Problem Set 3: Difference between revisions

From PhyWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 29: Line 29:




(3) Now consider a small external field <math>h > 0\;</math>, so that both order parameters can assume a nonzero value (Note: <math>m\;</math> will be small). By keeping only the leading terms in <math>h\;</math> and <math>m\;</math>, calculate the uniform spin susceptibility <math>\chi = \partial m/ \partial h</math>, as a function of temperature. Plot <math>\chi</math> as a function of temperature, and show that it has a cusp around <math>T_N</math>.
(3) Now consider a small external field <math>h > 0\;</math>, so that both order parameters can assume a nonzero value (Note: <math>m\;</math> will be small). By keeping only the leading terms in <math>h\;</math> and <math>m\;</math>, calculate the uniform spin susceptibility <math>\chi = \partial m/ \partial h</math>, as a function of temperature. Plot <math>\chi\;</math> as a function of temperature, and show that it has a cusp around <math>T_N\;</math>.




(4) Imagine adding a ”staggered” external field <math>h^{\dagger}</math>, which would be positive on sublattice A, but would be negative on sublattice B. Concentrate on the system with no uniform field <math>(h = 0)\;</math>, and determine the behavior of the staggered susceptibility <math>\chi^{\dagger}= \partial m^{\dagger} / \partial h^{\dagger} </math>
(4) Imagine adding a ”staggered” external field <math>h^{\dagger}</math>, which would be positive on sublattice A, but would be negative on sublattice B. Concentrate on the system with no uniform field <math>(h = 0)\;</math>, and determine the behavior of the staggered susceptibility <math>\chi^{\dagger}= \partial m^{\dagger} / \partial h^{\dagger} </math>
. Show that <math>\chi^{\dagger}</math> blows up at the Neel temperature.
. Show that <math>\chi^{\dagger}</math> blows up at the Neel temperature.

Revision as of 23:03, 29 January 2009

Ising antiferromagnet on a ”bipartite” lattice

Hamiltonian:

Failed to parse (syntax error): {\displaystyle H = \frac{J}{2} \sum_{<ij>} S_i S_j -− h\sum_i S_i } ,

with the sum is over all nearest neighbor sites i and j. Note that now the interaction between spins minimizes the energy when the spins anti-allign, i.e. for Failed to parse (syntax error): {\displaystyle S_i = −- S_j} . A bipartite lattice is one that has two sublattices, so that each spin on sublattice A interacts only with some spin on the other sublattice B. In this case, in an antiferromagnetic state, each sublattice assumes a uniform magnetization. We can introduce the magnetization for each sublattice


The average magnetization then can be written as

and the so-called ”staggered” magnetization is defined by the difference between the two sublattices

For perfect ferromagnetic order , while for perfect antiferromagnetic order .


(1) Use Weiss mean-field decoupling to replace one of the spins in the Hamiltonian by its thermal average. The Weiss field experienced by a given spin is then proportional to the sublattice magnetization on the other sublattice. Write down self-consistent equations for and , and express them through the order parameters and .


(2) Assume that , so that , and solve the mean-field equations by expanding in . Determine the Neel (ordering) temperature, and calculate the order-parameter exponent.


(3) Now consider a small external field , so that both order parameters can assume a nonzero value (Note: will be small). By keeping only the leading terms in and , calculate the uniform spin susceptibility , as a function of temperature. Plot as a function of temperature, and show that it has a cusp around .


(4) Imagine adding a ”staggered” external field , which would be positive on sublattice A, but would be negative on sublattice B. Concentrate on the system with no uniform field , and determine the behavior of the staggered susceptibility . Show that blows up at the Neel temperature.