Skip to content

The Gross–Pitaevskii equation is the leading nonlinear field equation for a dilute Bose condensate with small depletion and a separation between microscopic scattering and macroscopic density scales. For a single component in three dimensions, its standard time-dependent form is

iℏ∂Ψ∂t=[−ℏ22m∇2+Vext+g∣Ψ∣2]Ψ,i\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = \left[ -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 +V_{\mathrm{ext}} +g|\Psi|^2 \right]\Psi,

where the condensate field is normalized here by

∫d3r ∣Ψ(r,t)∣2=N,\int d^3r\,|\Psi(\mathbf r,t)|^2 = N,

and the leading low-energy coupling is

g=4πℏ2asm.g = \frac{4\pi\hbar^2a_s}{m}.

Here NN denotes the population represented by the condensate field; identifying it with total particle number is a leading-order approximation when depletion is negligible. Thus ∣Ψ∣2|\Psi|^2 is a number density, not a one-particle probability density. The nonlinearity is not an arbitrary modification of Schrödinger dynamics: it is the functional derivative of a mean-field interaction energy. That variational origin fixes the factor 1/21/2 in the energy, the coefficient in the equation, the conserved quantities, and the relation between energy and chemical potential.

Gross–Pitaevskii theory is simultaneously simple and subtle. It can describe strongly deformed trapped profiles, sound, interference, solitons, and quantized vortices even while the gas remains microscopically dilute. But it does not include condensate depletion, thermal-cloud kinetics, generic dissipation, fragmentation, or strong correlations. Trustworthy use begins by keeping those boundaries visible.

Helpful background. Condensation defines the occupied mode, field operators gives its operator description, and scattering length explains the low-energy coupling.

A dilute condensate and its scattering length

Section titled “A dilute condensate and its scattering length”

The baseline theory used below assumes:

  • one species of spinless bosons;
  • a macroscopically occupied condensate mode;
  • three spatial dimensions;
  • a short-range interaction probed at low collision energy;
  • a dilute gas, locally satisfying nas3≪1n a_s^3\ll1;
  • small quantum and thermal depletion;
  • spatial variation slow compared with the interaction range;
  • a closed, conservative evolution unless explicitly stated otherwise.

The gas can still be far from ideal. In a harmonic trap, for example, the collective parameter Nas/ahoNa_s/a_{\mathrm{ho}} may be large while the local gas parameter nas3n a_s^3 remains small. The first controls how much the condensate profile is reshaped by interactions; the second controls omitted correlation corrections. Confusing these parameters is a common source of contradictory claims about whether Gross–Pitaevskii theory is valid.

For the main discussion take as>0a_s>0, so g>0g>0 and the local interaction is repulsive. Attractive condensates require a separate stability analysis because the cubic focusing energy favors collapse.

Two conventions appear throughout the literature. Both are correct, but their nonlinear coefficients differ.

The convention used on this page is

∫d3r ∣Ψ∣2=N.\int d^3r\,|\Psi|^2 = N.

Then n=∣Ψ∣2n=|\Psi|^2 is the condensate number density and the equation contains g∣Ψ∣2g|\Psi|^2.

Alternatively, write

Ψ(r,t)=N ϕ(r,t),∫d3r ∣ϕ∣2=1.\Psi(\mathbf r,t) = \sqrt N\,\phi(\mathbf r,t), \qquad \int d^3r\,|\phi|^2 = 1.

The large-NN equation becomes

iℏ∂tϕ=[−ℏ22m∇2+Vext+gN∣ϕ∣2]ϕ.i\hbar\partial_t\phi = \left[ -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 +V_{\mathrm{ext}} +gN|\phi|^2 \right]\phi.

For an exact fixed-NN Hartree product, pair counting gives g(N−1)∣ϕ∣2g(N-1)|\phi|^2 instead of gN∣ϕ∣2gN|\phi|^2. Equivalently, the number-normalized interaction energy carries a factor 1−1/N1-1/N. Standard Gross–Pitaevskii notation drops this relative O(1/N)O(1/N) distinction. It can be restored within that effective product model when finite-particle counting matters. It does not restore all finite-NN or beyond-mean-field corrections to a microscopic gas.

The nonrelativistic contact model is

H^=∫d3r ψ^†[−ℏ22m∇2+Vext(r,t)]ψ^+g2∫d3r ψ^†ψ^†ψ^ψ^.\hat H ={} \int d^3r\, \hat\psi^\dagger \left[ -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 +V_{\mathrm{ext}}(\mathbf r,t) \right] \hat\psi + \frac{g}{2} \int d^3r\, \hat\psi^\dagger \hat\psi^\dagger \hat\psi \hat\psi.

The fields obey

[ψ^(r),ψ^†(r′)]=δ(3)(r−r′).[\hat\psi(\mathbf r),\hat\psi^\dagger(\mathbf r')] = \delta^{(3)}(\mathbf r-\mathbf r').

The contact term is an effective low-energy representation. In three dimensions, matching the two-body amplitude gives

g=4πℏ2asmg = \frac{4\pi\hbar^2a_s}{m}

at leading order. This gg is expressed in terms of the physical scattering length. It is not permission to insert an unregulated delta potential into every ultraviolet-sensitive calculation. Once loop integrals, zero-point energies, or high-momentum modes are retained, the bare coupling depends on the regulator and must be matched.

The conditions

k∣as∣≪1,∣asre∣k2≪1,nas3≪1k|a_s|\ll1,\qquad |a_s r_e|k^2\ll1,\qquad n a_s^3\ll1

control different approximations. The first two justify replacing

f(k)=1−as−1+12rek2−ik+⋯f(k)=\frac{1}{-a_s^{-1}+\tfrac12r_e k^2-ik+\cdots}

by its zero-energy value −as-a_s: both ikik and the effective-range term must be small relative to as−1a_s^{-1}. The effective-range expansion itself also needs momenta below microscopic range scales. The gas parameter controls many-body corrections. Here rer_e is the effective range and kk a representative relative wave number; k∣re∣≪1k|r_e|\ll1 alone is not a universal near-resonance criterion.

From the Operator Field to a Condensate Field

Section titled “From the Operator Field to a Condensate Field”

The exact Heisenberg equation for the contact model is

iℏ∂tψ^=[−ℏ22m∇2+Vext+gψ^†ψ^]ψ^.i\hbar\partial_t\hat\psi = \left[ -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 +V_{\mathrm{ext}} +g\hat\psi^\dagger\hat\psi \right] \hat\psi.

A symmetry-breaking mean-field treatment writes

ψ^=Ψ+δψ^\hat\psi = \Psi + \delta\hat\psi

and neglects the fluctuation terms at leading order. Equivalently, it factorizes the cubic expectation value as

⟨ψ^†ψ^ψ^⟩≈∣Ψ∣2Ψ.\langle \hat\psi^\dagger\hat\psi\hat\psi \rangle \approx |\Psi|^2\Psi.

That replacement yields the time-dependent Gross–Pitaevskii equation. It is physically informative but not by itself a controlled error estimate. Control comes from the dilute limit, small depletion, scale separation, and the observable under study.

There is also a number-conserving route. Restrict the many-body state to a fixed-NN product in one orbital, evaluate the Hamiltonian, and vary the orbital. This gives the same leading equation with the finite-NN pair-counting correction. Hartree Approximation develops that variational connection in detail.

For a static external potential, define

E[Ψ]=∫d3r [ℏ22m∣∇Ψ∣2+Vext∣Ψ∣2+g2∣Ψ∣4].E[\Psi] = \int d^3r\, \bigg[ \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}|\boldsymbol\nabla\Psi|^2 +V_{\mathrm{ext}}|\Psi|^2 + \frac{g}{2}|\Psi|^4 \bigg].

It is useful to name the three contributions:

E=Ekin+Etrap+Eint,E = E_{\mathrm{kin}} + E_{\mathrm{trap}} + E_{\mathrm{int}},

with

Ekin=ℏ22m∫d3r ∣∇Ψ∣2,Etrap=∫d3r Vext∣Ψ∣2,Eint=g2∫d3r ∣Ψ∣4.\begin{aligned} E_{\mathrm{kin}} &= \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \int d^3r\,|\boldsymbol\nabla\Psi|^2, \\ E_{\mathrm{trap}} &= \int d^3r\,V_{\mathrm{ext}}|\Psi|^2, \\ E_{\mathrm{int}} &= \frac{g}{2} \int d^3r\,|\Psi|^4. \end{aligned}

The factor 1/21/2 in EintE_{\mathrm{int}} counts each pair once. Functional differentiation removes that factor because either member of a pair can be varied:

δEintδΨ∗=g∣Ψ∣2Ψ.\frac{\delta E_{\mathrm{int}}} {\delta\Psi^*} = g|\Psi|^2\Psi.

The ground-state problem is therefore a constrained minimization of E[Ψ]E[\Psi] at fixed NN, not a linear eigenvalue problem with a prescribed potential.

Introduce a Lagrange multiplier μ\mu and vary

F[Φ]=E[Φ]−μ(∫d3r ∣Φ∣2−N).\mathcal F[\Phi] = E[\Phi] - \mu \left( \int d^3r\,|\Phi|^2-N \right).

Treat Φ\Phi and Φ∗\Phi^* as independent variables. The first variation with respect to Φ∗\Phi^* is

δF=∫d3r [ℏ22m∇(δΦ∗)⋅∇Φ+(Vext+g∣Φ∣2−μ)Φ δΦ∗].\delta\mathcal F = \int d^3r\, \bigg[ \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \boldsymbol\nabla(\delta\Phi^*) \boldsymbol\cdot \boldsymbol\nabla\Phi + \left( V_{\mathrm{ext}} +g|\Phi|^2 -\mu \right) \Phi\,\delta\Phi^* \bigg].

After integration by parts, and assuming decay, periodicity, Dirichlet data, or another boundary condition that removes the surface term,

δF=∫d3r δΦ∗[−ℏ22m∇2+Vext+g∣Φ∣2−μ]Φ.\delta\mathcal F = \int d^3r\, \delta\Phi^* \bigg[ -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 +V_{\mathrm{ext}} +g|\Phi|^2 -\mu \bigg] \Phi.

Stationarity for arbitrary δΦ∗\delta\Phi^* gives

[−ℏ22m∇2+Vext(r)+g∣Φ(r)∣2]Φ(r)=μΦ(r).\left[ -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 +V_{\mathrm{ext}}(\mathbf r) +g|\Phi(\mathbf r)|^2 \right] \Phi(\mathbf r) = \mu\Phi(\mathbf r).

This is the time-independent Gross–Pitaevskii equation. The multiplier μ\mu is the chemical potential associated with changing the condensate population along the family of optimized states:

μ=∂EGP,min∂N\mu = \frac{\partial E_{\mathrm{GP,min}}}{\partial N}

when the derivative exists and all external parameters, including gg, are fixed. This is the derivative of the optimized Gross–Pitaevskii functional, not an assertion about the exact finite-particle addition spectrum.

Chemical potential is not energy per particle

Section titled “Chemical potential is not energy per particle”

Multiply the stationary equation by Φ∗\Phi^* and integrate. One obtains

μN=Ekin+Etrap+2Eint.\mu N = E_{\mathrm{kin}} + E_{\mathrm{trap}} + 2E_{\mathrm{int}}.

Since

E=Ekin+Etrap+Eint,E = E_{\mathrm{kin}} + E_{\mathrm{trap}} + E_{\mathrm{int}},

the relation is

E=μN−Eint.E = \mu N - E_{\mathrm{int}}.

The nonlinear eigenvalue μ\mu therefore differs from E/NE/N whenever interactions contribute. Calling μ\mu the energy of the condensate wavefunction obscures this distinction.

The conservative dynamics follows from

S=∫dt L,S = \int dt\,L,

with

L=∫d3r [iℏ2(Ψ∗∂tΨ−Ψ∂tΨ∗)−ℏ22m∣∇Ψ∣2−Vext∣Ψ∣2−g2∣Ψ∣4].L = \int d^3r\, \bigg[ \frac{i\hbar}{2} \left( \Psi^*\partial_t\Psi - \Psi\partial_t\Psi^* \right) - \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}|\boldsymbol\nabla\Psi|^2 - V_{\mathrm{ext}}|\Psi|^2 - \frac{g}{2}|\Psi|^4 \bigg].

Varying with respect to Ψ∗\Psi^* gives

iℏ∂tΨ=δEδΨ∗=[−ℏ22m∇2+Vext+g∣Ψ∣2]Ψ.i\hbar\partial_t\Psi = \frac{\delta E}{\delta\Psi^*} = \left[ -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 +V_{\mathrm{ext}} +g|\Psi|^2 \right]\Psi.

For a static stationary profile,

Ψ(r,t)=e−iμt/ℏΦ(r),\Psi(\mathbf r,t) = e^{-i\mu t/\hbar} \Phi(\mathbf r),

and the time-dependent equation reduces to the stationary one. A stationary density can therefore carry a uniformly rotating phase.

The time-dependent equation preserves the norm when VextV_{\mathrm{ext}} and gg are real. Define

n=∣Ψ∣2n = |\Psi|^2

and

j=ℏ2mi(Ψ∗∇Ψ−Ψ∇Ψ∗).\mathbf j = \frac{\hbar}{2mi} \left( \Psi^*\boldsymbol\nabla\Psi - \Psi\boldsymbol\nabla\Psi^* \right).

Combining the equation with its complex conjugate gives the local continuity equation

∂tn+∇⋅j=0.\partial_t n + \boldsymbol\nabla\boldsymbol\cdot\mathbf j = 0.

Under vanishing normal current or suitable decay,

dNdt=0.\frac{dN}{dt} = 0.

For constant gg, if VextV_{\mathrm{ext}} has no explicit time dependence, then

dEdt=0.\frac{dE}{dt} = 0.

For a driven trap,

dEdt=∫d3r n(r,t)∂Vext∂t.\frac{dE}{dt} = \int d^3r\, n(\mathbf r,t) \frac{\partial V_{\mathrm{ext}}}{\partial t}.

If g=g(t)g=g(t) is driven too, add 12g˙∫d3r n2\tfrac12\dot g\int d^3r\,n^2 to dE/dtdE/dt. Thus ordinary time-dependent Gross–Pitaevskii evolution is Hamiltonian. Imaginary-time propagation, damping terms, stochastic noise, and particle-loss terms are additional models; they are not hidden inside the conservative equation.

Set Vext=0V_{\mathrm{ext}}=0 and consider a uniform solution

Ψ0=n0e−iμt/ℏ.\Psi_0 = \sqrt{n_0} e^{-i\mu t/\hbar}.

The stationary equation gives

μ=gn0.\mu = gn_0.

The leading energy density and pressure are

E=g2n02,P=g2n02.\mathcal E = \frac{g}{2}n_0^2, \qquad P = \frac{g}{2}n_0^2.

The inverse compressibility scale is finite:

∂μ∂n0=g.\frac{\partial\mu}{\partial n_0} = g.

This is the simplest indication that weak repulsion changes the ideal condensate qualitatively. It costs energy to compress the density, and long-wavelength disturbances propagate as sound rather than as independent quadratic particles.

Suppose a repulsive uniform condensate is disturbed near a wall, defect, interface, or vortex core. The density cannot jump discontinuously because the gradient energy would diverge. It recovers over the distance at which kinetic and interaction energies balance:

ℏ22mξ2∼gn0.\frac{\hbar^2}{2m\xi^2} \sim gn_0.

This page uses the convention

ξ=ℏ2mgn0=18πasn0.\xi = \frac{\hbar}{\sqrt{2mgn_0}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{8\pi a_s n_0}}.

Some texts define ξ′=ℏ/mgn0=2 ξ\xi'=\hbar/\sqrt{mgn_0}=\sqrt2\,\xi. Formulas involving a numerical factor of 2\sqrt2 must therefore be compared only after the convention is identified.

Take a hard wall at x=0x=0, a condensate for x>0x>0, and boundary conditions

Φ(0)=0,Φ(x→∞)=n0.\Phi(0) = 0, \qquad \Phi(x\to\infty) = \sqrt{n_0}.

Write

Φ(x)=n0 f(x),μ=gn0.\Phi(x) = \sqrt{n_0}\,f(x), \qquad \mu = gn_0.

The stationary equation becomes

−ξ2f′′+(f2−1)f=0.-\xi^2 f'' + (f^2-1)f = 0.

Its monotone solution is

f(x)=tanh⁡(x2 ξ),f(x) = \tanh \left( \frac{x}{\sqrt2\,\xi} \right),

so the density profile is

n(x)n0=tanh⁡2(x2 ξ).\frac{n(x)}{n_0} = \tanh^2 \left( \frac{x}{\sqrt2\,\xi} \right).

The healing length is not a hard cutoff. It is the scale controlling a smooth crossover. Different operational definitions, such as the half-density distance, differ by order-one constants.

Condensate amplitude and number density rise smoothly from zero at a hard wall to their bulk values

The amplitude is f=tanh⁡[x/(2ξ)]f=\tanh[x/(\sqrt2\xi)], while density is f2f^2. Both approach the same normalized bulk value, but close to the wall the amplitude grows linearly and the density quadratically. The exact analytic curves use the healing-length convention stated above.

Where n>0n>0, write the condensate field as

Ψ=n eiθ.\Psi = \sqrt n\,e^{i\theta}.

The current becomes

j=nv,v=ℏm∇θ.\mathbf j = n\mathbf v, \qquad \mathbf v = \frac{\hbar}{m}\boldsymbol\nabla\theta.

The imaginary part of the Gross–Pitaevskii equation gives

∂tn+∇⋅(nv)=0.\partial_t n + \boldsymbol\nabla\boldsymbol\cdot(n\mathbf v) = 0.

The real part gives a Bernoulli-like equation,

ℏ∂tθ+m2v2+Vext+gn+Q=0,\hbar\partial_t\theta + \frac{m}{2}v^2 + V_{\mathrm{ext}} + gn + Q = 0,

where

Q=−ℏ22m∇2nnQ = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\nabla^2\sqrt n}{\sqrt n}

is the quantum-pressure potential. Taking a gradient gives

m(∂t+v⋅∇)v=−∇(Vext+gn+Q)m \left( \partial_t + \mathbf v\boldsymbol\cdot\boldsymbol\nabla \right) \mathbf v = -\boldsymbol\nabla \left( V_{\mathrm{ext}} +gn +Q \right)

where the flow is smooth and irrotational. The name quantum pressure is conventional; QQ is a chemical-potential contribution generated by density gradients, not the thermodynamic pressure P=gn2/2P=gn^2/2.

Linearize around n=n0n=n_0 and v=0\mathbf v=0. For a plane-wave perturbation, one obtains

ω2=c2k2+ℏ2k44m2,\omega^2 = c^2k^2 + \frac{\hbar^2k^4}{4m^2},

with

c=gn0m.c = \sqrt{\frac{gn_0}{m}}.

For kξ≪1k\xi\ll1, the first term dominates and ω≈ck\omega\approx ck. For kξ≫1k\xi\gg1, the gradient term restores particle-like curvature. The same dispersion emerges from a Bogoliubov quasiparticle calculation, but that calculation additionally determines mode amplitudes, commutators, depletion, and zero-point corrections.

If the density has order-one relative variation on a scale LL much larger than the local healing length ξ(n)\xi(n), then

∣Q∣gn∼ξ2L2≪1.\frac{|Q|}{gn} \sim \frac{\xi^2}{L^2} \ll 1.

Dropping QQ gives classical-looking compressible, irrotational hydrodynamics. The approximation fails at edges, vortex cores, solitons, sharp barriers, and dispersive shock structures precisely because LL becomes comparable to ξ\xi.

Consider

Vext=m2(ωx2x2+ωy2y2+ωz2z2).V_{\mathrm{ext}} = \frac{m}{2} \left( \omega_x^2x^2 + \omega_y^2y^2 + \omega_z^2z^2 \right).

Define the geometric-mean frequency and oscillator length

ωˉ=(ωxωyωz)1/3,aho=ℏmωˉ.\bar\omega = (\omega_x\omega_y\omega_z)^{1/3}, \qquad a_{\mathrm{ho}} = \sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{m\bar\omega}}.

For g=0g=0, the condensate occupies the one-particle harmonic-oscillator ground state. Repulsion broadens the density because reducing ∣Ψ∣4|\Psi|^4 lowers the interaction energy at the price of kinetic and trapping energy.

The central trap parameter is

η=Nasaho.\eta = \frac{Na_s}{a_{\mathrm{ho}}}.

At fixed moderate trap anisotropy, small η\eta gives a profile close to the oscillator Gaussian, and large positive η\eta leads toward the Thomas–Fermi regime. The actual three-dimensional condition is μ≫ℏωi\mu\gg\hbar\omega_i for every confined direction, together with local diluteness. A strongly anisotropic trap can keep a transverse mode frozen even when a geometric-mean parameter looks large; it then needs a lower-dimensional treatment.

When the density changes slowly over most of the cloud, neglect the kinetic term in the stationary equation. The local algebraic relation is

Vext(r)+gnTF(r)=μ,V_{\mathrm{ext}}(\mathbf r) + g n_{\mathrm{TF}}(\mathbf r) = \mu,

so

nTF(r)=μ−Vext(r)g Θ(μ−Vext(r)).n_{\mathrm{TF}}(\mathbf r) = \frac{\mu-V_{\mathrm{ext}}(\mathbf r)}{g} \,\Theta \left( \mu-V_{\mathrm{ext}}(\mathbf r) \right).

The Heaviside factor restricts the cloud to the region Vext<μV_{\mathrm{ext}}<\mu. For a harmonic trap, the boundary is an ellipsoid with radii

Ri=2μmωi2.R_i = \sqrt{\frac{2\mu}{m\omega_i^2}}.

Normalization gives

μTF=ℏωˉ2(15Nasaho)2/5.\mu_{\mathrm{TF}} = \frac{\hbar\bar\omega}{2} \left( 15\frac{Na_s}{a_{\mathrm{ho}}} \right)^{2/5}.

For an isotropic trap with frequency ω\omega,

RTF=aho(15Nasaho)1/5.R_{\mathrm{TF}} = a_{\mathrm{ho}} \left( 15\frac{Na_s}{a_{\mathrm{ho}}} \right)^{1/5}.

At the trap center,

ξ(0)=ℏ2mμ=aho2RTF.\xi(0) = \frac{\hbar}{\sqrt{2m\mu}} = \frac{a_{\mathrm{ho}}^2}{R_{\mathrm{TF}}}.

Thus RTF≫ahoR_{\mathrm{TF}}\gg a_{\mathrm{ho}} implies ξ(0)≪RTF\xi(0)\ll R_{\mathrm{TF}}, which explains why the gradient term is negligible in the bulk.

The Thomas–Fermi profile has a nonanalytic edge. The exact Gross–Pitaevskii solution rounds that edge because the density-gradient scale becomes short and quantum pressure can no longer be neglected. Thomas–Fermi theory is a bulk approximation, not a boundary condition.

For a three-dimensional harmonic trap in the Thomas–Fermi limit,

Etrap=37Nμ,Eint=27Nμ,E_{\mathrm{trap}} = \frac{3}{7}N\mu, \qquad E_{\mathrm{int}} = \frac{2}{7}N\mu,

and therefore

E=57Nμ.E = \frac{5}{7}N\mu.

The result is consistent with both

μN=Etrap+2Eint\mu N = E_{\mathrm{trap}} + 2E_{\mathrm{int}}

and the harmonic-trap virial theorem.

For an isotropic or anisotropic harmonic trap, scale a normalized field as

Φλ(r)=λ3/2Φ(λr).\Phi_\lambda(\mathbf r) = \lambda^{3/2} \Phi(\lambda\mathbf r).

The three energy terms transform as

Ekin(λ)=λ2Ekin,E_{\mathrm{kin}}(\lambda) = \lambda^2E_{\mathrm{kin}}, Etrap(λ)=λ−2Etrap,E_{\mathrm{trap}}(\lambda) = \lambda^{-2}E_{\mathrm{trap}},

and

Eint(λ)=λ3Eint.E_{\mathrm{int}}(\lambda) = \lambda^3E_{\mathrm{int}}.

Stationarity at λ=1\lambda=1 gives

2Ekin−2Etrap+3Eint=0.2E_{\mathrm{kin}} - 2E_{\mathrm{trap}} + 3E_{\mathrm{int}} = 0.

This identity is both a physical result and a powerful numerical diagnostic. A converged stationary solver can satisfy the discretized equation while still having appreciable finite-box or resolution error; the virial residual exposes many such failures.

A simple trial profile connects the noninteracting and interaction-broadened regimes. In an isotropic trap, take

Φσ(r)=Nπ3/4σ3/2exp⁡(−r22σ2).\Phi_\sigma(\mathbf r) = \frac{\sqrt N} {\pi^{3/4}\sigma^{3/2}} \exp \left( -\frac{r^2}{2\sigma^2} \right).

Its energy per particle is

E(σ)Nℏω=34(s2+s−2)+Nas/aho2π s3,\frac{E(\sigma)}{N\hbar\omega} = \frac{3}{4} \left( s^2 + s^{-2} \right) + \frac{Na_s/a_{\mathrm{ho}}} {\sqrt{2\pi}\,s^3},

where

s=σaho.s = \frac{\sigma}{a_{\mathrm{ho}}}.

At as=0a_s=0, the minimum is s=1s=1. Repulsion shifts it to s>1s>1. Attraction shifts it to s<1s<1 and eventually removes the local minimum. The Gaussian is not quantitatively exact in the Thomas–Fermi regime, but it makes the competition among kinetic, trap, and interaction energies transparent.

For an isotropic harmonic trap, set

r=ahox,t=τω,Ψ=Naho3/2ψ.\mathbf r = a_{\mathrm{ho}}\mathbf x, \qquad t = \frac{\tau}{\omega}, \qquad \Psi = \frac{\sqrt N}{a_{\mathrm{ho}}^{3/2}} \psi.

Then

∫d3x ∣ψ∣2=1\int d^3x\,|\psi|^2 = 1

and the equation becomes

i∂τψ=[−12∇x2+x22+4πNasaho∣ψ∣2]ψ.i\partial_\tau\psi = \left[ -\frac{1}{2}\nabla_{\mathbf x}^2 + \frac{x^2}{2} + 4\pi\frac{Na_s}{a_{\mathrm{ho}}}|\psi|^2 \right]\psi.

This scaling shows that the zero-temperature, one-component, isotropic contact problem has one dimensionless interaction parameter. Anisotropy introduces frequency ratios. Lower-dimensional reductions introduce different effective couplings and should not inherit the three-dimensional value of gg unchanged.

The phase representation implies irrotational flow wherever Ψ≠0\Psi\ne0:

∇×v=0.\boldsymbol\nabla\times\mathbf v = 0.

Nevertheless, the phase may wind around a line where the density vanishes. Single-valuedness requires

Δθ=2πℓ,ℓ∈Z.\Delta\theta = 2\pi\ell, \qquad \ell\in\mathbb Z.

Therefore the circulation is quantized:

∮v⋅dℓ=2πℏmℓ.\oint\mathbf v\boldsymbol\cdot d\boldsymbol\ell = \frac{2\pi\hbar}{m}\ell.

For a straight vortex along zz, an axisymmetric ansatz is

Φ(ρ,φ,z)=f(ρ,z)eiℓφ.\Phi(\rho,\varphi,z) = f(\rho,z)e^{i\ell\varphi}.

The kinetic energy contains

ℏ2ℓ22mρ2∣f∣2.\frac{\hbar^2\ell^2}{2m\rho^2}|f|^2.

Finite energy forces f→0f\to0 on the axis, creating a core of order the local healing length for a singly quantized vortex. Higher winding introduces an additional winding-dependent core scale and may be unstable to splitting. Gross and Pitaevskii introduced their equations in precisely this vortex context. In a nonrotating simply connected trap, a vortex is generally not the ground state. In a frame rotating with angular velocity Ω\Omega, the relevant functional is E−Ω⟨Lz⟩E-\Omega\langle L_z\rangle, and vortices can become energetically favorable.

Nonlinear Superposition and Stationary States

Section titled “Nonlinear Superposition and Stationary States”

The stationary equation resembles an eigenvalue equation, but it is nonlinear. If Φ1\Phi_1 and Φ2\Phi_2 are solutions, then

c1Φ1+c2Φ2c_1\Phi_1+c_2\Phi_2

is not generally a solution. Orthogonality and spectral decomposition therefore do not transfer unchanged from linear quantum mechanics.

A stationary solution can be:

  • the constrained energy minimum;
  • a local minimum representing a metastable state;
  • a saddle such as a soliton or vortex configuration;
  • dynamically unstable even though the stationary residual vanishes.

Energetic and dynamical stability are determined by the second variation and the linearized time-dependent equation. The resulting coupled mode problem is the Bogoliubov–de Gennes system, not the original stationary equation applied independently to one perturbation amplitude.

In a symmetry-breaking description,

Ψ(r,t)=⟨ψ^(r,t)⟩.\Psi(\mathbf r,t) = \langle\hat\psi(\mathbf r,t)\rangle.

But an exact eigenstate of total particle number satisfies

⟨ψ^⟩=0\langle\hat\psi\rangle = 0

because ψ^\hat\psi changes the number sector. This does not mean that a fixed-NN condensate has no Gross–Pitaevskii description. Its condensate orbital can be defined as the dominant eigenvector of the one-body density matrix, or obtained through a number-conserving expansion. The complex phase then represents a relative phase, a symmetry-broken thermodynamic description, or a convenient representative of the condensate mode.

Observable quantities such as nn, j\mathbf j, phase differences, and interference signals are invariant under the global transformation

Ψ⟼eiαΨ.\Psi \longmapsto e^{i\alpha}\Psi.

The equation respects this global U(1) symmetry and conserves the associated norm.

The conservative equation is widely used for:

  • collective oscillations after a weak trap perturbation;
  • expansion after release from a trap;
  • phase imprinting and interference;
  • flow past barriers and weak links;
  • vortex nucleation and motion when the mean-field description remains valid;
  • soliton and dispersive-wave dynamics;
  • coherent splitting, transport, and recombination protocols.

The equation does not guarantee accuracy merely because a numerical solution exists. Rapid driving can populate noncondensed modes, produce fragmentation, or transfer weight to momenta outside the contact model’s low-energy range. The relevant validity test concerns the evolving state, not only the initial state.

For a harmonic trap and translation-invariant two-body interactions, the condensate center of mass obeys

R¨i+ωi2Ri=0.\ddot R_i + \omega_i^2R_i = 0.

The contact nonlinearity does not shift this dipole frequency because internal forces cancel. This is the mean-field manifestation of center-of-mass decoupling and provides another stringent simulation check.

Normalized gradient flow or imaginary-time propagation can minimize the energy. Formally setting t=−iτt=-i\tau damps higher-energy components, but this evolution does not conserve norm: renormalize the field or enforce the constraint continuously. It is an optimization procedure, not physical time evolution, and a local solver can remain in a metastable branch.

Resolve the smallest relevant healing length and any vortex core, enlarge the numerical domain until boundaries no longer affect the cloud, and compare the stationary residual with the virial relation. For real-time propagation, norm conservation and the harmonic-trap dipole frequency provide independent checks. Energy is conserved only without explicit driving.

For a uniform three-dimensional gas at zero temperature, the leading depletion fraction scales as

N−N0N∼nas3.\frac{N-N_0}{N} \sim \sqrt{n a_s^3}.

Gross–Pitaevskii theory retains the leading mean field but omits this depletion and the associated Lee–Huang–Yang correction. Small nas3n a_s^3 is therefore central to its ordinary dilute-gas use.

The formula g=4πℏ2as/mg=4\pi\hbar^2a_s/m is three-dimensional and low energy. In one or two dimensions, and in strongly confined quasi-low-dimensional geometries, the effective coupling has different dimensional dependence and may be modified by confinement-induced resonances. See Low-Dimensional Quantum Gases for the dimensional boundary.

At nonzero temperature, a thermal cloud can alter the mean field, damp collective modes, exchange particles with the condensate, and generate noise. A single conservative field does not describe those processes. Finite-temperature mean-field, kinetic, stochastic, or open-system methods require additional assumptions.

For g<0g<0, the three-dimensional cubic interaction lowers the energy as the density concentrates. A trap can support a metastable condensate only below a geometry-dependent critical population. Beyond it, the simple energy functional has no stable local minimum against collapse. Three-body loss and short-distance physics then become important before a mathematical singularity should be interpreted literally.

One condensate field is inadequate for Mott phases, Tonks–Girardeau gases, strongly depleted fluids, fragmented condensates, and states whose one-body density matrix has several macroscopic eigenvalues. A large occupation number alone does not prove that connected correlations are negligible.

Dipolar, spinor, multicomponent, spin–orbit-coupled, and cavity-mediated condensates require nonlocal kernels, coupled fields, matrix-valued order parameters, or additional dynamical variables. Calling all of these extensions Gross–Pitaevskii equations can be convenient, but their couplings and stability criteria are model specific.

Terms such as

−iℏK32∣Ψ∣4Ψ-i\hbar\frac{K_3}{2}|\Psi|^4\Psi

are sometimes added phenomenologically to represent three-body loss. With this convention K3K_3 is the atom-loss coefficient in ∂tn=−K3n3\partial_t n=-K_3n^3 for a locally uniform field; a coefficient defined per recombination event differs by the number of atoms lost. Damped or stochastic variants are also common. Such equations no longer follow from the closed conservative action above, and their noise, damping, and fluctuation relations must be justified separately.

The replacement ψ^→Ψ\hat\psi\to\Psi is a useful heuristic, but rigorous Gross–Pitaevskii limits retain short-range pair correlations needed to replace a microscopic potential by its scattering length. A naive uncorrelated product using the bare potential generally produces the Born integral of that potential, not automatically 4πℏ2as/m4\pi\hbar^2a_s/m. The final mean-field equation can be asymptotically correct even though the exact many-body wavefunction is not an uncorrelated product at microscopic separations.

For the dimensionless boundary equation

−ξ2f′′+(f2−1)f=0,-\xi^2f'' + (f^2-1)f = 0,

with f(0)=0f(0)=0 and f(∞)=1f(\infty)=1, derive a first integral and obtain the healing profile.

Solution

Multiply by f′f':

−ξ2f′′f′+(f2−1)ff′=0.-\xi^2f''f' + (f^2-1)ff' = 0.

Integrating once gives

−ξ22(f′)2+14(f2−1)2=C.-\frac{\xi^2}{2}(f')^2 + \frac{1}{4}(f^2-1)^2 = C.

The bulk conditions f→1f\to1 and f′→0f'\to0 imply C=0C=0. For the increasing solution,

f′=1−f22 ξ.f' = \frac{1-f^2}{\sqrt2\,\xi}.

Separating variables yields

artanh⁡f=x2 ξ,\operatorname{artanh}f = \frac{x}{\sqrt2\,\xi},

and therefore

f(x)=tanh⁡(x2 ξ).f(x) = \tanh \left( \frac{x}{\sqrt2\,\xi} \right).

For

V(r)=12mω2r2,V(r) = \frac{1}{2}m\omega^2r^2,

normalize the Thomas–Fermi density and derive RTFR_{\mathrm{TF}} and μTF\mu_{\mathrm{TF}}.

Solution

Inside the cloud,

n(r)=1g(μ−12mω2r2),n(r) = \frac{1}{g} \left( \mu - \frac{1}{2}m\omega^2r^2 \right),

and n(R)=0n(R)=0 gives

μ=12mω2R2.\mu = \frac{1}{2}m\omega^2R^2.

Normalization yields

N=4πg∫0Rdr r2(μ−12mω2r2)=4πmω2R515g.\begin{aligned} N &= \frac{4\pi}{g} \int_0^Rdr\,r^2 \left( \mu-\frac{1}{2}m\omega^2r^2 \right) \\ &= \frac{4\pi m\omega^2R^5}{15g}. \end{aligned}

Using

g=4πℏ2asm,aho2=ℏmω,g = \frac{4\pi\hbar^2a_s}{m}, \qquad a_{\mathrm{ho}}^2 = \frac{\hbar}{m\omega},

gives

R5=15Nasaho4.R^5 = 15Na_s a_{\mathrm{ho}}^4.

Therefore

RTF=aho(15Nasaho)1/5,R_{\mathrm{TF}} = a_{\mathrm{ho}} \left( 15\frac{Na_s}{a_{\mathrm{ho}}} \right)^{1/5},

and

μTF=ℏω2(15Nasaho)2/5.\mu_{\mathrm{TF}} = \frac{\hbar\omega}{2} \left( 15\frac{Na_s}{a_{\mathrm{ho}}} \right)^{2/5}.

Let Φ=f(ρ,z)eiℓφ\Phi=f(\rho,z)e^{i\ell\varphi}. Derive the velocity field and circulation. Explain why the density must vanish on the axis for ℓ≠0\ell\ne0.

Solution

The phase is θ=ℓφ\theta=\ell\varphi, so

v=ℏm∇θ=ℏℓmρφ^.\mathbf v = \frac{\hbar}{m}\nabla\theta = \frac{\hbar\ell}{m\rho} \hat{\boldsymbol\varphi}.

Around a circle of radius ρ\rho,

∮v⋅dℓ=2πρℏℓmρ=2πℏℓm.\oint\mathbf v\boldsymbol\cdot d\boldsymbol\ell = 2\pi\rho \frac{\hbar\ell}{m\rho} = \frac{2\pi\hbar\ell}{m}.

The phase is undefined on the axis. Moreover, the angular kinetic-energy density contains

ℏ2ℓ22mρ2∣f∣2.\frac{\hbar^2\ell^2}{2m\rho^2}|f|^2.

Its transverse integral would diverge at ρ=0\rho=0 unless ff vanishes sufficiently rapidly. The density therefore forms a vortex core.

For as<0a_s<0, use the Gaussian energy

ENℏω=34(s2+s−2)−k2π s3,\frac{E}{N\hbar\omega} = \frac{3}{4} \left( s^2+s^{-2} \right) - \frac{k}{\sqrt{2\pi}\,s^3},

where k=N∣as∣/ahok=N|a_s|/a_{\mathrm{ho}}. Find the value at which the local minimum disappears.

Solution

Stationarity gives

s5−s+2k2π=0.s^5 -s + \frac{2k}{\sqrt{2\pi}} = 0.

At the disappearance of the minimum, the stationary equation has a double root. Differentiating its left side gives

5s4−1=0,5s^4-1 = 0,

so

sc=5−1/4.s_c = 5^{-1/4}.

Substitution yields

kc=22π55−1/4≈0.67.k_c = \frac{2\sqrt{2\pi}}{5} 5^{-1/4} \approx 0.67.

This is a Gaussian variational estimate, not a universal exact threshold. More accurate stationary solutions give a different numerical value, and anisotropy changes it further.

  • W. Bao and Y. Cai, “Mathematical Theory and Numerical Methods for Bose–Einstein Condensation,” Kinetic and Related Models 6, 1–135 (2013), doi:10.3934/krm.2013.6.1.
  • F. Dalfovo, S. Giorgini, L. P. Pitaevskii, and S. Stringari, “Theory of Bose–Einstein Condensation in Trapped Gases,” Reviews of Modern Physics 71, 463–512 (1999), doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.71.463.
  • A. L. Fetter, “Rotating Trapped Bose–Einstein Condensates,” Reviews of Modern Physics 81, 647–691 (2009), doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.81.647.
  • E. P. Gross, “Structure of a Quantized Vortex in Boson Systems,” Il Nuovo Cimento 20, 454–477 (1961), doi:10.1007/BF02731494.
  • A. J. Leggett, “Bose–Einstein Condensation in the Alkali Gases: Some Fundamental Concepts,” Reviews of Modern Physics 73, 307–356 (2001), doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.73.307.
  • E. H. Lieb, R. Seiringer, and J. Yngvason, “Bosons in a Trap: A Rigorous Derivation of the Gross–Pitaevskii Energy Functional,” Physical Review A 61, 043602 (2000), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.61.043602.
  • C. J. Pethick and H. Smith, Bose–Einstein Condensation in Dilute Gases, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2008), doi:10.1017/CBO9780511802850.
  • L. Pitaevskii and S. Stringari, Bose–Einstein Condensation and Superfluidity (Oxford University Press, 2016), doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198758884.001.0001.
  • L. P. Pitaevskii, “Vortex Lines in an Imperfect Bose Gas,” Soviet Physics JETP 13, 451–454 (1961), official JETP text.
  • P. A. Ruprecht, M. J. Holland, K. Burnett, and M. Edwards, “Time-Dependent Solution of the Nonlinear Schrödinger Equation for Bose-Condensed Trapped Neutral Atoms,” Physical Review A 51, 4704–4711 (1995), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.51.4704.