Definition
A more mathematical definition is that Fock states are those elements of a Fock space which are eigenstates of the particle number operator. Elements of a Fock space which are superpositions of states of differing particle number (and thus not eigenstates of the number operator) are, therefore, not Fock states. Thus, not all elements of a Fock space are referred to as "Fock states."
If we limit to a single mode for simplicity (doing so we formally describe a mere harmonic oscillator), a Fock state is of the type with n an integer value. This means that there are n quanta of excitation in the mode. corresponds to the ground state (no excitation). It is different from 0, which is the null vector.
Fock states form the most convenient basis of the Fock space. They are defined to obey the following relations in the bosonic algebra:
with (resp. ) the annihilation (resp. creation) bose operator. Similar relations hold for fermionic algebra.
This allows to check that and, i.e., that measuring the number of particles in a Fock state returns always a definite value with no fluctuation.
Read more about this topic: Fock State
Famous quotes containing the word definition:
“Beauty, like all other qualities presented to human experience, is relative; and the definition of it becomes unmeaning and useless in proportion to its abstractness. To define beauty not in the most abstract, but in the most concrete terms possible, not to find a universal formula for it, but the formula which expresses most adequately this or that special manifestation of it, is the aim of the true student of aesthetics.”
—Walter Pater (1839–1894)
“Perhaps the best definition of progress would be the continuing efforts of men and women to narrow the gap between the convenience of the powers that be and the unwritten charter.”
—Nadine Gordimer (b. 1923)
“The man who knows governments most completely is he who troubles himself least about a definition which shall give their essence. Enjoying an intimate acquaintance with all their particularities in turn, he would naturally regard an abstract conception in which these were unified as a thing more misleading than enlightening.”
—William James (1842–1910)