selfenergies .
they are given by @xmath821~.                                     \nonumber   \end{aligned}\ ] ] furthermore , the keldysh component of the selfenergies equals @xmath822~.                  \nonumber   \end{aligned}\ ] ] as a result the quantum boltzmann equation for the gas becomes @xmath823 with the rate to scatter out of the state @xmath824 given by @xmath825 and the rate to scatter into this state by @xmath826 as expected from fermi s golden rule .
the quantum boltzmann equation found above , in combination with the expressions for the shift in the energy levels , fully describes the dynamics of the gas in the normal state . however , close to the critical temperature when the occupation numbers of the one - particle groundstate @xmath827 start to become large , we are no longer allowed to neglect the nonlinear terms in the fokker - planck equation in equation  ( [ fpinhom ] ) . applying again the hartree - fock approximation , which is essentially exact in the weak - coupling limit as we have seen in the equilibrium case , and substituting the ansatz @xmath595 = p_0[\phi^*_{\bf 0},\phi_{\bf 0};t ] p_1[\phi'^*,\phi';t]$ ] into equation  ( [ fpinhom ] )
, we obtain for the probability distribution of the condensate @xmath828 \\ & & = - \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi_{\bf 0 } }          \left ( \epsilon_{\bf 0 } + \hbar\sigma^{(+)}_{\bf 0 } - \mu(t )            + t^{(+)}_{{\bf 0},{\bf 0};{\bf 0},{\bf 0}}(t )                |\phi_{\bf 0}|^2 \right ) \phi_{\bf 0 }                                   p_0[\phi^*_{\bf 0},\phi_{\bf 0};t ] \nonumber \\   & & + \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi^*_{\bf 0 } }         \left ( \epsilon_{\bf 0 } + \hbar\sigma^{(-)}_{\bf 0 } - \mu(t )           + t^{(+)}_{{\bf 0},{\bf 0};{\bf 0},{\bf 0}}(t )               |\phi_{\bf 0}|^2 \right ) \phi^*_{\bf 0 }                                   p_0[\phi^*_{\bf 0},\phi_{\bf 0};t ] \nonumber \\ & & - \frac{1}{2 }        \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \phi^*_{\bf 0 } \partial \phi_{\bf 0 } }          \hbar \sigma^k_{\bf 0 } p_0[\phi^*_{\bf 0},\phi_{\bf 0};t]~ , \nonumber                                                                                \end{aligned}\ ] ] where it should be remembered that for consistency reasons the selfenergies need to be evaluated at the energies @xmath829 . in equilibrium
the fluctuation - dissipation theorem then reads @xmath830 \propto
\exp \left\ { -\beta     \left ( \epsilon'_{\bf 0 } - \mu +             \frac{t^{(+)}_{{\bf 0},{\bf 0};{\bf 0},{\bf 0}}}{2 } |\phi_{\bf 0}|^2     \right ) |\phi_{\bf 0}|^2 \right\}~.           \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] the fokker - planck equation , and hence the boltzmann equation , for the noncondensed part of the gas is the same as in the normal state because for a discrete system the contributions from the condenstate to the selfenergies is already included in our expressions for @xmath831 and needs not be separated out explicitly .
this implies of course , that if we evaluate the rates @xmath832 and @xmath833 by replacing the sum over states by an integral over a continuum , we first need to separate the contribution from the condensate to obtain the correct result .    in summary we have thus found that in the weak - coupling limit the dynamics of bose - einstein condensation in an external trapping potential is described by the coupled equations in equation  ( [ beinhom ] ) and equation  ( [ fpcinhom ] ) , i.e. , by a boltzmann equation for the noncondensed part of the gas and a fokker - planck equation for the condensate , respectively .
if we apply these equations to a bose gas with a positive scattering length , we essentially arrive at the theory recently put forward by gardiner and coworkers @xcite . indeed , neglecting the energy shifts and assuming that the noncondensed cloud is in equilibrium with a chemical potential @xmath834 , our fokker - planck equation for a @xmath424 invariant probability distribution of the condensate becomes @xmath835   = - \frac{\beta}{4 } \hbar \sigma^k_{\bf 0 }         \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi_{\bf 0 } }          \left ( \epsilon_{\bf 0 } - \mu            + t^{(+)}_{{\bf 0},{\bf 0};{\bf 0},{\bf 0 } }                |\phi_{\bf
0}|^2 \right ) \phi_{\bf 0 } p_0[|\phi_{\bf 0}|;t ] \\   & & \hspace*{0.2 in } - \frac{\beta}{4 } \hbar \sigma^k_{\bf 0 }       \frac{\partial}{\partial \phi^*_{\bf 0 } }         \left ( \epsilon_{\bf 0 } - \mu           + t^{(+)}_{{\bf 0},{\bf 0};{\bf 0},{\bf 0 } }               |\phi_{\bf 0}|^2 \right ) \phi^*_{\bf 0 }                                   p_0[|\phi_{\bf 0}|;t ] \nonumber \\   & & \hspace*{0.2 in } - \frac{1}{2 } \hbar \sigma^k_{\bf 0 }       \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \phi^*_{\bf 0 } \partial \phi_{\bf 0 } }           p_0[|\phi_{\bf 0}|;t]~. \nonumber                                                                                \end{aligned}\ ] ]    .
the inset shows the evolution of the average condensate number and its fluctuations . ]
it is equivalent to the fokker - planck equation for a single - mode laser , since introduction of the dimensionless time @xmath836 , the dimensionless condensate number @xmath837 , and the so - called ` pump parameter ' @xmath838 leads to the fokker - planck equation @xmath839 =    \frac{\partial}{\partial i } \left\ {      2(i - a)i + 4i \frac{\partial}{\partial i } \right\ } p[i;\tau]\ ] ] well - known from laser theory @xcite .
the typical behaviour of @xmath840 $ ] during bose - einstein condensation in shown in figure 17 .    calculating @xmath841 from equation ( [ sml ] ) by making use of the mean - field assumption @xmath842 ,
precisely reproduces the theory of gardiner _
et al . _ a comparison with the experiments of h .- j .
shows that the theory of gardiner and coworkers is unfortunately not fully satisfactory @xcite .
the reason for this is presumably that these experiments are really in the strong - coupling limit , where the above theory does not apply .
as mentioned previously , the theory is however applicable to gases with a negative scattering length . since we know from our experience with homogeneous gases that the chemical potential will never be larger than @xmath843 in this case
, we clearly see from the equilibrium probability distribution @xmath844 $ ] that a condensate in a gas with effectively attractive interactions is only metastable and will ultimately collapse to a dense state after it has overcome an energy barrier , either by thermal fluctuations or by quantum mechanical tunneling .
this is clearly in full agreement with the discussion in section [ nsl ] .
furthermore , we now also understand how the dynamics of the collapse must be treated .
it requires the solution of a stochastic , dissipative nonlinear schrdinger equation , in which the dissipative terms and the noise obey an appropriate fluctuation - dissipation theorem .
having arrived at this important result , we are finally left with a discussion of the strong - coupling limit .
the difficulty with the strong - coupling limit is that the appropriate one - particle states of the gas are no longer the states @xmath824 of the trapping potential because these states are now strongly coupled by the mean - field interaction . for our caldeira - leggett model
this problem could be easily resolved by introducing the states @xmath845 that incorporate the average interaction with the reservoir . however , for a trapped bose gas the same procedure would lead to an expansion into states @xmath846 that parametrically depend on time since the mean - field interaction depends on time also . in principle
, we thus have to deal with the situation that not only the occupation numbers vary with time but also the states to which these occupation numbers belong .
this results in highly nontrivial dynamics since it is _ a priori _ clear that an adiabatic approximation , in which we neglect the nondiagonal matrix elements @xmath847 , is not valid , because of the lack of a separation of time scales .
notice that we were able to circumvent the above problems for a bose gas with effectively attractive interactions due to the fact that on the one hand the growth of the condensate essentially takes place in the weak - coupling regime and that on the other hand the collapse , which certainly occurs in the strong - coupling regime , requires in first instance only knowledge of the collisionless dynamics of the condensate .    notwithstanding the above remarks
, we can make progress in the strong - coupling limit if we realize that in this limit the typical length scale on which the ( noncondensate ) density of the gas varies is always much larger than the trap size .
we are therefore justified in performing a gradient expansion .
to do so in a systematic fashion , it is convenient to express the various selfenergies and interactions in the coordinate representation , i.e. , by introducing @xmath848 and similarly @xmath849 in this coordinate representation , our fokker - planck equation acquires in all generality the form @xmath850   = - \int d{\bf x } d{\bf x}'~     \frac{\delta}{\delta \phi({\bf x } ) } \\ & & \hspace*{0.2 in }            \left\ { \left ( \left (                - \frac{\hbar^2\mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                 + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) - \mu(t )                        \right ) \delta({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' )              + \hbar\sigma^{(+)}({\bf x},{\bf x } ' ) \right ) \phi({\bf x } ' )              \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.4 in } + \left .
\int d{\bf y } d{\bf y}'~                 v^{(+)}({\bf x},{\bf x}';{\bf y},{\bf y } ' )                      \phi^*({\bf y } )                     \phi({\bf y } ' ) \phi({\bf x } ' )       \raisebox{0.2 in } { } \right\ } p[\phi^*,\phi;t ] \nonumber \\ & & + \int d{\bf x } d{\bf x}'~    \frac{\delta}{\delta \phi^*({\bf x } ) } \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.2 in }            \left\ { \left ( \left (                      - \frac{\hbar^2\mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                       + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) - \mu(t )                        \right ) \delta({\bf x}-{\bf x } ' )              + \hbar\sigma^{(-)}({\bf x}',{\bf x } ) \right ) \phi^*({\bf x } ' )              \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{0.4 in } +   \left .
\int d{\bf y } d{\bf y}'~                 v^{(-)}({\bf x}',{\bf x};{\bf y}',{\bf y } )                     \phi^*({\bf x } ' ) \phi^*({\bf y } ' )                     \phi({\bf y } )       \raisebox{0.2 in } { } \right\ } p[\phi^*,\phi;t ] \nonumber \\ & & - \frac{1}{2 } \int d{\bf x } d{\bf x}'~    \frac{\delta^2}{\delta \phi({\bf x } )                      \delta \phi^*({\bf x } ' ) }         \left\ { \hbar\sigma^k({\bf x},{\bf x } ' )                      \raisebox{0.2 in } { } \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace{0.4 in } +   \left .
\int d{\bf y } d{\bf y}'~                 v^k({\bf x},{\bf x}';{\bf y},{\bf y } ' )                      \phi^*({\bf y } ) \phi({\bf y } ' )          \right\ } p[\phi^*,\phi;t]~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] to study its physical content and to familiarize ourselves with how to perform the desired gradient expansion , we first analyze again the normal state of the gas in which we can neglect the nonlinear terms representing the effect of the condensate .    in the normal state the condensate is absent and we are only interested in the behavior of the quantity @xmath851 . from the above fokker - planck equation
we see that it obeys the equation of motion @xmath852 introducing now the wigner distribution @xcite by means of @xmath853 and similarly the selfenergies @xmath854 by @xmath855 we find after substituting these relations in lowest nonvanishing order in the gradient @xmath856 the expected quantum boltzmann equation @xcite @xmath857 where the energies of the atoms have to be determined selfconsistently from @xmath858~.\ ] ] moreover , the expressions for the retarded energy @xmath859 , and the collision rates @xmath860 and @xmath861 turn out to be identical to the ones for a homogeneous gas @xcite .
we only need to replace the one - particle energies @xmath862 and occupation numbers @xmath863 by their local counterparts @xmath864 and @xmath865 , respectively .
notice also that the same substitution has to be made in the bethe - salpeter equation for the many - body t matrix , which implies that the effective interaction now implicitly depends both on the position @xmath51 and the time @xmath30 .    as an example , let us consider the gas not too close to the critical temperature
. then the effective interaction is well approximated by the two - body t matrix and we simply have @xmath866 as a result the equilibrium solution @xmath867 of the quantum boltzmann equation equals a bose - einstein distribution evaluated at the energy @xmath868 .
the equilibrium density profile @xmath869 thus corresponds to a local - density approximation but is indeed very accurate for the atomic gases of interest .
apart from describing the relaxation of the gas towards equilibrium , the quantum boltzmann equation can also be used to study the collective modes of the trapped gas above the critical temperature . using the same methods that have recently been applied to inhomogeneous bose gases by zaremba , griffin , and nikuni @xcite , we can for example derive the hydrodynamic equations of motion the gas .
moreover , the collisionless modes are obtained from @xmath870 solving this equation is equivalent to the generalized random - phase approximation @xcite . more important
is that the above collisionless boltzmann equation can be shown to satisfy the kohn theorem @xcite by substituting the shifted equilibrium profile @xmath871 . for an harmonic external potential the center - of - mass of the gas cloud
then precisely follows newton s law @xmath872 , which shows that the gas has three collisionless modes with frequencies that are equal to the three frequencies of the external trapping potential .
the full quantum boltzmann equation in equation  ( [ qbe ] ) also describes the relaxation of the gas towards equilibrium .
it can thus be used to study forced evaporative cooling by adding an appropriate loss term to account for the escaping high - energetic atoms . in agreement with our previous picture we then expect that , if the evaporative cooling is performed slowly , the distribution function @xmath865 can be well approximated by a truncated equilibrium distribution with a time - dependent temperature and chemical potential . as a result , we can use the results from the homogeneous gas to show that in the critical regime the gas again becomes unstable towards bose - einstein condensation .
this is the case when @xmath873 for positions near the center of the trap where the density of the gas is highest .
if that happens we are no longer allowed to neglect the nonlinear terms in the fokker - planck equation and some corrections are neccesary . applying again the hartee - fock approximation , which is correct sufficiently close to the critical temperature where @xmath874
, we find first of all that the quantum boltzmann equation for the noncondensed part of the gas has the same form as in equation  ( [ qbe ] ) .
we only have to add the by now familiar mean - field interaction @xmath875 due to the condensate to the renormalized energy @xmath864 .
finally , the scattering rates @xmath860 and @xmath861 have to be adjusted in precisely the same way as in the homogeneous case to account for the macroscopic occupation of the condensate @xcite .
in addition , the resulting quantum boltzmann equation for the noncondensed atoms is coupled to a fokker - planck equation for the condensate . after a gradient expansion
the latter equals @xmath876 \\ & & = - \int d{\bf x}~     \frac{\delta}{\delta \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } ) }          \left ( - \frac{\hbar^2\mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                  + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) - \mu(t )                 + \hbar\sigma^{(+)}({\bf x},{\bf 0 } )                 \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace{1.22 in } +   \left . { } ^{{}^{{}^{{}^{{}^{{}^ { } } } } } }                   t^{(+)}({\bf 0},0 ) |\phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x})|^2          \right ) \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } ) p_0[\phi_{\bf 0}^*,\phi_{\bf 0};t ]             \nonumber \\ & & + \int d{\bf x}~    \frac{\delta}{\delta \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } ) }          \left ( - \frac{\hbar^2\mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                  + v^{\rm ex}({\bf x } ) - \mu(t )                 + \hbar\sigma^{(-)}({\bf x},{\bf 0 } )                 \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace{1.22 in } +   \left . { } ^{{}^{{}^{{}^{{}^{{}^ { } } } } } }                   t^{(+)}({\bf 0},0 ) |\phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x})|^2          \right ) \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } ) p_0[\phi_{\bf 0}^*,\phi_{\bf 0};t ]             \nonumber \\ & & - \frac{1}{2 } \int d{\bf x}~    \frac{\delta^2}{\delta \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } ) \delta \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } ) }       \hbar\sigma^k({\bf x},{\bf 0 } ) p_0[\phi_{\bf 0}^*,\phi_{\bf 0};t]~ ,       \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath877 denotes @xmath878 . in more detail
we have for the real part of the retarded and advanced selfenergies that @xmath879 $ ] and @xmath880 the local energy of a condensate atom .
moreover , using our picture of the evaporative cooling of the gas , the imaginary parts follow most conveniently from the fluctuation - dissipation theorem @xmath881 where @xmath882 can in a good approximation be considered as independent of @xmath883 . near equilibrium
the fokker - planck equation thus simplifies to @xmath884 \\ & & =   - \frac{\beta}{4 } \int d{\bf x}~ \hbar\sigma^k({\bf x},{\bf 0 } )     \frac{\delta}{\delta \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } ) }          \left ( - \frac{\hbar^2\mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                  + \epsilon'({\bf x},{\bf 0 } ) - \mu          \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace{1.2 in } +   \left . { } ^{{}^{{}^{{}^{{}^{{}^ { } } } } } }                   t^{(+)}({\bf 0},0 ) |\phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x})|^2          \right ) \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } ) p_0[|\phi_{\bf 0}|;t ]     \nonumber \\ & & - \frac{\beta}{4 } \int d{\bf x}~ \hbar\sigma^k({\bf x},{\bf 0 } )    \frac{\delta}{\delta \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } ) }          \left ( - \frac{\hbar^2\mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }                  + \epsilon'({\bf x},{\bf 0 } ) - \mu          \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \hspace{1.2 in } +    \left . { } ^{{}^{{}^{{}^{{}^{{}^ { } } } } } }                   t^{(+)}({\bf 0},0 ) |\phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x})|^2          \right ) \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } ) p_0[|\phi_{\bf 0}|;t ] \nonumber \\ & & - \frac{1}{2 } \int d{\bf x}~ \hbar\sigma^k({\bf x},{\bf 0 } )     \frac{\delta^2}{\delta \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } ) \delta \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } ) }       p_0[|\phi_{\bf 0}|;t ] \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] and the probability distribution of the condensate relaxes to the expected stationary state @xmath885
\propto   \exp \left\ { - \beta \int d{\bf x}~ \phi_{\bf 0}^*({\bf x } )    \left ( - \frac{\hbar^2\mbox{\boldmath $ \nabla$}^2}{2 m }            + \epsilon'({\bf x},{\bf 0 } ) - \mu \right . \right .
\\ & & \hspace*{2.0 in } \left .
\left .
+ \frac{t^{(+)}({\bf 0},0)}{2 } |\phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x})|^2    \right ) \phi_{\bf 0}({\bf x } ) \right\}~. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    from this result we conclude that eqs .
( [ qbe ] ) and ( [ fpsc ] ) give an accurate discription of the dynamics of bose - einstein condensation in the strong - coupling regime .
unfortunately , the solution of these coupled equations is not possible analytically and we therefore have to refer to future work for a numerical study and a comparison of this theory with experiment .
we here only remark that the semiclassical approximation in this case amounts to the thomas - fermi result for the condensate density @xmath886 such an approximation implicitly assumes , however , that the dominant mechanism for the formation of the condensate is by means of a coherent evolution and not by incoherent collisions .
this might be expected not to be very accurate on the basis of the homogeneous result that the second mechanism only diverges logarithmically with the system size @xcite , whereas the first diverges linearly @xcite .
nevertheless it seems that only a full solution of equations  ( [ qbe ] ) and ( [ fpsc ] ) can settle this important issue .
although we have up to now primarily been focussed on the dynamics of bose - einstein condensation itself , it is interesting that we have in fact , similarly as for temperatures above the critical temperature , also arrived at an accurate discription of the collective modes of a condensed gas at nonzero temperatures .
since these collective modes are receiving much attention at present , we now briefly want to discuss how such a description emerges from our fokker - planck equation .
since most experiments at present are performed in the collisionless limit , we consider only this limit here .
it is in principle possible , however , to derive the hydrodynamic equations of motions as well @xcite .
let us for simplicitly first assume that the temperature of the gas is sufficiently far below the critical temperature that the many - body t matrix is well approximated by the two - body t matrix , but not so low that the hartree - fock approximation is no longer valid .
in this regime we have that @xmath887 and the dynamics of the noncondensed part of the gas is again determined by the collisionless quantum boltzmann equation given in equation  ( [ clqbe ] ) , where the total density now consists of two contributions @xmath888 the dynamics of the condensate follows again from the nonlinear schrdinger equation @xmath889 which can be rewritten as the continuity equation @xmath890 together with the josephson relation for the superfluid velocity @xmath891 here , we used that @xmath892 , @xmath893 , and have applied the thomas - fermi approximation , which is appropriate in the strong - coupling limit .
it will presumably not come as a surprise that these coupled equations for @xmath865 , @xmath894 , and @xmath895 can be shown to fulfill the kohn theorem exactly .
this is an important constraint on any theory for the collective modes of a trapped gas , as stressed recently by zaremba , griffin , and nikuni @xcite .    as a first step towards this goal
we here consider the time - dependent hartree - fock theory for the collective modes of the bose condensed gas , in which the collisionless boltzmann equation in equation  ( [ clqbe ] ) is coupled to the nonlinear schrdinger equation in equation  ( [ nlse ] ) .
it turns out that a numerical determination of the eigenmodes of the collisionless boltzmann equation is rather difficult .
therefore , we have recently proposed a variational approach to solve these coupled equations @xcite . denoting the anisotropic harmonic trapping potential used in the experiments @xcite by @xmath896 , we first of all take for the condensate wave function the gaussian _ ansatz _ @xmath897 with the functions @xmath898 describing the ` breathing ' of the condensate in three independent directions . clearly , this is the anisotropic generalization of the gaussian _ ansatz _ that we used in section [ nsl ] to study the stability of a condensate with negative scattering length .
although it is not immediately obvious that such an _ ansatz _ is also appropriate in the strong - coupling regime of interest here , it has been shown by perez - garcia _ et al .
_ @xcite that at zero temperature the assumption of a gaussian density profile nevertheless leads to rather accurate results for the frequencies of the collective modes .
we therefore anticipate that at nonzero temperatures the same will be the case .
next we also need an _ ansatz _ for the distribution function @xmath865 of the thermal cloud . here
, we consider the bose distribution @xmath899 where @xmath900 are again three scaling parameters , @xmath901 is the number of noncondensed particles , @xmath902 denotes the equilibrium value of @xmath900 that in general is greater than @xmath65 due to the repulsive interactions between the atoms , and @xmath903 . the functional form of the distribution function is physically motivated by the following reasons .
first , by integrating over the momentum @xmath664 we see that the time - dependent density profile of the noncondensed cloud @xmath904 is a time - independent function of @xmath905 , as desired .
second , for such a density profile we must have that the local velocity @xmath906 is given by @xmath907 .
third , we want the equilibrium distribution to be only anisotropic in coordinate space , and not in momentum space .
this explains the appearance of the factor @xmath908 in the exponent .
the full lines give the results with a bose distribution _
ansatz _ for the distribution function of the thermal cloud .
curves 1 and 2 correspond to the @xmath909 in and out - of - phase modes , respectively .
similarly , curves 3 and 4 give the frequencies of the @xmath910 in and out - of - phase modes .
the experimental data is also shown .
triangles are for a @xmath909 mode and circles for a @xmath910 mode . ]    using the ideal gas result for the number of condensate particles and substituting the above _ ansatz _ for the condensate wave function and the wigner distribution function into the nonlinear schrdinger and collisionless boltzmann equations , it is straightforward but somewhat tedious to derive the six coupled equations of motion for the ` breathing ' parameters @xmath898 and @xmath900 .
linearizing these equations around the equilibrium solutions @xmath911 and @xmath902 , respectively , we can then also obtain the desired eigenmodes and eigenfrequencies . the results of this calculation for the trap parameters of jin _ et al .
_ @xcite are shown in figure 18 together with the experimental data .
note that the trap has a disk geometry with @xmath912 and @xmath913 . due to the axial symmetry
, the modes of the gas can be labeled by the usual quantum number @xmath4 that describes the angular dependence around the @xmath914-axis . on the whole
there appears to be a quite reasonable agreement between this simple theory and experiment .
the only exceptions are the two data point almost halfway in between the in and out - of - phase @xmath909 modes .
a possible explanation for this discrepancy is that experimentally both modes are excited simultaneously @xcite . to make sure of this ,
however , we need to determine the oscillator strength of the various modes and it appears that the in - phase mode indeed dominates the response for temperatures larger than about @xmath915 @xcite .
with the latter remark we end this course on the use of field - theoretical methods for the study of the equilibrium and nonequilibrium properties of trapped atomic gases .
although we have in principle illustrated all the necessary tools for an _ ab initio _ treatment of these new quantum systems , many interesting topics still need to be considered in detail .
we already mentioned such topics as fermi - bose mixtures , the dynamics of condensate collapse , the strong - coupling theory for the formation of a condensate in either atomic bose of fermi gases , and the hydrodynamics of single or multicomponent atomic gases .
several other important areas of research , which can also be easily addressed within the context of quantum field theory , are atom lasers , the damping of collective modes , the behaviour of spinor condensates , the dynamics of topological excitations such as kinks , vortices and skyrmions , quantum critical phenomena , the optical properties of superfluid gases , and two - dimensional phase transitions . in view of these and many other possibilities that are now experimentally feasible
, it appears certain that the physics of degenerate atomic gases will remain very exciting for years to come .
106 e. abers and b.w .
lee , phys . rep . *
9c * , 1 ( 1973 ) .
k.g . wilson and j. kogut , phys . rep .
* 12 * , 75 ( 1974 ) .
hohenberg and b.i .
halperin , rev .
phys . * 49 * , 435 ( 1977 ) .
s. sachdev in _ proceedings of the 19th iupap international conference on statistical physics _ , edited by b .-
l . hao ( world scientific , singapore , 1996 ) .
p.a . lee and t.v .
ramakrishnan , rev .
phys . * 57 * , 287 ( 1985 ) .
anderson , phys .
rev . * 109 * , 1492 ( 1958 ) .
laughlin in _ the quantum hall effect _ , edited by r.e .
prange and s.m .
girvin ( springer - verlag , new york , 1990 ) .
wen , phys .
b * 43 * , 11025 ( 1991 )
mehta , _ random matrices _ ( academic press , new york , 1991 ) .
anderson , j.r .
ensher , m.r .
matthews , c.e .
wieman , and e.a .
cornell , science * 269 * , 198 ( 1995 ) .
bradley , c.a .
sackett , j.j .
tollett , and r.g .
hulet , phys .
lett . * 75 * , 1687 ( 1995 ) ; c.c .
bradley , c.a .
sackett , and r.g .
hulet , _ ibid . _ * 78 * , 985 ( 1997 ) .
davis , m .- o .
mewes , m.r .
andrews , n.j .
van druten , d.s .
durfee , d.m .
kurn , and w. ketterle , phys
lett . * 75 * , 3969 ( 1995 ) .
a. einstein , sitz .
( berlin ) , 3 ( 1925 ) .
i.f . silvera and j.t.m .
walraven , phys .
44 * , 164 ( 1980 ) .
a.l . fetter and j.d .
walecka , _ quantum theory of many - particle systems _ ( mcgraw - hill , new york , 1971 ) .
note that these authors use the more common notation @xmath916 and @xmath917 for the bosonic creation and annihilation operators .
l. mandel and e. wolf , _ optical coherence and quantum optics _ ( cambridge , new york , 1995 ) .
negele and h. orland , _ quantum many - particle systems _ ( addison - wesley , new york , 1988 ) .
amit , _ field theory , the renormalization group , and critical phenomena _
( world scientific , singapore , 1984 ) .
j. zinn - justin , _ quantum field theory and critical phenomena _
( oxford , new york , 1989 ) .
dyson , phys .
rev . * 75 * , 1736 ( 1949 ) .
stratonovich , sov . phys
* 2 * , 416 ( 1958 ) .
j. hubbard , phys . rev .
lett , * 3 * , 77 ( 1959 ) .
d.g . fried , t.c .
killian , l. willmann , d. landhuis , s.c .
moss , d. kleppner , and t.j .
greytak , phys .
* 81 * , 3811 ( 1998 ) .
bogoliubov , j. phys .
( u.s.s.r . ) * 11 * , 23 ( 1947 )
pitaevskii , sov .
jetp * 13 * , 451 ( 1961 ) and e.p .
gross , j. math .
phys . * 4 * , 195 ( 1963 ) .
jin , j.r .
ensher , m.r .
matthews , c.e .
wieman , and e.a .
cornell , phys .
lett . * 77 * , 420 ( 1996 ) ; d.s .
jin , m.r .
matthews , j.r .
ensher , c.e .
wieman , and e.a .
cornell , _ ibid . _ * 78 * , 764 ( 1997 ) .
m .- o . mewes , m.r .
anderson , n.j .
van druten , d.m .
kurn , d.s .
durfee , c.g .
townsend , and w. ketterle , phys .
lett . * 77 * , 988 ( 1996 ) .
hau , b.d .
busch , c. liu , z. dutton , m.m .
burns , and j.a .
golovchenko , phys .
a * 58 * , r54 ( 1998 ) .
singh and d.s .
rokhsar , phys .
lett . * 77 * , 1667 ( 1996 ) .
m. edwards , p.a .
ruprecht , k. burnett , r.j .
dodd , and c.w .
clark , phys .
77 * , 1671 ( 1996 ) .
fetter , ann . phys . * 70 * , 67 ( 1972 ) .
m. lewenstein and l. you , phys .
lett . * 77 * , 3489 ( 1996 ) .
popov , _ functional integrals in quantum field theory and statistical physics _
( reidel , dordrecht , 1983 ) and references therein . f. dalfovo , s. giorgini , l. pitaevskii , and s. stringari , rev . mod .
* 71 * , 463 ( 1999 ) .
hutchinson , e. zaremba , and a. griffin , phys . rev
* 78 * , 1842 ( 1997 ) .
dodd , m. edwards , c.w .
clark , and k. burnett , phys .
a * 57 * , r32 ( 1998 ) .
b.a . lippmann and j. schwinger ,
phys . rev . *
79 * , 469 ( 1950 ) .
m. bijlsma and h.t.c .
stoof , phys .
a * 54 * , 5085 ( 1996 ) .
h. shi and a. griffin , phys .
rep . * 304 * , 1 ( 1998 ) .
j. bardeen , l.n .
cooper , and j.r .
schrieffer , phys . rev . * 108 * , 1175 ( 1957 ) .
h. kleinert , forts . phys . * 26 * , 565 ( 1978 ) .
abraham , w.i .
mcalexander , j.m .
gerton , r.g .
hulet , r. ct , and a. dalgarno , phys .
a * 55 * , r3299 ( 1997 ) .
stoof , m. houbiers , c.a .
sackett , and r.g .
hulet , phys . rev
. lett . * 76 * , 10 ( 1996 ) ; m. houbiers , r. ferwerda , h.t.c .
stoof , w.i .
mcalexander , c.a .
sackett , and r.g .
hulet , phys . rev . a * 56 * , 4864 ( 1997 ) . for an equilibrium argument at zero temperature see l.d . landau and e.m .
lifshitz , _ statistical physics _
( pergamon , london , 1958 ) and p. nozires , in _ bose - einstein condensation _ , edited by a. griffin , d.w .
snoke , and s. stringari , p. 15
( cambridge , new york , 1995 ) .
nonzero temperatures are discussed in h.t.c .
stoof , phys .
a * 49 * , 4704 ( 1995 ) .
m. houbiers and h.t.c .
stoof , phys .
a * 54 * , 5055 ( 1996 ) .
t. bergeman , phys .
a * 55 * , 3658 ( 1997 ) .
see , for instance , s. coleman in _ aspects of symmetry _
( cambridge , new york , 1985 ) .
freire and d.p .
arovas , phys .
a * 59 * , 1461 ( 1999 ) .
s. stringari , phys .
lett . * 77 * , 2360 ( 1996 ) .
y. castin and r. dum , phys .
77 * , 5315 ( 1996 ) .
perez - garcia , h. michinel , j.i .
cirac , m. lewenstein , and p. zoller , phys .
lett . * 77 * , 5320 ( 1996 ) .
dodd , m. edwards , c.j .
williams , c.w .
clark , m.j .
holland , p.a .
ruprecht , and k. burnett , phys .
rev . a * 54 * , 661 ( 1996 ) . j. javanainen , phys . rev .
a * 54 * , 3722 ( 1996 ) .
l. you , w. hoston , and m. lewenstein , phys .
a * 55 * , 1581 ( 1997 ) .
p. hberg , e.l .
surkov , i. tittonen , s. stenholm , m. wilkens , and g.v .
shlyapnikov , phys .
a * 56 * , r3346 ( 1997 ) . for the anisotropic generalization see , for instance , g. baym and c.j .
pethick , phys .
lett . * 76 * , 6 ( 1996 ) .
fetter , phys .
a * 53 * , 4245 ( 1996 ) .
the exact result is obtained in p.a .
ruprecht , m.j .
holland , k. burnett , and m. edwards , phys .
a * 51 * , 4704 ( 1995 ) .
stoof , j. stat . phys .
* 87 * , 1353 ( 1997 ) . for a different calculation of the tunneling rate that however neglects the phase fluctuations of the condensate
, see e.v .
shuryak , phys .
a * 54 * , 3151 ( 1996 ) .
sackett , c.c .
bradley , m. welling , and r.g .
hulet , appl .
b * 65 * , 433 ( 1997 )
sackett , h.t.c .
stoof , and r.g .
hulet , phys .
lett . * 80 * , 2031 ( 1998 ) .
pitaevskii , phys .
a * 221 * , 14 ( 1996 ) .
sackett , j.m .
gerton , m. welling , and r.g .
hulet , phys .
* 82 * , 876 ( 1999 ) .
anderson , phys . rev . * 112 * , 1900 ( 1958 ) . e. abrahams and t. tsuneto , phys
. rev . * 152 * , 416 ( 1966 ) . in principle the effective action for a neutral superconductor contains also a topological term , but this does not affect the final result of the following argument because it only leads to a constant shift in the total number of particles . for more details ,
see m. stone , int .
b * 9 * , 1359 ( 1995 ) and references therein .
the magnitude of the frequency gap is actually not accurately described by this time - dependent ginzburg - landau theory , because the action @xmath918 $ ] is implicitly only valid for long wavelengths @xmath919 and low frequencies @xmath920 .
this may be compared directly with the results of e.m .
wright , d.f .
walls , and j.c .
garrison , phys .
* 77 * , 2158 ( 1996 ) and k. mlmer , phys .
a * 58 * , 566 ( 1998 ) .
v.v . goldman , i.f .
silvera , and a.j .
leggett , phys .
b * 24 * , 2870 ( 1981 ) . for simplicity we here again neglect a topological term in the action , which essentially plays no role in the following . this is also in agreement with our discussion of the superconductor , where exactly the same topological term was not included in the effective action for the global phase @xcite .
thomas , proc .
* 23 * , 542 ( 1927 ) and e. fermi , mat .
* 6 * , 602 ( 1927 ) .
see , however ,
t .- l . ho and v.b .
shenoy , phys .
lett * 77 * , 2595 ( 1996 ) .
ho , phys . rev .
lett . * 81 * , 742 ( 1998 ) .
m. houbiers and h.t.c .
stoof , phys .
a * 59 * , 1556 ( 1999 ) .
see , for example , k. huang , _ statistical mechanics _
( wiley , new york , 1987 ) .
j. schwinger , j. math . phys . * 2 * , 407 ( 1961 ) .
keldysh , zh .
fiz . * 47 * , 1515 ( 1964 ) [ sov .
jetp * 20 * , 1018 ( 1965 ) ] .
p. danielewicz , ann .
( n.y . ) * 152 * , 239 ( 1984 ) . b. de wit , private communication .
p. carruthers and k.s .
dy , phys . rev . * 147 * , 214 ( 1966 ) .
h. kleinert , _ path integrals in quantum mechanics statistics and polymer physics _ ( world scientific , singapore , 1994 ) .
this follows from the requirement that we want to be able to fourier transform the heaviside function .
caldeira and a.j .
leggett , phys .
* 46 * , 211 ( 1981 ) and a.o .
caldeira and a.j .
leggett , ann .
( n.y . ) * 149 * , 374 ( 1983 ) ; _ ibid . _ * 153 * , 445 ( 1984 )
kadanoff and g. baym , _ quantum statistical mechanics : green s function methods in equilibrium and nonequilibrium problems _ ( addison - wesley , new york , 1962 ) .
d.c . langreth and j.w .
wilkins , phys .
b * 6 * , 3189 ( 1972 ) . in agreement with our previous remarks
, the notation @xmath921 implies that the time integration can be either from @xmath586 to @xmath922 or from @xmath586 to @xmath30 .
n.g . van kampen , _
stochastic processes in physics and chemistry _
( north - holland , amsterdam , 1981 ) .
d. forster , _ hydrodynamic fluctuations , broken symmetry , and correlation functions _
( benjamin , reading , 1975 ) . to make a connection with a large body of knowledge in quantum optics
, we note that equation  ( [ stat ] ) explicitly shows that the probability distribution @xmath595 $ ] does not correspond to a @xmath923 or @xmath924 representation of the density matrix , but to a wigner representation instead .
the ` diffusion matrix ' in the fokker - planck equation for @xmath595 $ ] is therefore diagonal and positive , as is explained by c.w .
gardiner in _ quantum noise _
( springer , berlin , 1991 ) , chapter 6 .
the same nice feature will also appear in the case of an interacting bose gas .
kastner , rev .
phys . * 64 * , 849 ( 1992 ) and references therein .
see also h.t.c .
stoof in _ bose - einstein condensation _ , edited by a. griffin , d.w .
snoke , and s. stringari , p. 226
( cambridge , new york , 1995 ) .
luiten , m.w .
reynolds , and j.t.m .
walraven , phys .
rev . a * 53 * , 381 ( 1996 ) .
n.p . proukakis and k. burnett , j. res .
* 101 * , 457 ( 1996 ) ; n.p .
proukakis , k. burnett , and h.t.c .
stoof , phys .
rev . a * 57 * , 1230 ( 1998 ) .
gardiner , p. zoller , r.j .
ballagh , and m.j .
davis , phys .
lett . * 79 * , 1793 ( 1997 ) .
h. risken , z. phys .
* 186 * , 85 ( 1965 ) ; _ ibid . _
* 191 * , 302 ( 1966 ) .
miesner , d.m .
stamper - kurn , m.r .
andrews , d.s .
durfee , s. inouye , and w. ketterle , science * 279 * , 1005 ( 1998 ) . for
a recent extension of their theory see c.w .
gardiner , m.d .
lee , r.j .
ballagh , and m.j .
davis , and p. zoller , phys .
lett . * 81 * , 5266 ( 1998 ) .
m. hillery , r.f .
oconnell , m.o .
scully , and e.p .
wigner , phys . rep . * 106 * , 121 ( 1984 ) .
d.v . semikoz and i.i .
tkachev , phys .
lett . * 74 * , 3093 ( 1995 ) .
stoof , j. low temp . phys . * 114 * , 11 ( 1999 ) .
e. zaremba , a. griffin , and t. nikuni , phys .
a * 57 * , 4695 ( 1998 ) .
see also a. griffin , w .- c .
wu , and s. stringari , phys .
78 * , 1838 ( 1997 ) , g.m .
kavoulakis , c.j .
pethick , and h. smith , phys .
a * 57 * , 2938 ( 1998 ) , t. nikuni and a. griffin , j. low .
phys . * 111 * , 793 ( 1998 ) , and v. shenoy and t .- l . ho , phys . rev .
lett . * 80 * , 3895 ( 1998 ) . w. kohn , phys
. rev . * 123 * , 1242 ( 1961 ) .
kirkpatrick and j.r .
dorfman , j. low temp .
* 58 * , 301 ( 1985 ) ; _ ibid . _ * 58 * , 399 ( 1985 ) .
e. zaremba , t. nikuni , and a. griffin , j. low temp . phys . * 116 * , 277 ( 1999 ) .
k. damle , s.n .
majumdar , and s. sachdev , phys .
a * 54 * , 5037 ( 1996 ) .
bijlsma and h.t.c .
stoof , phys .
a * 60 * ( 1999 ) .
cornell , private communication .