Skip to content

Time-Dependent Correlations

A time-dependent correlation function compares operator insertions at different times. For a time-independent Hamiltonian and a state ρ\rho,

CAB(t,t′)=⟨AH(t)BH(t′)⟩ρ,C_{AB}(t,t') = \left\langle A_H(t)B_H(t') \right\rangle_\rho,

where

AH(t)=eiHt/ℏAe−iHt/ℏ.A_H(t) = e^{iHt/\hbar} A e^{-iHt/\hbar}.

The time dependence reveals energy differences and transition matrix elements that an equal-time snapshot cannot resolve. Oscillation frequencies identify coherent splittings, spectral weight identifies which transitions the state and operators can access, temporal envelopes diagnose dephasing or relaxation mechanisms, and long-time remnants expose conserved or degenerate components.

This ordinary ordered product is not automatically a Green function, a response function, or a probability. Its meaning remains incomplete until the state, operator order, time convention, Fourier convention, and limiting procedure are stated.

This page is the canonical home for ordinary time-dependent correlations in many-body quantum mechanics. It owns:

  • two-time Heisenberg correlators and stationary reduction to a time difference;
  • literal and reversed operator orderings;
  • the Lehmann representation of ordinary correlation spectra;
  • Hermiticity, positivity, selection-rule, and moment checks;
  • thermal detailed balance and a bounded KMS preview;
  • dephasing, finite-system recurrence, plateaus, and correlation-time conventions;
  • center and relative times for quenched, driven, and aging states;
  • finite-time sampling, numerical evaluation, and measurement cautions.

Neighboring pages retain distinct canonical responsibilities:

The present page develops the ordinary correlator that those constructions combine, reorder, Fourier transform, or place inside a causal kernel.

Unless stated otherwise:

  1. HH is time independent and generates closed-system Heisenberg evolution.
  2. ⟨X⟩ρ=Tr⁡(ρX)\langle X\rangle_\rho=\operatorname{Tr}(\rho X).
  3. CAB>(t,t′)=⟨A(t)B(t′)⟩C_{AB}^{>}(t,t')=\langle A(t)B(t')\rangle is a literal ordered product.
  4. No factor of −i-i, 1/ℏ1/\hbar, or step function is included.
  5. Frequencies are angular frequencies; an energy transfer is ℏω\hbar\omega.
  6. For a stationary state, t′t' is set to zero after proving time-translation invariance.
  7. The Fourier pair is
SAB>(ω)=∫−∞∞dt eiωtCAB>(t),CAB>(t)=∫−∞∞dω2π e−iωtSAB>(ω).\begin{aligned} S_{AB}^{>}(\omega) &= \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt\, e^{i\omega t} C_{AB}^{>}(t), \\ C_{AB}^{>}(t) &= \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}\, e^{-i\omega t} S_{AB}^{>}(\omega). \end{aligned}

Changing the sign in the exponential reverses every frequency label. Changing from angular frequency to energy introduces a factor of ℏ\hbar. Neither convention is wrong, but mixing them is.

Stationarity and Time-Translation Invariance

Section titled “Stationarity and Time-Translation Invariance”

A state is stationary when

[H,ρ]=0.[H,\rho] = 0.

Shift both insertion times by ss:

CAB(t+s,t′+s)=Tr⁡[ρeiHs/ℏAH(t)BH(t′)e−iHs/ℏ].\begin{aligned} &C_{AB}(t+s,t'+s) \\ &= \operatorname{Tr} \left[ \rho e^{iHs/\hbar} A_H(t)B_H(t') e^{-iHs/\hbar} \right]. \end{aligned}

Cyclicity of the trace and [H,ρ]=0[H,\rho]=0 give

CAB(t+s,t′+s)=CAB(t,t′).C_{AB}(t+s,t'+s) = C_{AB}(t,t').

Choosing s=−t′s=-t' yields

CAB(t,t′)=CAB(t−t′,0).C_{AB}(t,t') = C_{AB}(t-t',0).

Only the relative time remains. Thermal equilibrium, an energy eigenstate, and a mixture diagonal in energy are stationary examples.

Stationarity does not require ρ\rho to be proportional to the identity inside a degenerate energy eigenspace. Since HH acts as a scalar on that block, one may choose a basis that diagonalizes ρ\rho within the block without changing the energy eigenvalues. This is enough for the standard Lehmann form below.

A generic quench state has

[H,ρ0]≠0[H,\rho_0] \ne 0

under the post-quench Hamiltonian. Then

CAB(t,t′)C_{AB}(t,t')

depends on both times, not just their difference. The same is true for an aging state, a periodically driven state before cycle averaging, or a system with an explicitly time-dependent Hamiltonian.

The statement “set t′=0t'=0 without loss of generality” is therefore an equilibrium or stationarity statement, not a notational convenience valid in every problem.

For a stationary state, define

CAB>(t)=⟨A(t)B(0)⟩C_{AB}^{>}(t) = \left\langle A(t)B(0) \right\rangle

and

CAB<(t)=⟨B(0)A(t)⟩.C_{AB}^{<}(t) = \left\langle B(0)A(t) \right\rangle.

Stationarity gives the useful relation

CAB<(t)=CBA>(−t).C_{AB}^{<}(t) = C_{BA}^{>}(-t).

The two orders coincide only when the relevant operators commute inside the expectation value. Their sum and difference define

CABsym(t)=12[CAB>(t)+CAB<(t)]C_{AB}^{\mathrm{sym}}(t) = \frac{1}{2} \left[ C_{AB}^{>}(t) + C_{AB}^{<}(t) \right]

and

CABcom(t)=CAB>(t)−CAB<(t)=⟨[A(t),B(0)]⟩.C_{AB}^{\mathrm{com}}(t) = C_{AB}^{>}(t) - C_{AB}^{<}(t) = \left\langle [A(t),B(0)] \right\rangle.

The symmetrized object is fluctuation-like. The commutator measures order sensitivity. A retarded response multiplies the commutator by a step function and a convention-dependent factor:

χABR(t)=iℏθ(t)CABcom(t)\chi_{AB}^{R}(t) = \frac{i}{\hbar} \theta(t) C_{AB}^{\mathrm{com}}(t)

for the source convention Hpert=−fBH_{\mathrm{pert}}=-fB. The derivation and sign boundary belong to Kubo Formula.

Time ordering is another operation:

⟨TA(t)B(0)⟩=θ(t)CAB>(t)+θ(−t)CAB<(t),\begin{aligned} \left\langle \mathcal T A(t)B(0) \right\rangle ={}& \theta(t) C_{AB}^{>}(t) \\ &+ \theta(-t) C_{AB}^{<}(t), \end{aligned}

with an additional fermionic sign when time ordering exchanges odd fermion-parity operators. An ordinary correlator should not acquire that sign unless time ordering is actually being performed.

For arbitrary AA and BB,

CAB(t,t′)∗=CB†A†(t′,t).C_{AB}(t,t')^* = C_{B^\dagger A^\dagger}(t',t).

In a stationary state,

CAB>(t)∗=CB†A†>(−t).C_{AB}^{>}(t)^* = C_{B^\dagger A^\dagger}^{>}(-t).

For a Hermitian autocorrelator,

CAA>(t)∗=CAA>(−t).C_{AA}^{>}(t)^* = C_{AA}^{>}(-t).

Its real part is even and its imaginary part is odd:

Re⁡CAA>(t)=Re⁡CAA>(−t),\operatorname{Re}C_{AA}^{>}(t) = \operatorname{Re}C_{AA}^{>}(-t), Im⁡CAA>(t)=−Im⁡CAA>(−t).\operatorname{Im}C_{AA}^{>}(t) = - \operatorname{Im}C_{AA}^{>}(-t).

The correlator need not be real at nonzero time even though AA is Hermitian. The imaginary part is precisely where noncommutativity enters.

For B=A†B=A^\dagger, the zero-time value is nonnegative:

CAA†>(0)=⟨AA†⟩≥0.C_{AA^\dagger}^{>}(0) = \left\langle AA^\dagger \right\rangle \geq 0.

Choose a basis satisfying

H∣n⟩=En∣n⟩,ρ=∑npn∣n⟩⟨n∣.H\lvert n\rangle = E_n\lvert n\rangle, \qquad \rho = \sum_n p_n \lvert n\rangle\langle n\rvert.

Insert a complete set between the operators:

CAB>(t)=∑n,mpnei(En−Em)t/ℏ×⟨n∣A∣m⟩⟨m∣B∣n⟩.\begin{aligned} C_{AB}^{>}(t) ={}& \sum_{n,m} p_n e^{i(E_n-E_m)t/\hbar} \\ &\times \langle n\lvert A\rvert m\rangle \langle m\lvert B\rvert n\rangle. \end{aligned}

Every term contains three ingredients:

  • the initial statistical weight pnp_n;
  • a transition frequency (Em−En)/ℏ(E_m-E_n)/\hbar;
  • source and detector matrix elements in the chosen operator order.

The Fourier transform is

SAB>(ω)=2π∑n,mpn⟨n∣A∣m⟩⟨m∣B∣n⟩×δ ⁣(ω−Em−Enℏ).\begin{aligned} S_{AB}^{>}(\omega) ={}& 2\pi \sum_{n,m} p_n \langle n\lvert A\rvert m\rangle \langle m\lvert B\rvert n\rangle \\ &\times \delta\!\left( \omega - \frac{E_m-E_n}{\hbar} \right). \end{aligned}

The spectrum records energy differences, not absolute energies. A Hamiltonian shift H↦H+E0IH\mapsto H+E_0I changes no transition frequency.

A possible energy difference contributes only if both matrix elements are nonzero. Symmetry can therefore hide an excitation from one operator while exposing it to another. The spectrum is a property of the triple

(ρ,A,B),(\rho,A,B),

not of HH alone.

Degenerate transitions at the same frequency add coherently in a cross spectrum. For an autocorrelation with B=A†B=A^\dagger, their weights are nonnegative and add without cancellation.

For B=A†B=A^\dagger,

SAA†>(ω)=2π∑n,mpn∣⟨n∣A∣m⟩∣2×δ ⁣(ω−Em−Enℏ)≥0\begin{aligned} S_{AA^\dagger}^{>}(\omega) ={}& 2\pi \sum_{n,m} p_n \left| \langle n\lvert A\rvert m\rangle \right|^2 \\ &\times \delta\!\left( \omega - \frac{E_m-E_n}{\hbar} \right) \geq 0 \end{aligned}

as a distribution.

Equivalently, the stationary kernel is of positive type. For arbitrary times tjt_j and coefficients zjz_j,

∑j,kzj∗zkCAA†>(tj−tk)≥0.\sum_{j,k} z_j^*z_k C_{AA^\dagger}^{>}(t_j-t_k) \geq 0.

This follows by writing the left side as ⟨XX†⟩\langle XX^\dagger\rangle with a suitable linear combination of A(tj)A(t_j). A negative reconstructed autocorrelation spectrum beyond uncertainty signals an inconsistent estimator, continuation, or convention.

Cross spectra SABS_{AB} need not be real or nonnegative.

Discrete spectral lines paired with a quasiperiodic time trace, and smooth spectral weight paired with a decaying time-domain envelope.

Fourier duality between spectral weight and temporal structure. A finite set of sharp frequencies produces a quasiperiodic sum with possible recurrences. A smooth band can dephase into a decaying envelope. A delta function at zero frequency would instead leave a nondecaying plateau.

The Fourier transform translates spectral structure into temporal behavior:

Spectral featureTime-domain signature
one delta line at ω0\omega_0persistent oscillation e−iω0te^{-i\omega_0t}
several incommensurate linesquasiperiodic beating
exact zero-frequency delta weightconstant plateau
Lorentzian lineexponential envelope
Gaussian lineGaussian envelope
band edge or thresholdoscillatory power-law tail
dense smooth continuumdephasing toward zero under suitable conditions

This dictionary is not one-way proof. A finite observation window can make discrete lines look continuous, and many line shapes can approximate the same short-time curve.

Setting t=0t=0 in the inverse transform gives

CAB>(0)=∫−∞∞dω2π SAB>(ω).C_{AB}^{>}(0) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}\, S_{AB}^{>}(\omega).

Equal-time data fix the total spectral weight but not how it is distributed in frequency.

The first moment is

∫−∞∞dω2π ωSAB>(ω)=1ℏ⟨[A,H]B⟩.\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}\, \omega S_{AB}^{>}(\omega) = \frac{1}{\hbar} \left\langle [A,H]B \right\rangle.

This follows either from the Lehmann sum or from differentiating at t=0t=0. Higher moments involve nested commutators with HH. These identities are exact validation checks and are developed systematically on Sum Rules.

For a canonical state,

ρβ=e−βHZ,pn=e−βEnZ.\rho_\beta = \frac{e^{-\beta H}}{Z}, \qquad p_n = \frac{e^{-\beta E_n}}{Z}.

Define the reversed-order spectrum with the same Fourier sign:

SAB<(ω)=∫−∞∞dt eiωt⟨B(0)A(t)⟩β.S_{AB}^{<}(\omega) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt\, e^{i\omega t} \left\langle B(0)A(t) \right\rangle_\beta.

For B=A†B=A^\dagger, swapping nn and mm in the Lehmann sum gives

SAA†<(ω)=e−βℏωSAA†>(ω).S_{AA^\dagger}^{<}(\omega) = e^{-\beta\hbar\omega} S_{AA^\dagger}^{>}(\omega).

At positive ω\omega, the reversed process is suppressed by the Boltzmann factor. This is detailed balance. It relates two operator orders; it does not say that one unsymmetrized spectrum is even in frequency.

The time-domain Kubo–Martin–Schwinger relation is

⟨A(t)B(0)⟩β=⟨B(0)A(t+iβℏ)⟩β,\left\langle A(t)B(0) \right\rangle_\beta = \left\langle B(0)A(t+i\beta\hbar) \right\rangle_\beta,

provided the analytic continuation and operator domains are well defined. This relation underlies thermal fluctuation–dissipation formulas; Fluctuation–Dissipation Theorem owns the response reconstruction, quantum factor, limiting regimes, and convention bookkeeping.

At zero temperature, a ground-state correlator with B=A†B=A^\dagger has support only on transition directions allowed by the chosen order. Reversing the order reverses which side of the spectrum is populated. Calling positive frequency “absorption” without stating the operator order can therefore invert the interpretation.

For

H=ℏω0(a†a+12)H = \hbar\omega_0 \left( a^\dagger a+\frac{1}{2} \right)

and

x=ℏ2mω0(a+a†),x = \sqrt{ \frac{\hbar}{2m\omega_0} } \left( a+a^\dagger \right),

the Heisenberg operator is

x(t)=ℏ2mω0(ae−iω0t+a†eiω0t).x(t) = \sqrt{ \frac{\hbar}{2m\omega_0} } \left( ae^{-i\omega_0t} + a^\dagger e^{i\omega_0t} \right).

In a thermal state with

n‾=1eβℏω0−1,\overline n = \frac{1}{ e^{\beta\hbar\omega_0}-1 },

the ordered correlator is

⟨x(t)x(0)⟩β=ℏ2mω0[(n‾+1)e−iω0t+n‾eiω0t].\begin{aligned} \left\langle x(t)x(0) \right\rangle_\beta ={}& \frac{\hbar}{2m\omega_0} \big[ (\overline n+1)e^{-i\omega_0t} \\ &\qquad+ \overline n e^{i\omega_0t} \big]. \end{aligned}

Its real and imaginary parts are

Re⁡⟨x(t)x(0)⟩β=ℏ2mω0(2n‾+1)cos⁡(ω0t),Im⁡⟨x(t)x(0)⟩β=−ℏ2mω0sin⁡(ω0t).\begin{aligned} \operatorname{Re} \left\langle x(t)x(0) \right\rangle_\beta &= \frac{\hbar}{2m\omega_0} (2\overline n+1) \cos(\omega_0t), \\ \operatorname{Im} \left\langle x(t)x(0) \right\rangle_\beta &= - \frac{\hbar}{2m\omega_0} \sin(\omega_0t). \end{aligned}

The symmetric fluctuation grows with temperature, while the commutator part is state independent:

⟨[x(t),x(0)]⟩=−iℏmω0sin⁡(ω0t).\left\langle [x(t),x(0)] \right\rangle = - \frac{i\hbar}{m\omega_0} \sin(\omega_0t).

The spectrum is

Sxx>(ω)=πℏmω0[(n‾+1)δ(ω−ω0)+n‾δ(ω+ω0)].\begin{aligned} S_{xx}^{>}(\omega) ={}& \frac{\pi\hbar}{m\omega_0} \big[ (\overline n+1) \delta(\omega-\omega_0) \\ &\qquad+ \overline n \delta(\omega+\omega_0) \big]. \end{aligned}

The ratio of negative- to positive-frequency weights is

n‾n‾+1=e−βℏω0,\frac{\overline n}{ \overline n+1 } = e^{-\beta\hbar\omega_0},

which is detailed balance in its simplest exact form.

A many-body correlator commonly retains both separation and relative time:

CAB(r,t)=⟨Ar(t)B0(0)⟩.C_{AB}(\mathbf r,t) = \left\langle A_{\mathbf r}(t) B_{\mathbf 0}(0) \right\rangle.

It can reveal:

  • propagation fronts after a local perturbation;
  • ballistic, diffusive, or subdiffusive spreading;
  • coherent modes and multi-particle continua;
  • oscillating density, spin, or pair patterns;
  • hydrodynamic long-time tails;
  • relaxation toward a stationary local state.

For a density mode,

ρq=∑je−iq⋅rjnj,\rho_{\mathbf q} = \sum_j e^{-i\mathbf q\cdot\mathbf r_j} n_j,

an intermediate scattering function is

F(q,t)=1N⟨ρq(t)ρ−q(0)⟩.F(\mathbf q,t) = \frac{1}{N} \left\langle \rho_{\mathbf q}(t) \rho_{-\mathbf q}(0) \right\rangle.

Its frequency transform is a dynamic structure factor under a specified normalization. The detailed scattering interpretation, elastic pieces, and momentum conventions belong to Structure Factors.

For local lattice Hamiltonians, Lieb–Robinson bounds constrain the norm of a commutator such as

∥[AX(t),BY]∥.\left\| [A_X(t),B_Y] \right\|.

They provide an effective causal cone for the influence of a perturbation. They do not say that an ordinary correlator must vanish outside that cone: the initial state may already contain long-range correlations. A commutator front, a connected-correlation front, and a quasiparticle group velocity are related but not identical diagnostics.

For a stationary state,

CAB>,c(t)=⟨A(t)B(0)⟩−⟨A⟩⟨B⟩.C_{AB}^{>,c}(t) = \left\langle A(t)B(0) \right\rangle - \langle A\rangle \langle B\rangle.

The subtraction removes the static disconnected contribution, which appears as a zero-frequency delta function:

SAB>(ω)=SAB>,c(ω)+2π⟨A⟩⟨B⟩δ(ω).S_{AB}^{>}(\omega) = S_{AB}^{>,c}(\omega) + 2\pi \langle A\rangle \langle B\rangle \delta(\omega).

Connected subtraction does not remove every nondecaying component. Degenerate energy transitions, exact conserved projections, symmetry sectors, and integrability can leave additional zero-frequency or singular weight.

For a nonstationary state, the means themselves depend on time:

CABc(t,t′)=⟨A(t)B(t′)⟩−⟨A(t)⟩⟨B(t′)⟩.\begin{aligned} C_{AB}^{c}(t,t') ={}& \left\langle A(t)B(t') \right\rangle \\ &- \left\langle A(t)\right\rangle \left\langle B(t')\right\rangle. \end{aligned}

The later Connected Correlation Functions page owns cumulants, clustering, and asymptotic subtraction in depth.

In a finite isolated system, the Lehmann representation is a finite or countable sum of pure phases. For a finite-dimensional Hilbert space,

CAB(t)=∑ℓwℓe−iωℓt.C_{AB}(t) = \sum_\ell w_\ell e^{-i\omega_\ell t}.

Different phases can nearly cancel over an interval, producing apparent decay. Yet unitary dynamics retains the amplitudes wℓw_\ell, and the phases can partially or nearly realign. The result is generally quasiperiodic, with recurrences possible.

True smooth decay in an effective description usually invokes at least one of:

  • a thermodynamic limit producing a dense spectrum;
  • a continuum of scattering states;
  • coarse graining or finite detector resolution;
  • averaging over disorder or initial conditions;
  • coupling to unobserved degrees of freedom;
  • a controlled kinetic or hydrodynamic limit;
  • a finite observation window that cannot resolve recurrences.

Interactions alone do not make a finite closed spectrum irreversible.

For a stationary finite system,

C‾AB=lim⁡T→∞1T∫0Tdt CAB(t)\overline C_{AB} = \lim_{T\to\infty} \frac{1}{T} \int_0^T dt\, C_{AB}(t)

selects zero transition frequency:

C‾AB=∑n,m: En=EmpnAnmBmn.\overline C_{AB} = \sum_{n,m:\,E_n=E_m} p_n A_{nm}B_{mn}.

If energy levels are nondegenerate, this reduces to

C‾AB=∑npnAnnBnn.\overline C_{AB} = \sum_n p_n A_{nn}B_{nn}.

This need not equal ⟨A⟩⟨B⟩\langle A\rangle\langle B\rangle. A nonzero connected long-time average can reflect conserved diagonal information rather than a failure of unitary quantum mechanics.

The limits

lim⁡t→∞lim⁡L→∞CL(t)\lim_{t\to\infty} \lim_{L\to\infty} C_L(t)

and

lim⁡L→∞lim⁡t→∞CL(t)\lim_{L\to\infty} \lim_{t\to\infty} C_L(t)

need not agree. Taking L→∞L\to\infty first can turn discrete recurrences into a continuum decay law. Taking t→∞t\to\infty first at fixed LL retains finite-size spectral discreteness. A claim of relaxation must state the order of limits.

Consider the two-sided model

C(t)=C0e−iω0te−Γ∣t∣.C(t) = C_0 e^{-i\omega_0t} e^{-\Gamma\lvert t\rvert}.

With the Fourier convention on this page,

S(ω)=2C0Γ(ω−ω0)2+Γ2.S(\omega) = \frac{ 2C_0\Gamma }{ (\omega-\omega_0)^2+\Gamma^2 }.

The half width at half maximum is Γ\Gamma, and the envelope time is 1/Γ1/\Gamma. This reciprocal relation relies on the exponential and Lorentzian model. A Gaussian envelope, stretched exponential, power law, finite-support spectrum, or multi-line spectrum has a different width–time dictionary.

Threshold nonanalyticities often produce oscillatory power-law tails. If spectral weight begins near ωth\omega_{\mathrm{th}} as

S(ω)∼(ω−ωth)αθ(ω−ωth),S(\omega) \sim (\omega-\omega_{\mathrm{th}})^\alpha \theta(\omega-\omega_{\mathrm{th}}),

then under suitable regularity assumptions its long-time transform contains

C(t)∼e−iωthtt−(α+1)C(t) \sim e^{-i\omega_{\mathrm{th}}t} t^{-(\alpha+1)}

up to a phase and coefficient. Long-time dynamics is therefore especially sensitive to sharp spectral edges and conserved low-frequency structure.

There is no universal correlation time. Common definitions include:

If

Cc(t)≈Cc(0)e−t/τC^c(t) \approx C^c(0)e^{-t/\tau}

over a justified range, τ\tau is the fitted envelope time. Oscillations, multiple rates, and finite offsets must be modeled rather than silently discarded.

For a real normalized stationary correlator,

τint=∫0∞dt Cc(t)Cc(0).\tau_{\mathrm{int}} = \int_0^\infty dt\, \frac{C^c(t)}{C^c(0)}.

Oscillatory cancellation can make this small or even negative. Some applications instead integrate the absolute value or square, producing a different quantity.

A linewidth can define a time only after choosing:

  • angular frequency versus ordinary frequency;
  • full width versus half width;
  • amplitude decay versus intensity decay;
  • intrinsic width versus instrumental or window broadening;
  • a specific line shape.

A nondecaying plateau makes an unmodified integral diverge. A power-law tail may also make the correlation time infinite even though C(t)→0C(t)\to0.

If AA commutes with HH,

[H,A]=0,[H,A] = 0,

then

A(t)=AA(t) = A

and

CAB>(t)=⟨AB⟩C_{AB}^{>}(t) = \left\langle AB \right\rangle

is constant. Its spectrum is entirely at zero frequency:

SAB>(ω)=2π⟨AB⟩δ(ω).S_{AB}^{>}(\omega) = 2\pi \left\langle AB \right\rangle \delta(\omega).

More generally, decompose

A=A∥+A⊥,A = A_\parallel + A_\perp,

where A∥A_\parallel is the projection onto operators conserved under the dynamics. The A∥A_\parallel component produces persistent weight, while A⊥A_\perp may dephase.

A vanishing retarded self-response of an exactly conserved quantity is compatible with a nonzero ordinary autocorrelation: the commutator can vanish while the fluctuation remains. Response and fluctuation are not interchangeable outside a carefully stated equilibrium relation.

For a nonstationary state, introduce center and relative times:

T=t+t′2,τ=t−t′.T = \frac{t+t'}{2}, \qquad \tau = t-t'.

Then

CAB(t,t′)=CAB(T+τ2,T−τ2).C_{AB}(t,t') = C_{AB} \left( T+\frac{\tau}{2}, T-\frac{\tau}{2} \right).

A Wigner transform Fourier transforms only the relative time:

CAB(T,ω)=∫−∞∞dτ eiωτ×CAB(T+τ2,T−τ2).\begin{aligned} C_{AB}(T,\omega) ={}& \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d\tau\, e^{i\omega\tau} \\ &\times C_{AB} \left( T+\frac{\tau}{2}, T-\frac{\tau}{2} \right). \end{aligned}

The center time tracks slow evolution of the background; ω\omega resolves relative-time oscillations. Interpreting C(T,ω)C(T,\omega) as an instantaneous spectrum requires scale separation. Without it, time and frequency resolution compete, and a cross-Wigner distribution can be complex or sign-indefinite.

After a sudden change of Hamiltonian, ρ0\rho_0 generally has off-diagonal matrix elements in the post-quench energy basis. Those coherences make a simultaneous time shift observable. At late times, local observables may approach stationary values through dephasing, but the full pure state remains unitary and finite systems recur. Quantum Quenches develops the underlying switch, final-energy weights, equal-time fronts, entanglement growth, and return amplitude.

The diagonal ensemble, generalized Gibbs descriptions, and eigenstate thermalization address when selected observables become stationary. They do not imply that every two-time correlator immediately acquires an equilibrium KMS relation.

Nonequilibrium Overview develops the complementary one-time and reduced-state criteria for equilibration, thermalization, retained memory, and order of limits.

In a periodic steady regime with drive period TdT_d,

C(t+Td,t′+Td)=C(t,t′)C(t+T_d,t'+T_d) = C(t,t')

can hold without continuous time-translation invariance. The correlator depends on relative time and on the center-time phase within the drive cycle. A Floquet-frequency representation then contains sidebands and harmonic indices rather than one equilibrium spectrum.

For nonunitary reduced dynamics, Heisenberg evolution is generated by the adjoint quantum channel or Liouvillian rather than by eiHt/ℏAe−iHt/ℏe^{iHt/\hbar}Ae^{-iHt/\hbar}. Multi-time correlations are not determined by the one-time reduced state alone.

The quantum regression theorem supplies a useful propagation rule under specific Markovian assumptions. Applying it to a non-Markovian bath without justification can give incorrect temporal correlations even when the one-time master equation looks accurate.

Time-dependent correlations require an operational protocol.

Inelastic neutron, x-ray, light, and matter-wave scattering resolve momentum and energy transfer. Cross sections contain dynamic density or spin correlations together with form factors, polarization factors, detailed-balance conventions, and instrumental resolution.

A sequence of strong projective measurements generally disturbs the state. The observed joint probability is not automatically the unmeasured operator product ⟨A(t)B(t′)⟩\langle A(t)B(t')\rangle.

Accessing an ordinary correlator can require weak coupling, ancilla interferometry, repeated preparation with controlled insertions, or a scattering protocol whose perturbative expansion identifies the desired order.

If detection destroys the sample, unequal-time density correlations cannot be formed by observing one realization twice. Repeated runs with identical preparation estimate separate-time ensembles, and protocol drift becomes part of the uncertainty budget.

A measured signal is often

Cmeas(t)=∫dt′ R(t−t′)Ctrue(t′),C_{\mathrm{meas}}(t) = \int dt'\, R(t-t') C_{\mathrm{true}}(t'),

where RR is an impulse-response or timing-resolution kernel. In frequency space this convolution becomes multiplication. Detector bandwidth can imitate physical temporal decay or suppress high-frequency weight.

The methods below are oriented here by the correlation function they approximate. Dynamical Correlation Functions Numerically owns their detailed comparison, matched-kernel identities, convergence ladder, and reproducibility record.

The Lehmann sum is exact once eigenvalues and matrix elements are known. It is efficient for small systems and exposes selection rules, but the spectrum consists of delta lines. A chosen Lorentzian width is a plotting or modeling parameter, not an intrinsic lifetime.

For larger sparse systems, one may compute

CAB(t)=⟨Ψ∣eiHt/ℏAe−iHt/ℏB∣Ψ⟩C_{AB}(t) = \langle\Psi\rvert e^{iHt/\hbar} A e^{-iHt/\hbar} B \lvert\Psi\rangle

using Krylov time evolution without full diagonalization. Operator order must be implemented from right to left.

Real-time matrix-product-state methods can evaluate local correlators in one dimension. Entanglement growth often limits the reachable time, which in turn limits spectral resolution. Linear prediction or extrapolation can extend a signal but adds model assumptions that must be tested on controlled data.

Equilibrium Monte Carlo naturally accesses imaginary-time correlators. Recovering a real-frequency spectrum requires analytic continuation, an ill-conditioned inverse problem. Maximum entropy, stochastic continuation, and related methods impose priors or regularization; agreement with noisy imaginary-time data does not uniquely determine sharp real-frequency features.

Keldysh, tensor-network, dynamical mean-field, semiclassical, and kinetic methods compute different approximations to two-time functions. A reliable comparison states:

  • the contour or operator ordering;
  • whether the result is full or connected;
  • the initial state and switch-on protocol;
  • finite-size and time-step errors;
  • conservation-law and equal-time checks;
  • any self-energy, memory, or closure approximation.

Numerical and experimental data cover a finite interval. A windowed transform is

ST(ω)=∫−T/2T/2dt w(t)eiωtC(t).S_T(\omega) = \int_{-T/2}^{T/2} dt\, w(t) e^{i\omega t} C(t).

Multiplication by w(t)w(t) in time convolves the true spectrum with the transform of the window. Consequences include:

  • frequency resolution of order 2π/T2\pi/T;
  • leakage from sharp lines into nearby bins;
  • a tradeoff between narrow main lobes and suppressed side lobes;
  • distortion of low-frequency weight by baseline subtraction;
  • artificial broadening that should not be called a lifetime.

With time step Δt\Delta t, the Nyquist angular frequency is

ωNy=πΔt.\omega_{\mathrm{Ny}} = \frac{\pi}{\Delta t}.

Frequencies above it alias into the sampled band. Zero padding gives a smoother interpolation of the discrete transform but does not improve the physical resolution set by TT.

For a stationary Hermitian autocorrelator, enforcing the exact relation

C(−t)=C(t)∗C(-t) = C(t)^*

can reduce noise only after independently checking that stationarity and Hermiticity apply. It should not be used to conceal a broken convention.

A trustworthy result should satisfy the applicable checks:

  1. CAB(t,t′)C_{AB}(t,t') reduces to the known equal-time value at t=t′t=t'.
  2. A stationary calculation depends only on t−t′t-t'.
  3. Hermitian-conjugation identities hold before optional symmetrization.
  4. SAA†>(ω)S_{AA^\dagger}^{>}(\omega) is nonnegative within numerical uncertainty.
  5. The integrated spectrum reproduces C(0)C(0).
  6. Low spectral moments reproduce commutator identities.
  7. Thermal spectra satisfy detailed balance.
  8. Exact conserved components appear at zero frequency.
  9. Selection-rule zeros agree with symmetry.
  10. Finite-system data show discrete lines before artificial broadening.
  11. Results converge with time step, maximum time, window, size, and truncation.
  12. Claimed decay survives separation from detector and analysis kernels.
  • Setting one time to zero without establishing stationarity.
  • Calling ⟨A(t)B(0)⟩\langle A(t)B(0)\rangle real because AA and BB are Hermitian.
  • Swapping greater and lesser operator orders.
  • Importing a retarded Green-function factor of −i-i into an ordinary correlation.
  • Treating an ordinary correlator as a response without a commutator and source convention.
  • Calling the unsymmetrized thermal spectrum even in frequency.
  • Reversing the detailed-balance exponent by changing Fourier signs halfway through.
  • Reading absolute energies rather than energy differences from a Lehmann spectrum.
  • Ignoring matrix-element selection rules.
  • Interpreting finite-size dephasing as irreversible decay.
  • Treating chosen Lorentzian broadening as a physical lifetime.
  • Ignoring a zero-frequency plateau before defining a correlation time.
  • Assuming interactions alone eliminate recurrences.
  • Taking long-time and thermodynamic limits without stating their order.
  • Applying a one-frequency equilibrium spectrum to a quench or driven state.
  • Applying the quantum regression theorem outside its Markovian domain.
  • Interpreting a Wigner transform as a positive instantaneous probability.
  • Claiming improved resolution from zero padding.
  • Ignoring aliasing, leakage, and the detector response kernel.
  • Applying Wick factorization to a non-Gaussian initial state without checking it.
  1. Specify HH, ρ\rho, AA, BB, and the literal operator order.
  2. Decide whether the state and dynamics are stationary.
  3. State the Fourier sign, normalization, and use of ω\omega versus energy.
  4. Derive symmetry and conservation constraints before computing.
  5. Check equal-time normalization and Hermitian conjugation.
  6. Use the Lehmann representation to interpret frequencies, populations, and matrix elements.
  7. Separate disconnected, conserved, and genuinely decaying pieces.
  8. Distinguish finite-size dephasing from continuum relaxation.
  9. Map the desired operator product to the actual measurement or numerical estimator.
  10. Vary time window, step, broadening, system size, and truncation independently.
  11. Test detailed balance or nonequilibrium two-time structure as appropriate.
  12. Assign a correlation time only after declaring its operational definition.

Prove that

CAB(t,t′)=CAB(t−t′,0)C_{AB}(t,t') = C_{AB}(t-t',0)

when [H,ρ]=0[H,\rho]=0.

Solution

Write

AH(t)BH(t′)=eiHt′/ℏAH(t−t′)Be−iHt′/ℏ.\begin{aligned} A_H(t)B_H(t') ={}& e^{iHt'/\hbar} A_H(t-t') B e^{-iHt'/\hbar}. \end{aligned}

Therefore

CAB(t,t′)=Tr⁡[ρeiHt′/ℏAH(t−t′)Be−iHt′/ℏ].\begin{aligned} C_{AB}(t,t') ={}& \operatorname{Tr} \left[ \rho e^{iHt'/\hbar} A_H(t-t')B e^{-iHt'/\hbar} \right]. \end{aligned}

Cyclicity moves the final unitary to the front:

CAB(t,t′)=Tr⁡[e−iHt′/ℏρeiHt′/ℏAH(t−t′)B].\begin{aligned} C_{AB}(t,t') ={}& \operatorname{Tr} \left[ e^{-iHt'/\hbar} \rho e^{iHt'/\hbar} A_H(t-t')B \right]. \end{aligned}

Since [H,ρ]=0[H,\rho]=0,

e−iHt′/ℏρeiHt′/ℏ=ρ.e^{-iHt'/\hbar} \rho e^{iHt'/\hbar} = \rho.

The result is Tr⁡[ρAH(t−t′)B]\operatorname{Tr}[\rho A_H(t-t')B], which equals CAB(t−t′,0)C_{AB}(t-t',0).

Exercise 2: Hermitian autocorrelation symmetry

Section titled “Exercise 2: Hermitian autocorrelation symmetry”

Let A=A†A=A^\dagger and ρ\rho be stationary. Show that

CAA(t)∗=CAA(−t).C_{AA}(t)^* = C_{AA}(-t).

Deduce the parity of its real and imaginary parts.

Solution

Complex conjugation gives

CAA(t)∗=⟨A(t)A(0)⟩∗=⟨A(0)A(t)⟩.\begin{aligned} C_{AA}(t)^* &= \left\langle A(t)A(0) \right\rangle^* \\ &= \left\langle A(0)A(t) \right\rangle. \end{aligned}

Stationarity permits a common shift by −t-t:

⟨A(0)A(t)⟩=⟨A(−t)A(0)⟩=CAA(−t).\left\langle A(0)A(t) \right\rangle = \left\langle A(-t)A(0) \right\rangle = C_{AA}(-t).

Writing C(t)=R(t)+iI(t)C(t)=R(t)+iI(t) and comparing both sides gives

R(t)=R(−t),I(t)=−I(−t).R(t) = R(-t), \qquad I(t) = -I(-t).

Thus the real part is even and the imaginary part is odd.

Exercise 3: Harmonic-oscillator detailed balance

Section titled “Exercise 3: Harmonic-oscillator detailed balance”

Starting from

x(t)=ℏ2mω0(ae−iω0t+a†eiω0t),x(t) = \sqrt{ \frac{\hbar}{2m\omega_0} } \left( ae^{-i\omega_0t} + a^\dagger e^{i\omega_0t} \right),

derive the thermal Sxx>(ω)S_{xx}^{>}(\omega) and verify the ratio of its negative- and positive-frequency weights.

Solution

The thermal contractions are

⟨a†a⟩=n‾,⟨aa†⟩=n‾+1,\left\langle a^\dagger a \right\rangle = \overline n, \qquad \left\langle aa^\dagger \right\rangle = \overline n+1,

while ⟨aa⟩=⟨a†a†⟩=0\langle aa\rangle=\langle a^\dagger a^\dagger\rangle=0. Hence

Cxx>(t)=ℏ2mω0[(n‾+1)e−iω0t+n‾eiω0t].\begin{aligned} C_{xx}^{>}(t) ={}& \frac{\hbar}{2m\omega_0} \big[ (\overline n+1)e^{-i\omega_0t} \\ &\qquad+ \overline n e^{i\omega_0t} \big]. \end{aligned}

Using

∫−∞∞dt ei(ω−ω0)t=2πδ(ω−ω0),\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt\, e^{i(\omega-\omega_0)t} = 2\pi\delta(\omega-\omega_0),

we obtain

Sxx>(ω)=πℏmω0[(n‾+1)δ(ω−ω0)+n‾δ(ω+ω0)].\begin{aligned} S_{xx}^{>}(\omega) ={}& \frac{\pi\hbar}{m\omega_0} \big[ (\overline n+1)\delta(\omega-\omega_0) \\ &\qquad+ \overline n\delta(\omega+\omega_0) \big]. \end{aligned}

Since

n‾=1eβℏω0−1,\overline n = \frac{1}{ e^{\beta\hbar\omega_0}-1 },

the ratio is

n‾n‾+1=e−βℏω0.\frac{\overline n}{ \overline n+1 } = e^{-\beta\hbar\omega_0}.

For

CAB(t)=∑n,mpnei(En−Em)t/ℏAnmBmn,C_{AB}(t) = \sum_{n,m} p_n e^{i(E_n-E_m)t/\hbar} A_{nm}B_{mn},

compute the infinite-time average. What changes when the spectrum is degenerate?

Solution

Each phase contributes

1T∫0Tdt ei(En−Em)t/ℏ.\frac{1}{T} \int_0^T dt\, e^{i(E_n-E_m)t/\hbar}.

As T→∞T\to\infty, this tends to zero when En≠EmE_n\ne E_m and to one when En=EmE_n=E_m. Therefore

C‾AB=∑n,m: En=EmpnAnmBmn.\overline C_{AB} = \sum_{n,m:\,E_n=E_m} p_n A_{nm}B_{mn}.

For a nondegenerate spectrum, only m=nm=n remains:

C‾AB=∑npnAnnBnn.\overline C_{AB} = \sum_n p_n A_{nn}B_{nn}.

With degeneracy, off-diagonal matrix elements inside a common-energy block can survive. One may diagonalize ρ\rho inside the block, but AA and BB need not be diagonal there.

Exercise 5: Exponential envelope and Lorentzian line

Section titled “Exercise 5: Exponential envelope and Lorentzian line”

Evaluate the Fourier transform of

C(t)=C0e−iω0te−Γ∣t∣,Γ>0.C(t) = C_0 e^{-i\omega_0t} e^{-\Gamma\lvert t\rvert}, \qquad \Gamma>0.
Solution

Split the integral at t=0t=0:

S(ω)=C0∫0∞dt e−[Γ−i(ω−ω0)]t+C0∫0∞dt e−[Γ+i(ω−ω0)]t.\begin{aligned} S(\omega) ={}& C_0 \int_0^\infty dt\, e^{-[\Gamma-i(\omega-\omega_0)]t} \\ &+ C_0 \int_0^\infty dt\, e^{-[\Gamma+i(\omega-\omega_0)]t}. \end{aligned}

The two terms are

C0Γ−i(ω−ω0)\frac{C_0}{ \Gamma-i(\omega-\omega_0) }

and its complex conjugate. Their sum is

S(ω)=2C0Γ(ω−ω0)2+Γ2.S(\omega) = \frac{ 2C_0\Gamma }{ (\omega-\omega_0)^2+\Gamma^2 }.

At ω=ω0±Γ\omega=\omega_0\pm\Gamma, the value is half the peak value. Thus Γ\Gamma is the half width at half maximum for this convention.

Exercise 6: Conserved autocorrelation and zero-frequency weight

Section titled “Exercise 6: Conserved autocorrelation and zero-frequency weight”

Suppose [H,A]=0[H,A]=0. Show that CAA†>(t)C_{AA^\dagger}^{>}(t) is constant and find its spectrum. What is the retarded self-response?

Solution

Conservation gives

A(t)=A.A(t) = A.

Therefore

CAA†>(t)=⟨AA†⟩.C_{AA^\dagger}^{>}(t) = \left\langle AA^\dagger \right\rangle.

The Fourier transform of a constant is

SAA†>(ω)=2π⟨AA†⟩δ(ω).S_{AA^\dagger}^{>}(\omega) = 2\pi \left\langle AA^\dagger \right\rangle \delta(\omega).

The retarded self-response built from [A(t),A][A(t),A] vanishes if AA is Hermitian, because the commutator is zero. A persistent ordinary fluctuation and a vanishing isolated response are therefore compatible.

Suppose

C(t,t′)=C(t−t′).C(t,t') = C(t-t').

Show that its Wigner transform is independent of center time TT and reduces to the ordinary spectrum.

Solution

By definition,

C(T,ω)=∫−∞∞dτ eiωτ×C(T+τ2,T−τ2).\begin{aligned} C(T,\omega) ={}& \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d\tau\, e^{i\omega\tau} \\ &\times C \left( T+\frac{\tau}{2}, T-\frac{\tau}{2} \right). \end{aligned}

Stationarity makes the two-time argument depend only on

(T+τ2)−(T−τ2)=τ.\left( T+\frac{\tau}{2} \right) - \left( T-\frac{\tau}{2} \right) = \tau.

Hence

C(T,ω)=∫−∞∞dτ eiωτC(τ)=S(ω),C(T,\omega) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d\tau\, e^{i\omega\tau} C(\tau) = S(\omega),

with no TT dependence.

A real-time signal is sampled every Δt\Delta t over a total duration TT. State the Nyquist angular frequency and the scale of the Fourier resolution. Does zero padding improve either?

Solution

Sampling at interval Δt\Delta t identifies frequencies that differ by integer multiples of

2πΔt.\frac{2\pi}{\Delta t}.

The nonaliased angular-frequency band can be chosen as

−πΔt≤ω<πΔt,-\frac{\pi}{\Delta t} \leq \omega < \frac{\pi}{\Delta t},

so

ωNy=πΔt.\omega_{\mathrm{Ny}} = \frac{\pi}{\Delta t}.

A total duration TT gives a characteristic bin spacing and physical resolution of order

Δω∼2πT,\Delta\omega \sim \frac{2\pi}{T},

with the exact line shape set by the window. Zero padding evaluates the same finite-window transform on a denser frequency grid. It improves visual interpolation but changes neither Nyquist bandwidth nor physical resolution.

  1. A. L. Fetter and J. D. Walecka, Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems, Dover (2003).
  2. J. W. Negele and H. Orland, Quantum Many-Particle Systems, Westview Press (1998).
  3. G. D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics, 3rd ed., Springer (2000).
  4. P. Coleman, Introduction to Many-Body Physics, Cambridge University Press (2015).
  5. A. Altland and B. Simons, Condensed Matter Field Theory, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press (2010).
  6. L. Van Hove, “Correlations in Space and Time and Born Approximation Scattering in Systems of Interacting Particles”, Physical Review 95, 249–262 (1954).
  7. H. Lehmann, “On the Properties of Propagation Functions and Renormalization Constants of Quantized Fields”, Il Nuovo Cimento 11, 342–357 (1954).
  8. R. Kubo, “Statistical-Mechanical Theory of Irreversible Processes. I. General Theory and Simple Applications to Magnetic and Conduction Problems”, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 12, 570–586 (1957).
  9. P. C. Martin and J. Schwinger, “Theory of Many-Particle Systems. I”, Physical Review 115, 1342–1373 (1959).
  10. E. H. Lieb and D. W. Robinson, “The Finite Group Velocity of Quantum Spin Systems”, Communications in Mathematical Physics 28, 251–257 (1972).
  11. S. R. White and A. E. Feiguin, “Real-Time Evolution Using the Density Matrix Renormalization Group”, Physical Review Letters 93, 076401 (2004).
  12. A. J. Daley, C. Kollath, U. Schollwöck, and G. Vidal, “Time-Dependent Density-Matrix Renormalization-Group Using Adaptive Effective Hilbert Spaces”, Journal of Physics A 37, 10391–10407 (2004).
  13. M. Rigol, V. Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, “Thermalization and Its Mechanism for Generic Isolated Quantum Systems”, Nature 452, 854–858 (2008).