arXiv:quant-ph/0111050v1 8 Nov 2001

arXiv:quant-ph/0111050v1 8 Nov 2001

the Aharonov-Bohm eet ombined with

a homogeneous magneti eld

P. Exner

1 , 3

, P. ’´oví£ek

2 , 3

, P. Vyt°as

2

1

Nulear Physis Institute, Aademy of Sienes, 250 68 eº near Prague,

Czeh Republi

2

Department of Mathematis, Faulty of Nulear Siene, Czeh Tehnial

University, Trojanova 13,120 00Prague, Czeh Republi

3

Doppler Institute, Czeh Tehnial University, B°ehová 7, 115 19Prague,

Czeh Republi

Abstrat

The most general admissible boundary onditions are derived for

an idealised Aharonov-Bohm uxinterseting the plane at the origin

onthe bakgroundofahomogeneousmagnetield. Astandardteh-

nique based on self-adjoint extensions yields a four-parameter family

of boundary onditions; other two parameters of the model are the

Aharonov-Bohm ux and the homogeneous magneti eld. The gen-

eralised boundaryonditionsmayberegardedasaombination ofthe

Aharonov-Bohm eetwithapointinteration. Spetralpropertiesof

the derived Hamiltonians arestudied indetail.

1 Introdution

Thepurposeofthispaperistodeterminethemostgeneraladmissiblebound-

ary onditionsforthe Aharonov-Bohm(AB)eet inthe planeonthe bak-

properties of Hamiltoniansobtained this way. The history of the eet goes

four deades bak and starts from the observation of Aharonov and Bohm

[1℄ that the behavior of a harged quantum partileis inuened by a mag-

neti uxeven ifthe eldiszero intheregionwherethe partileisloalized.

A partiularly elegant treatment is possible in ase of an idealized setup in

whih the AB ux is onentrated along a line perpendiularly interseting

the plane,onventionally atthe origin[2℄.

The boundary onditions of the last mentioned paper are not the most

general ones; the full family of suh onditions giving the AB eet in the

plane was derived in [7℄, and simultaneously also in [8℄. These generalised

boundary onditions may be interpreted as a ombination of the AB eet

with a point interation supported, too, at the origin, although this is just

onepossiblepointofview. Inanyasetheyanbedesribedandinvestigated

by the tehniqueof self-adjointextensions whihisinpriniplethesame one

as that used in the paper [6℄ in whih two-dimensional point interations

were introdued.

Anaturalquestioniswhathappensifsuhasystemisplaedintoabak-

groundhomogeneous magnetield. This problemattrated someattention

reently, even withaontroversy: thepapers [3,4,5℄onsider thepure AB

eet inthis settingfor the Pauli operator,i.e. a spin

1/2

^{partile. The last}

named property leads to spei behavior related to the Aharonov-Casher

eet, whih we willnot disuss here.

Our aim here is dierent: we are going to onsider a spinless partile

with a point ux and a homogeneous bakground, and ask about the most

general lass of boundary onditions analogous to those of [7, 8℄. The basi

dierenebetween thesituationswithoutandwith ahomogeneousmagneti

eld is that in the former ase the spetrum is absolutely ontinuous and

equaltothe positivehalf-linepossiblyaugmented with atmosttwonegative

Weonsider the symmetri operator

L = − ( ∇ − A( ∇ )) ² , Dom(L) = C ₀ ^∞ ( R ² \ { 0 } ),

wherethevetorpotential

A

^{isasumoftwoparts,}

A = A hmf + A AB

^,withthe

part

A _hmf

orresponding to the homogeneous magneti eld in the irular gauge,

A hmf = − ıB

2 ( − x 2 dx 1 + x 1 dx 2 ),

and with the part

A AB

orresponding tothe idealisedABeet,

A AB = ıΦ

2πr ² ( − x 2 dx 1 + x 1 dx 2 ), r ² = x ₁ ² + x ₂ ² .

Without loss of generality we may assume that

B > 0

^{. Further, we resale}

the Aharonov-Bohmux,

α = − Φ 2π ,

tohaveavariablewhihexpressesthenumberofuxquantaand,asusual,we

makeuseofthegaugesymmetryallowingustoassumethat

α ∈ ]0, 1[

^{. Hene}

the ase

Φ ∈ 2π Z

is exluded sine it is gauge equivalent to the vanishing AB ux. Our goal is to desribe all the self-adjoint extensions of

L

^{as well}

as toinvestigate their basi properties.

It isstraightforward todetermine the adjoint operator

L ^∗

^,

ψ ∈ Dom(L ^∗ ) ⇐⇒ ψ ∈ L ² ( R ² , d ² x) ∩ H _loc ^2,2 ( R ² \ { 0 } )

and

( ∇ − A( ∇ )) ² ψ ∈ L ² ( R ² , d ² x).

Next we an employ the rotational symmetry when using the polar oordi-

nates

(r, θ)

^{and deomposing the Hilbert spae into the orthogonal sum of}

L ² ( R ² , d ² x) = X ⊕ m∈Z

L ² ( R ₊ , r dr) ⊗ C e ^ımθ .

⁽¹⁾

In the polaroordinates the operator

L

^(and orrespondingly

L ^∗

^{) takes the}

form

L = − 1

r ∂ r r∂ r + 1 r ²

− ı∂ θ + α + Br ² 2

2

.

The operator

L ^∗

^{ommutes on}

Dom(L ^∗ )

^{with the projetors}

P m

^{onto the}

eigenspaes of the angular momentum,

P m ψ(r, θ) = 1 2π

Z 2π 0

ψ(r, θ ^′ ) e ^{ım(θ−θ ′ )} dθ ^′ ,

andtherefore

L ^∗

^deomposesinorrespondenewiththeorthogonalsum(1),

L ^∗ = X ⊕ m∈Z

(L ^∗ ) m .

⁽²⁾

Thusweanredue the problemand workinthe setors

Ran P m

^,

m ∈ Z

. For a given spetral parameter

λ ∈ C

we hoose two independent solutions (exept of partiular values of

λ

^{)of the dierentialequation}

− 1

r ∂ r r∂ r + 1 r ²

m + α + Br ² 2

2 !

g(r) = λ g(r),

⁽³⁾

namely

g _m ¹ (λ; r) = r ^|m+α| F

β(m, λ), γ(m), Br ² 2

exp

− Br ² 4

, g _m ² (λ; r) = r ^|m+α| G

β(m, λ), γ(m), Br ² exp

− Br ² ,

(4)

β(m, λ) = 1 2

1 + m + α + | m + α | − λ B

, γ(m) = 1 + | m + α | .

(5)

Here

F

^and

G

^{are onuent} hypergeometri funtions[9, Chp. 13℄,

F (β, γ, z) =

∞

X

n=0

(β) n z ⁿ (γ) _n n! ,

and

G(β, γ, z) = Γ(1 − γ)

Γ(β − γ + 1) F (β, γ, z) + Γ(γ − 1)

Γ(β) z ^1−γ F (β − γ + 1, 2 − γ, z).

(6)

Notie that

F (β, γ, z)

^and

G(β, γ, z)

^{are linearly dependent if and only}

if

β ∈ − Z ₊

. Moreover,

F (β, γ, z)

^{is an entire funtion,} partiularly, it is regular at the origin while

G(β, γ, z)

^{has a} singularity there provided

γ > 1

and

β / ∈ − Z ₊

, and inthat ase it holds true that

z→0 lim +

z ^γ−1 G(β, γ, z) = Γ(γ − 1) Γ(β) .

Thus in the ase when

1 < γ < 2

^{we have the asymptoti behaviour, as}

z → 0 +

^,

G(β, γ, z) = Γ(γ − 1)

Γ(β) z ^1−γ + Γ(1 − γ)

Γ(β − γ + 1) + O(z ^2−γ ).

⁽⁷⁾

We shall also need some information about the asymptoti behaviour at

innity. When

z → + ∞

^{itholds true that}

F (β, γ, z) = Γ(γ)

Γ(γ − β) ( − z) ^−β 1 + O z ⁻¹

+ Γ(γ)

Γ(β) e ^z z ^β−γ 1 + O z ⁻¹

(8)

G(β, γ, z) = z ^−β 1 + O z ⁻¹ .

3 The standard Aharonov-Bohm Hamiltonian

Withthe abovepreliminariesitisstraightforwardtosolvethe spetralprob-

lem for the standard AB Hamiltonianas we mentioned in the introdution.

This means to solve the eigenvalue problem

L ^∗ ψ = λψ

with the boundaryondition

r→0 lim +

ψ(r, θ) = 0.

⁽⁹⁾

By virtue of the deomposition (2) the problem is redued to the ountable

set of equations

(L ^∗ ) m f = λf, m ∈ Z ,

and hene to the dierential equations(3).

The solution

g _m ² (λ; r)

^{of (3) is ruled out beause it ontradits the on-}

dition (9) and the solution

g ¹ _m (λ; r)

^{belongs to}

L ² ( R ₊ , r dr)

^{if and only if}

β(m, λ) = − n

^{, with}

n ∈ Z ₊

. Sine itholds

F ( − n, 1 + σ, z) = n! Γ(σ + 1)

Γ(n + σ + 1) L ^σ _n (z), n ∈ Z ₊ ,

we get a ountableset of eigenvalues,

f _m,n (r, θ) = C _m,n r ^|m+α| L ^|m+α| _n Br ²

2

exp

− Br ² 4

e ^ımθ

where

C m,n = B

2

¹ ₂ (|m+α|+1)

n!

π Γ(n + | m + α | + 1) 1/2

are the normalisationonstants.

As it is well known if we x

m ∈ Z

then the funtions

{ f m,n (r, θ) } ^∞ n=0

formanorthonormalbasisin

L ² ( R ₊ , r dr) ⊗ C e ^ımθ

^{andsotheompletesetof}

eigenfuntions

{ f m,n (r, θ) } m∈Z , n∈Z +

^isanorthonormalbasisin

L ² ( R ₊ , r dr) ⊗ L ² ([ 0, 2π ], dθ)

^{. Sineallthe} eigenvalues

λ m,n

^{are realwe get this way awell}

dened self-adjoint operator whih is an extension of

L

^{. We onvention-}

ally all it the standard AB Hamiltonian and denote it by

H ^AB

^{. Thus the}

spetrum of

H ^AB

^{is pure point and an be writtenas aunion of twoparts,}

σ(H ^AB ) = σ pp (H ^AB ) = { B(2k + 1); k ∈ Z ₊ } ∪ { B(2α + 2k + 1); k ∈ Z ₊ } .

Notie that the eigenvalues belonging to the rst part are nothing but the

Landaulevels. Alltheeigenvalues

B (2k + 1)

^haveinnitemultipliitieswhile the multipliity of the eigenvalue

B(2α + 2k + 1)

^{is nite and equals}

k + 1

^.

A nal short remark onerning the Hamiltonian

H ^AB

^{is devoted to the}

Green funtion. Naturally, the Green funtion is expressible as an innite

series

G ^AB (z; r 1 , θ 1 , r 2 , θ 2 ) = 1 2π

∞

X

m=−∞

G ^AB _m (z; r 1 , r 2 ) e ^{ım(θ 1 −θ 2 )}

G ^AB _m (z; r 1 , r 2 ) = 2 B

2

|m+α|+1

(r 1 r 2 ) ^|m+α| exp

− 1

4 B(r ₁ ² + r ₂ ² )

×

∞

X

n=0

n!

Γ(n + | m + α | + 1)

× L ^|m+α| n ( ¹ ₂ Br ₁ ² ) L ^|m+α| n ( ¹ ₂ Br ₂ ² ) B(m + α + | m + α | + 2n + 1) − z .

The radialparts an be rewritten with the aidof the standard onstrution

of the Green funtion for ordinary dierentialoperatorsof seond order,

G ^AB _m (z; r 1 , r 2 ) = B

2

|m+α|+1

(r 1 r 2 ) ^|m+α| exp

− 1

4 B(r ₁ ² + r ₂ ² )

× Γ − w(m, z)

Γ( | m + α | + 1) F ( − w(m, z), | m + α | + 1, r _< )

× G( − w(m, z), | m + α | + 1, r > )

where

w(m, z) = z 2B − 1

2 (m + α + | m + α | + 1)

and

r < = min(r 1 , r 2 )

^,

r > = max(r 1 , r 2 )

^{. This amountsto the identity}

∞

X

n=0

n!

Γ(n + σ + 1)

L ^σ _n (y 1 ) L ^σ _n (y 2 ) n − w

= Γ( − w)

Γ(σ + 1) F ( − w, σ + 1, y < ) G( − w, σ + 1, y > ).

WedonotexpetthatasimplerformfortheGreenfuntionouldbederived

sine the Hamiltonian

H ^AB

^{enjoys onlythe rotationalsymmetry.}

4 Self-adjoint extensions of

L

Reallingwhat has been summarisedinSetion2it iseasytodetermine the

deieny indies. The solution

g _m ¹ ( ± ı; r)

^diverges exponentially at innity (f. (8)) while

g _m ² ( ± ı; r)

^{behaves well at innity but has a} singularity at the origin of the order

r ^−|m+α|

^{. Thus}

g _m ² ( ± ı; r) ∈ L ² ( R ₊ , r dr)

^{if and only if}

m = − 1

^or

m = 0

^{. This means that the deieny indies are}

(2, 2)

^{. Fora}

basis in the deieny subspaes

N ±ı

^{we an hoose}

{ f m,± (r, θ) = 1

√ 2π N m g ² _m ( ± ı; r) e ^ımθ ; m = − 1, 0 } .

Thus

f −1,± (r, θ) = 1

√ 2π N −1 r ^1−α G 1

2 ∓ ı

2B , 2 − α, Br ² 2

exp

− Br ² 4

e ^−ıθ , f _0,± (r, θ) = 1

√ 2π N ₀ r ^α G 1

2 + α ∓ ı

2B , 1 + α, Br ² 2

exp

− Br ² 4

,

where

N −1

^and

N 0

^arenormalisationonstantsmakingthebasisorthonormal.

We shall need the expliit values of

N ₋₁

^and

N ₀

^{. Usingthe relation}

W υ,τ (z) = z ^{τ+ 1 2} e ^−z/2 G

1

2 − υ + τ, 2τ + 1, z

where

W

^{is the Whittakerfuntion we get}

N _m ⁻² =

Z ∞

0 | g ² _m ( ± ı; r) | ² rdr

= 1 2

2 B

|m+α|+1 Z ∞ 0

x ⁻¹ W ̺,σ (x) W ̺,σ ¯ (x) dx

where

̺ = 1 2

− m − α + ı B

, σ = 1

2 | m + α | .

Z ∞ 0

x ⁻¹ W ̺,σ (x) W µ,σ (x) dx = π sin(2πσ)

× − 1

Γ ¹ ₂ − σ − µ

Γ ³ ₂ + σ − ̺ 2 F 1

1

2 + σ − µ, 1; 3

2 + σ − ̺; 1

+ 1

Γ ¹ ₂ + σ − µ

Γ ³ ₂ − σ − ̺ 2 F 1

1

2 − σ − µ, 1; 3

2 − σ − ̺; 1 !

and

2 F ₁ (a, b; c; z) = Γ(c) Γ(c − a − b)

Γ(c − a) Γ(c − b) ² F ₁ (a, b; a + b − c + 1; 1 − z) + Γ(c) Γ(a + b − c)

Γ(a) Γ(b) (1 − z) ^c−a−b 2 F 1 (c − a, c − b; c − a − b + 1; 1 − z)

we arrive atthe relation

Z ∞ 0

x ⁻¹ W ̺,σ (x) W µ,σ (x) dx = π

sin(2πσ)(µ − ̺)

× − 1

Γ ¹ ₂ − µ − σ

Γ ¹ ₂ − ̺ + σ + 1 Γ ¹ ₂ − µ + σ

Γ ¹ ₂ − ̺ − σ

! .

Finally we get

N −1 = B

2

¹ ₂ (1−α) r

sin(πα)

2π Im 1

Γ − ¹ ₂ + α + _2B ^ı

Γ ¹ ₂ − _2B ^ı

! −1/2

,

N 0 = B

2

¹ ₂ α r

sin(πα)

2π Im 1

Γ ¹ ₂ + _2B ^ı

Γ ¹ ₂ + α − _2B ^ı

! −1/2

.

Letushave alook atthe asymptotibehaviourat theorigin of the basis

funtions in the deieny subspaes

N ±ı

^{. By(4)and (7)we have}

g ₋₁ ² ( ± ı; r) = a −1,± r ^−1+α + b −1,± r ^1−α + O(r ^1+α ), g ₀ ² ( ± ı; r) = a 0,± r ^−α + b 0,± r ^α + O(r ^2−α ),

(10)

where

a −1,± = Γ(1 − α) Γ ¹ ₂ ∓ _2B ^ı

B 2

−1+α

, b −1,± = Γ( − 1 + α) Γ − ¹ ₂ + α ∓ _2B ^ı , a 0,± = Γ(α)

Γ ¹ ₂ + α ∓ _2B ^ı B

2 −α

, b 0,± = Γ( − α) Γ ¹ ₂ ∓ _2B ^ı .

The oeients

a m,±

^,

b m,±

^{are relatedtothe} normalisationonstants

N m

^for

it holds true that

det M −1 = − ı

1 − α (N −1 ) ⁻² , det M 0 = − ı

α (N 0 ) ⁻² .

⁽¹¹⁾

where

M m = a m,+ b m,+

a _m,− b _m,−

! .

Partiularly,weshallneedthefatthatthematries

M ₋₁

^and

M ₀

^areregular.

Let us now desribe the losure of the operator

L

^{. In virtue of the de-}

omposition(2) we have

L ¯ = X ⊕ m∈Z

L ¯ _m

where

L ¯ m = (L ^∗ ) _m ^∗

^{. As it is well known,}

ψ ∈ Dom(L ^∗ )

^{belongs to}

Dom( ¯ L)

if and only if

h ψ, L ^∗ ϕ i = h L ^∗ ψ, ϕ i

^{for all}

ϕ ∈ N ı + N −ı

^{. Thus}

(L ^∗ ) _m = ¯ L _m

for

m 6 = {− 1, 0 }

^{, and if}

m ∈ {− 1, 0 }

^then

ϕ(r) e ^ımθ ∈ Dom((L ^∗ ) _m )

^belongs

to

Dom( ¯ L m )

^{if and only if}

r→0 lim +

r W (ϕ(r), g ² _m ( ± ı, r)) = 0

where

W (f, g) = (∂ r f)g − f ∂ r g

^{is the Wronskian. Usingthe asymptotibe-}

haviour(10)andtheregularityofthe matrix

M m

^{wearriveattwoonditions}

lim r→0 + ( −| m + α | r ^−|m+α| ϕ(r) − r ^−|m+α|+1 ∂ r ϕ(r)) = 0, lim r→0 + ( | m + α | r ^|m+α| ϕ(r) − r ^|m+α|+1 ∂ r ϕ(r)) = 0,

whihan be rewritten inthe equivalent form,

r→0 lim +

r ^−2|m+α|+1 ∂ _r (r ^|m+α| ϕ(r)) = 0, lim

r→0 +

r ^|m+α| ϕ(r) = 0.

But sine

r ^−|m+α| | ϕ(r) | ≤ 1

2 | m + α | sup

x∈ ]0,r[ | x ^−2|m+α|+1 ∂ x (x ^|m+α| ϕ(x)) |

wenallygetasuientandneessaryonditionfor

ϕ(r) e ^ımθ ∈ Dom((L ^∗ ) m )

to belong to

Dom( ¯ L)

^{, namely}

r→0 lim +

r ^−1+α ϕ(r) = 0

^and

lim

r→0 +

r ^α ϕ ^′ (r) = 0

^if

m = − 1,

r→0 lim +

r ^−α ϕ(r) = 0

^and

lim

r→0 +

r ^−α+1 ϕ ^′ (r) = 0

^if

m = 0.

(12)

This shows that if

ψ ∈ Dom(L ^∗ ) = Dom( ¯ L) + N ı + N −ı

^then

ψ(r, θ) = Φ ¹ ₁ (ψ)r ^−1+α + Φ ¹ ₂ (ψ)r ^1−α

e ^−ıθ + Φ ² ₁ (ψ)r ^−α + Φ ² ₂ (ψ)r ^α

+

^{a regularpart}

.

Let usformally introdue the funtionals

Φ ^k _j

^on

Dom(L ^∗ )

^,

Φ ⁻¹ ₁ (ψ) = lim

r→0 +

r ^1−α 1 2π

Z 2π 0

ψ(r, θ) e ^ıθ dθ, Φ ⁻¹ ₂ (ψ) = lim

r→0 +

r ^−1+α 1

2π Z 2π

0

ψ(r, θ) e ^ıθ dθ − Φ ¹ ₁ (ψ) r ^−1+α

, Φ ⁰ ₁ (ψ) = lim

r→0 +

r ^α 1 2π

Z 2π 0

ψ(r, θ)dθ, Φ ⁰ ₂ (ψ) = lim

r→0 +

r ^−α 1

2π Z 2π

0

ψ(r, θ)dθ − Φ ² ₁ (ψ) r ^−α

.

Notie that the upperindex refers tothe setor ofangularmomentumwhile

the lower index refers to the order of the singularity. If

ψ ∈ Dom( ¯ L)

^then

aording to(12) itatually holds

Φ ^k _j (ψ ) = 0

^for

j = 1, 2

^,

k = − 1, 0

^{. On the}

otherhand, if

ψ ∈ N ı + N −ı

^and

Φ ^k _j (ψ ) = 0

^forallindies

j = 1, 2

^,

k = − 1, 0

^,

then

ψ = 0

^{(this is again guaranteed by the regularity of the matries}

M −1

and

M 0

^).

Let us introdue some more notation. It is onvenient to arrange the

funtionals

Φ ^k _j

^{intoolumn vetors as follows,}

Φ _j (ψ) = Φ ⁻¹ _j (ψ )

Φ ⁰ _j (ψ)

!

, j = 1, 2.

Further,applyingthefuntionalstothebasisfuntionsin

N ı + N −ı

^weobtain

four

2 × 2

^{diagonalmatries. More preisely, set}

(Φ j,± ) _kℓ = √

2π Φ ^k−2 _j (f ℓ−2,± ), j, k, ℓ = 1, 2.

Then

Φ 1,± = N −1 a −1,± 0 0 N ₀ a _0,±

!

, Φ 2,± = N −1 b −1,± 0 0 N ₀ b _0,±

! .

Now it is straightforward to give a formal denition of a self-adjoint ex-

tension

H ^U

^{of the symmetri operator}

L

^{determined by a unitary operator}

U : N ı → N −ı

^{. We identify}

U

^{with a unitary}

2 × 2

^{matrix via the hoie}

of the orthonormal bases

{ f −1,± , f 0,± }

ⁱⁿ

N ±ı

^.The self-adjoint operator

H ^U

is unambiguously dened by the ondition:

H ^U ⊂ L ^∗

^and

ψ ∈ Dom(L ^∗ )

belongsto

Dom(H ^U )

^{if and onlyif}

Φ ₁ (ψ)

Φ 2 (ψ)

!

∈ Ran Φ _1,+ + Φ _1,− U Φ 2,+ + Φ 2,− U

!

.

⁽¹³⁾

However ondition (13) is rather inonvenient and we shall replae it in the

next setionby another one whih ismore suitable forpratial purposes.

5 Boundary onditions

To turn (13) into a onvenient requirement whih would involve boundary

onditions we shall need the following proposition. Set

D = 1 − α 0

0 α

! .

There is a one-to-one orrespondene between unitary matries

U ∈ U (2)

and ouples of matries

X 1 , X 2 ∈ Mat(2, C )

^obeying

rank X 1

X 2

!

= 2

⁽¹⁴⁾

and

X ₁ ^∗ DX 2 = X ₂ ^∗ DX 1

⁽¹⁵⁾

modulo the right ation of the group of regular matries

GL(2, C )

^{. The one-}

to-one orrespondene is given by the equality

X !

Φ + Φ U !

orresponds toatwo-dimensionalsubspae in

C ⁴

andhenetoapointinthe Grassmann manifold

G ₂ ( C ⁴ )

^{. The omplex dimension of}

G ₂ ( C ⁴ )

^{equals 4,}

i.e.

dim R G ₂ ( C ⁴ ) = 8

^{. The points of}

G ₂ ( C ⁴ )

^{obeying the (real) ondition}

(15)formareal4-dimensionalsubmanifoldwhihisdieomorphi,aording

to the proposition,to the unitary group

U(2)

^.

To verify the propositionwe rst show that toany ouple

(X 1 , X 2 )

^with

theproperties(14),(15)therearerelatedunique

Y ∈ GL(2, C )

^and

U ∈ U (2)

suh that

X ₁ X ₂

!

Y = J I U

!

(16)

where we haveset

J = Φ 1,+ Φ 1,−

Φ 2,+ Φ 2,−

!

=













N −1 a −1,+ 0 N −1 a −1,− 0 0 N 0 a 0,+ 0 N 0 a 0,−

N −1 b −1,+ 0 N −1 b −1,− 0 0 N 0 b 0,+ 0 N 0 b 0,−











 .

Using (11) one easilynds that

J

^{is regular and}

J ⁻¹ = ı D 0 0 D

! Φ 2,− − Φ 1,−

− Φ 2,+ Φ 1,+

! .

Let us introdue another ouple of matries,

V ₊ , V ₋ ∈ Mat(2, C )

^{, by the}

relation

V −

V +

!

= J ⁻¹ X 1

X 2

! ,

thus

V ± = ∓ ıD(Φ 2,± X 1 − Φ 1,± X 2 )

^{. It follows that}

V _± ^∗ V ± =

X ₁ ^∗ X ₂ ^∗ Φ _2,± ^∗ D ² Φ 2,± − Φ _2,± ^∗ D ² Φ 1,±

− Φ _1,± ^∗ D ² Φ _2,± Φ _1,± ^∗ D ² Φ _1,±

! X 1

X ₂

!

V ₋ ^∗ V ₋ − V ₊ ^∗ V ₊ =

X ₁ ^∗ X ₂ ^∗ 0 − ıD ıD 0

! X 1

X 2

!

= ı(X ₂ ^∗ DX ₁ − X ₁ ^∗ DX ₂ )

for

Φ j,±

^and

D

^{ommute (allof them are diagonal),}

Φ _j,± ^∗ = Φ j,∓

^and

− Φ 1,+ Φ 2,− + Φ 1,− Φ 2,+ = ıD ⁻¹

(f. (11)). Owingto the property (15) we have

V ₋ ^∗ V ₋ = V ₊ ^∗ V ₊

⁽¹⁷⁾

whihjointly with the property (14) impliesthat

Ker V − = Ker V + = Ker V ₋ V ₊

!

= Ker X ₁ X ₂

!

= 0.

The only possible hoie of the matries

Y

^and

U

^{satisfying (16) is}

Y = V ₋ ⁻¹ , U = V + V ₋ ⁻¹ .

The matrix

U

^{is atually unitarybeauseof (17).}

Conversely, we have to show that any ouple of matries

X 1

^,

X 2

^related

to aunitary matrix

U

^{aording tothe rule}

X 1

X 2

!

= J I U

!

obeys (14) and (15). Condition (14) isobvious sine

J

^{is regularand ondi-}

tion (15) is again a matter of a diret omputation. In more detail, sine it

holds

J ^∗ 0 D

− D 0

!

J = ı I 0 0 − I

! .

This onludes the proof of the aboveproposition.

Usingthis orrespondene one an relate toa ouple

X 1 , X 2 ∈ Mat(2, C )

obeying(14)and(15)aself-adjointextension

H

^{determinedbytheondition}

ψ ∈ Dom(H) ⇐⇒ Φ 1 (ψ)

Φ ₂ (ψ)

!

∈ Ran X 1

X ₂

!

.

⁽¹⁸⁾

Two ouples

(X 1 , X 2 )

^and

(X ₁ ^′ , X ₂ ^′ )

^{determine the same} self-adjoint exten- sion if and only if there exists a regular matrix

Y

^{suh that}

(X ₁ ^′ , X ₂ ^′ ) = (X 1 Y, X 2 Y )

^{. Moreover, allthe} self-adjointextensions anbeobtainedinthis way.

We shall restrit ourselves to an open dense subset in the spae of all

self-adjointextensions byrequiringthematrix

X 2

^{toberegular. In thatase}

we an set diretly

X 2 = I

^{and rename}

X 1 = Λ

^{. Thus}

Λ

^{is a}

2 × 2

^omplex

matrix satisfying

DΛ = Λ ^∗ D.

⁽¹⁹⁾

The orrespondingself-adjointextension willbedenoted

H ^Λ

^{. The ondition}

(18) simplies in an obvious way. We onlude that

H ^Λ ⊂ L ^∗

^and

ψ ∈ Dom(L ^∗ )

^{belongs to}

Dom(H ^Λ )

^{if and only if}

Φ 1 (ψ) = ΛΦ 2 (ψ),

⁽²⁰⁾

and this isin fatthe sought boundary ondition.

Matries

Λ

^{obeying(19) anbe}parametrisedby fourrealparameters (or two real and one omplex). We hoose the parameterisation

Λ = u α w ¯

(1 − α)w v

!

, u, v ∈ R , w ∈ C .

The relation between

Λ

^and

U

^reads

Λ = (Φ 1,+ + Φ 1,− U)(Φ 2,+ + Φ 2,− U ) ⁻¹

⁽²¹⁾

(provided the RHSmakessense).

The most regular among the boundary onditions is

Φ 1 (ψ) = 0

^{, i.e.}

the one determined by

Λ = 0

^{, and the} orresponding self-adjoint extension is nothingbut the standard Aharonov-BohmHamiltonian

H ^AB

^{disussed in}

Setion 3. Aording to (21)

H ^AB

^{orresponds to the unitary matrix}

U = − Φ _1,− ⁻¹ Φ 1,+ = diag

(

− Γ ¹ ₂ + _2B ^ı

Γ ¹ ₂ − _2B ^ı , − Γ ¹ ₂ + α + _2B ^ı Γ ¹ ₂ + α − _2B ^ı

) .

6 The spetrum

Let us now proeed tothe disussion of spetral properties of the desribed

self-adjoint extensions. It is lear from what has been explained up to now

that everything interesting is happening in the two ritial setors of the

angularmomentumlabeledby

m = − 1

^and

m = 0

^{. Tostateitmoreformally}

we deompose the Hilbert spae into anorthogonal sum of the stable and

ritial parts,

H = H ^s ⊕ H ^c

where

H s = X ⊕ m∈Z\{−1,0}

L ² ( R ₊ , r dr) ⊗ C e ^ımθ , H c = L ² ( R ₊ , r dr) ⊗ ( C e ^−ıθ ⊕ C 1).

A self-adjoint extension

H ^Λ

^deomposes orrespondingly,

Λ Λ | ⊕ ^Λ |

and we know that on

H s

^{the operator}

H ^Λ

^{oinides with the standard AB}

Hamiltonian,

H ^Λ | H ^s = H ^AB | H ^s .

Thus

σ(H ^Λ ) = σ(H ^AB | H s ) ∪ σ(H ^Λ | H c )

and, as explainedin Setion3,

σ(H ^AB | ^{H s} ) = { B(2k + 1); k ∈ Z ₊ } ∪ { B(2k + 2α + 1); k ∈ N }

where the multipliityof the eigenvalue

B(2k + 1)

^{is innite while the mul-}

tipliity of the eigenvalue

B(2k + 2α + 1)

^equals

k

^{. On the other hand,}

σ(H ^AB | H ^c ) = { B (2k + 1); k ∈ Z ₊ } ∪ { B(2k + 2α + 1); k ∈ Z ₊ }

where all the eigenvalues are simple (the rst set is a ontribution of the

setor

m = − 1

^{whilethe seondoneomesfromthesetor}

m = 0

^{). Sinethe}

deieny indies are nite the Krein's formula jointly with Weyl Theorem

[11, Theorem XIII.14℄ tells us that the essential spetrum

σ ess (H ^Λ | ^{H c} )

^is

emptyforany

Λ

^{. Thusthespetrumof}

H ^Λ | ^{H c}

^isformedbyeigenvalueswhih are atmost nitely degenerated and have no niteaumulationpoints.

Let us derive the equation on eigenvalues for the restrition

H ^Λ | H c

. Let

λ ∈ R

. In eah of the setors

m = − 1, 0

^{there exists exatly one (up to a}

multipliative onstant) solution of the equation

(L ^∗ ) m f = λf

^{whih is}

L ²

^-

integrableatinnity(withrespettothemeasure

r dr

^{)andwemaytakeforit}

thefuntion

g _m ² (λ; r) e ^ımθ

^{(f. (4)). Foraseondlinearly}independentsolution one may take

g _m ¹ (λ; r) e ^ımθ

^provided

β(m, λ) 6∈ − Z ₊

(f. (5)). If

β(m, λ) ∈

− Z ₊

then apossiblehoie of aseond linearly independent solution is

r ^|m+α| H

β(m, λ), γ(m), Br ² 2

exp

− Br ² 4

H(β, γ, z) = z ^1−γ F (β − γ + 1, 2 − γ, z)

(f. (6)).

Thus

λ

^{is an eigenvalue of}

H ^Λ | H ^c

^{if and only if there exists a vetor}

(µ, ν) ∈ C ² \ { 0 }

^{suh that the funtion}

ψ λ (r, θ) = µ g ₋₁ ² (λ; r) e ^−ıθ + ν g ₀ ² (λ; r)

satises theboundary ondition(20). Usingagain(4)and (7)onends that

Φ 1 (ψ λ ) = a −1 0 0 a 0

! µ ν

!

, Φ 2 (ψ λ ) = b −1 0 0 b 0

! µ ν

! ,

where

a −1 = Γ(1 − α) Γ ¹ ₂ − _2B ^λ

B 2

−1+α

, b −1 = Γ( − 1 + α) Γ − ¹ ₂ + α − _2B ^λ , a 0 = Γ(α)

Γ ¹ ₂ + α − _2B ^λ B

2 −α

, b 0 = Γ( − α) Γ ¹ ₂ − _2B ^λ .

This immediately leads to the desired equation on eigenvalues whih takes

the form

det A = 0

^where

A = a −1 0

0 a 0

! µ ν

!

− Λ b −1 0 0 b 0

! .

After the substitution

z = 1 2 − λ

2B ,

ⁱ

.e. λ = B(1 − 2z),

Γ(1 − α)Γ(α) Γ(z)Γ(z + α)

2

B − Γ(α)Γ(α − 1) Γ(z + α − 1)Γ(z + α)

2 B

α

u

− Γ(1 − α)Γ( − α) Γ(z) ²

2 B

1−α

v + Γ(α − 1)Γ( − α)

Γ(z)Γ(z + α − 1) (uv − α(1 − α) | w | ² ) = 0.

Tosimplifysomewhatthe formoftheequationitisonvenienttoresalethe

parameters as follows,

ξ = B

2 1−α

Γ(α)

Γ(2 − α) u, η = B

2 α

Γ(1 − α)

Γ(1 + α) v, ζ = r B

2 | w | .

⁽²²⁾

Finally we arrive atan equation depending on three real parameters

ξ, η, ζ

^,

namely

1

Γ(z) Γ(z + α) + ξ

Γ(z + α − 1) Γ(z + α) + η

Γ(z) ² + ξ η − ζ ²

Γ(z) Γ(z + α − 1) = 0.

(23)

Thereisnohanetosolveequation(23) expliitlyapartof someparti-

ular ases. One of them, of ourse, orresponds to the standard AB Hamil-

tonian. This ase is determined by the values of parameters

ξ = η = ζ = 0

and the roots of (23) form the set

− Z ₊ ∪ ( − α − Z ₊ )

^{. Consider also the}

ase when when

ξ = η = 0

^and

ζ 6 = 0

^{with the set of roots equal to}

− Z ₊ ∪ ( − α − Z ₊ ) ∪{ 1 − α +ζ ⁻² }

^{. Comparingthelatterasetotheformerone}

we see that there is one additional root,namely

1 − α + ζ ⁻²

^{,whih esapes}

to innity when

ζ → 0

^.

In the last partiular ase one an alsoonsider the limit

ζ → ∞

^{. More}

generally,suppose that

det Λ 6 = 0

^,i.e.

ξη − ζ ² 6 = 0

^,replae

Λ

^with

t Λ

ⁱⁿ⁽²⁰⁾

and takethe limit

t → ∞

^{. The limitingboundary ondition reads}

Φ 2 (ψ ) = 0

and the orresponding self-adjoint extension whih we shall all

H ^∞

^{is one}

of those omitted when we restrited ourselves to an open dense subset in

the spae of all self-adjoint extensions (regarded as a a 4-dimensional real

manifold). Equation(23) redues in this limittothe equation

1

Γ(z) Γ(z + α − 1) = 0

⁽²⁴⁾

with the set of roots

− Z ₊ ∪ (1 − α − Z ₊ ).

Another ase when equation (23) simplies though it is not solvable ex-

pliitly is

ζ = 0

^{. This is easy to understand sine if}

ζ = 0

^{then the matrix}

Λ

^{is diagonal and the two ritial setors of angular momentum do not in-}

terfere. This is reeted in the fat that the equation (23) splits into two

independent equations,

1

Γ(z) + ξ

Γ(z + α − 1) = 0, 1

Γ(z + α) + η

Γ(z) = 0.

Let us shortly disuss the dependene of roots of equation (23) on the

parameters

ξ, η, ζ

^{. Sine the derivativeof the LHS of (23) with respet to}

z

and with the values of parameters

(ξ, η, ζ ) = (0, 0, 0)

^equals

( − 1) ^m m!

Γ( − m + α) 6 = 0

^for

z = − m,

^and

( − 1) ^m m!

Γ( − m − α) 6 = 0

^for

z = − m − α,

where

m ∈ Z ₊

, the standard Impliit Funtion Theorem (analyti ase) is suienttoonludethattherootsare analytifuntionsin

ξ, η, ζ

^atleastin

some neighbourhoodofthe origin(dependingingeneralonthe root). Letus

denote by

z 1,m (ξ, η, ζ )

^and

z 2,m (ξ, η, ζ )

^{the rootsof (23) regarded asanalyti}

funtions in

ξ, η, ζ

^andsuhthat

z 1,m (0, 0, 0) = − m

^and

z 2,m (0, 0, 0) = − α −

m

^{, with}

m ∈ Z ₊

. A straightforward omputation results in the following power series trunatedat degree 4.

h ⁰ _m (z) =

m

X

j=1

1

j − γ − ψ(z), h ¹ _m (z) = π ²

6 +

m

X

j=1

1

j ² − ψ ^′ (z), h ² _m (z) = − 2 ζ(3) + 2

m

X

j=1

1

j ³ − ψ ^′′ (z),

where

γ

^{is the Euler onstant,}

ψ(z) = Γ ^′ (z)/Γ(z)

^{is the digamma funtion}

and

ζ

^{is the zeta funtion. Then}

z 1,m (ξ, η, ζ ) = − m + ( − 1) ^m+1

m! Γ( − 1 − m + α) ξ + h ⁰ _m ( − 1 − m + α) (m!) ² Γ( − 1 − m + α) ² ξ ² + ( − 1) ^m+1 (3 h ⁰ _m ( − 1 − m + α) ² + h ¹ _m ( − 1 − m + α))

2 (m!) ³ Γ ( − 1 − m + α) ³ ξ ³ + ( − 1) ^m (1 + m − α)

m! Γ( − 1 − m + α) ξ ζ ²

+ 1

6 (m!) ⁴ Γ( − 1 − m + α) ⁴ 4 h ⁰ _m ( − 1 − m + α)

⁽²⁵⁾

× 4 h ⁰ _m ( − 1 − m + α) ² + 3 h ² _m ( − 1 − m + α) + h ² _m ( − 1 − m + α)

ξ ⁴

+ 3 − 2 (1 + m − α) h ⁰ _m ( − m + α)

(m!) ² Γ( − 1 − m + α) ² ξ ² ζ ² + · · · ,

z 2,m (ξ, η, ζ ) = − α − m + ( − 1) ^m+1

m! Γ( − m − α) η + h ⁰ _m ( − m − α) (m!) ² Γ( − m − α) ² η ² + ( − 1) ^m+1 (3 h ⁰ _m ( − m − α) ² + h ¹ _m ( − m − α))

2 (m!) ³ Γ ( − m − α) ³ η ³ + ( − 1) ^m (m + 1)

m! Γ( − m − α) η ζ ²

+ 1

6 (m!) ⁴ Γ( − m − α) ⁴ 4 h ⁰ _m ( − m − α)

⁽²⁶⁾

× 4 h ⁰ _m ( − m − α) ² + 3 h ² _m ( − m − α) + h ² _m ( − m − α)

η ⁴

+ 1 − 2 (m + 1) h ⁰ _m ( − m − α)

(m!) ² Γ( − m − α) ² η ² ζ ² + · · · .

A similar analysis an be arriedout toget the asymptoti behaviourof

roots for

ξ, η, ζ

^{large. To this end assume that}

ξη − ζ ² 6 = 0

^{and set}

ξ ^′ = ξ

ξη − ζ ² , η ^′ = η

ξη − ζ ² , ζ ^′ = ζ ξη − ζ ² .

Notie that

ξ ^′ η ^′ − ζ ^{′ 2} = (ξη − ζ ² ) ⁻¹

^{. Equation (23) beomes}

ξ ^′ η ^′ − ζ ^′2

Γ(z) Γ(z + α) + ξ ^′

Γ(z + α − 1) Γ(z + α) + η ^′

Γ(z) ² + 1

Γ(z) Γ(z + α − 1) = 0.

(27)

Rootsof(27)areanalytifuntionsin

ξ ^′ , η ^′ , ζ ^′

^{atleastinsome}neighbourhood of the origin. Again, it would be possible to ompute the beginning of the

orresponding power series and to derive formulae similar to those of (25),

(26) but weavoid doingit here expliitly.

Instead we prefer to plot two graphs in order to give a reader some im-

pression about how the eigenvalues may depend on the parameters, i.e. on

the boundary onditions. In eah graph we hoose a line in the parameter

solutions of equation (23) might be a loalisation of roots of this equation

with respet to a suitable splitting of the real line into intervals. Let us

hoose the splittingintointervals with boundary pointsoiniding with the

roots of equation (24). To get the loalisationlet us rewrite equation (23),

equivalently provided

z 6 = − Z ₊ ∪ (1 − α − Z ₊ )

^{, asfollows}

Γ(z − 1 + α)

Γ(z) + ξ Γ(z) Γ(z + α) + η

= ζ ² .

⁽²⁸⁾

Put

F _α (z) = Γ(z − 1 + α) Γ(z)

so that equation (28) an be rewritten as

(F _α (z) + ξ) (F _1−α (z + α) + η) = ζ ² .

⁽²⁹⁾

It is easy to arry out some basi analysis of the funtion

F α (z)

^{. We}

have

F α ′ (z) = F α (z) (ψ(z − 1 + α) − ψ(z))

^{. One observes that}

F α (z) > 0

for

z ∈ ]1 − α, + ∞ [ ∪ S

m∈Z + ] − α − m, − m[

, and

F _α (z) < 0

^for

z ∈ S

m∈Z + ] − m, 1 − α − m[

^,andinanyase

F _α ^′ (z) < 0

^{. Intheformerasethis}

follows from the fat that

ψ(z)

^{is stritly inreasing oneah of the intervals}

]0, + ∞ [

^and

] − m − 1, − m[

^{, with}

m ∈ Z ₊

. In the latter ase this is a onsequene of the identity

ψ(z − 1 + α) − ψ(z) = π sin(πα)

sin(πz) sin(π(z + α)) + Z ∞

0

e ^{−(1−z) t} 1 − e ^{−(1−α) t} 1 − e ^−t dt.

Moreover,

z→+∞ lim F α (z) = 0, lim

z→(1−α−m)± F α (z) = ±∞

^and

F α ( − m) = 0

^for

m ∈ Z ₊ .

Thisalsoimpliesthat

F 1−α (z+α) > 0

^for

z ∈ ]0, + ∞ [ ∪ S

m∈Z + ] − 1 − m, − α − m[

and

F 1−α (z) < 0

^for

z ∈ S

m∈Z + ] − α − m, − m[

^{,in anyase}

F 1−α ′ (z + α) <

0

^{, and}

z→+∞ lim F 1−α (z + α) = 0, lim

z→−m± F 1−α (z + α) = ±∞ ,

and

F 1−α ( − α − m) = 0

^for

m ∈ Z ₊ .

With the knowledge of these basi properties of the funtion

F α (z)

^it

is a matter of an elementary analysis to determine the number of roots of

equation (29) in eah of the intervals

]1 − α, + ∞ [

^,

] − m, 1 − α − m[

^and

] − α − m, − m[

^{, with}

m ∈ Z ₊

. The result is summarised in the following tables.

interval

]1 − α, + ∞ [

onditions numberof roots

ξ ≥ 0 η ≥ 0 ζ ² > ξη

¹

ξ ≥ 0 η ≥ 0 ζ ² ≤ ξη

⁰

ξ ≥ 0 − Γ(1 − α) < η < 0

^{noondition 1}

ξ ≥ 0 η ≤ − Γ(1 − α)

^{noondition 0}

ξ < 0 η ≥ 0

^{noondition 1}

ξ < 0 − Γ(1 − α) < η < 0 ζ ² ≥ ξη

¹

ξ < 0 − Γ(1 − α) < η < 0 ζ ² < ξη

²

ξ < 0 η ≤ − Γ(1 − α) ζ ² ≥ ξη

⁰

ξ < 0 η ≤ − Γ(1 − α) ζ ² < ξη

¹

interval

]0, 1 − α[

onditions number of roots

ξ ≤ 0 η ≥ − Γ(1 − α)

⁰

ξ ≤ 0 η < − Γ(1 − α)

¹

ξ > 0 η ≥ − Γ(1 − α)

¹

ξ > 0 η < − Γ(1 − α)

²

intervals

] − α − m, − m[

^,

m ∈ Z ₊

onditions number of roots

ξ ≥ 0 η ≤ 0

⁰

ξ ≥ 0 η > 0

¹

ξ < 0 η ≤ 0

¹

ξ < 0 η > 0

²

intervals

] − 1 − m, − α − m[

^,

m ∈ Z ₊

onditions number of roots

ξ ≤ 0 η ≥ 0

⁰

ξ ≤ 0 η < 0

¹

ξ > 0 η ≥ 0

¹

ξ > 0 η < 0

²

This is to be ompleted with the simple observation that

1 − α

^{is a root of}

(23) if and only if

η = − Γ(1 − α)

^{, and}

− m

^{, with}

m ∈ Z ₊

, is a root if and onlyif

ξ = 0

^,andnally

− α − m

^{, with}

m ∈ Z ₊

,isarootifand onlyif

η = 0

^.

Let us note that this loalisation is in agreement with a general result

aording to whih if

A

^and

B

^{are two} self-adjoint extensions of the same symmetrioperatorwithnitedeienyindies

(d, d)

^{thenanyinterval}

J ⊂ R

not interseting the spetrum of

A

^{ontains at most}

d

eigenvalues of the operator

B

^(inluding multipliities)andnoother partof thespetrumof

B

[12,Ÿ8.3℄. Thusinourexampleif

J

^{isanopenintervalwhoseboundarypoints}

are either two subsequent eigenvalues of

H ^∞

^{orthe lowest eigenvalue of}

H ^∞

and

−∞

^{then any} self-adjointextension

H ^Λ

^{has at most two} eigenvalues in

J

^.

7 Conluding remarks

The above disussion does not exhaust all questions related to the system

under onsideration. One may ask, for instane, how the state of suh a

partile evolves under an adiabati hange of parameters. In partiular,

sine the model exhibits eigenvalue rossings, one may expet that there

are parameter loops exhibiting a nontrivial Berry phase. Another question

is interested inwhih sense the model Hamiltonianan be approximated by

those with smeared ux and a regular interation. We leave these problems

to afuture publiation.

201/01/01308and GAAS1018101.

Referenes

[1℄ Y. Aharonov and D. Bohm: Signiane of eletromagneti potentials

in the quantum theory, Phys. Rev. 115 (1959)485-491.

[2℄ S.N. M.Ruijsenaars: The Aharonov-Bohmeetand sattering theory,

Annals Phys. 146 (1983)1-34.

[3℄ H.-P. Thienel: Quantum mehanis of an eletron in a homogeneous

magneti eld and a singular magneti ux tube, Annals Phys. 280

(2000) 140-162.

[4℄ R. M. Cavalanti: Comment on Quantum mehanis of an eletron in

a homogeneousmagnetieldanda singularmagnetiux tube,quant-

ph/0003148.

[5℄ M.Hirokawa,O.Ogurisu: Groundstateof aspin1/2 hargedpartilein

a two-dimensionalmagneti eld, J. Math. Phys. 42 (2001) 3334-3343.

[6℄ S.Albeverio, F. Gesztesy,R. Høegh-Krohnand H.Holden: Pointinter-

ations in two dimensions: Basi properties, approximations and appli-

ations to solid state physis, J. reineangew. Math. 380 (1987) 87-107.

[7℄ L. Dabrowskiand P.’´oví£ek: Aharonov-Bohmeet with

δ

^{-type inter-}

ation, J. Math. Phys. 39 (1998) 47-62.

[8℄ R. Adami and A. Teta: On the Aharonov-Bohm Hamiltonian, Lett.

Math. Phys. 43 (1998)43.

[9℄ M.Abramowitz,I.A.Stegun: Handbookof MathematialFuntionswith

Formulas, Graphs and Mathematial Tables, Dover Publiations, New

York, 1965.

Nauka, Moskva, 1986.

[11℄ M. Reed and B. Simon: Methods of Modern Mathematial Physis IV,

Aademi, New York,1975.

[12℄ J.Weidmann: LinearOperatorsin HilbertSpaes,Springer-Verlag,New

York, 1980.

- 20 - 10 10 20 t

- 5 5 10 15

eigenvalues depending on t

Figure 1: The Hamiltonianisdeterminedby the boundaryonditions orre-

sponding to the parameters

(ξ, η, ζ ) = (0.95 t, 0.25 t, 0.25 t)

^,

α = 0.3

^,

B = 1

^.

- 20 - 10 10 20 t

- 5 5 10 15

eigenvalues depending on t