Problem Set 3: Difference between revisions

From PhyWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
<math> H = \frac{J}{2} \sum_{<ij>} S_i S_j  -− h\sum_i S_i </math>,
<math> H = \frac{J}{2} \sum_{<ij>} S_i S_j  -− h\sum_i S_i </math>,


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 <math>S_i = −- S_j</math> . 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  
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 <math>S_i = −- S_j\;</math> . 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  


<math>m_A = < S^{(A)} >; \; \; m_A = < S^{(A)} >.</math>
<math>m_A = < S^{(A)} >; \; \; m_A = < S^{(A)} >.</math>
Line 18: Line 18:
<math>m^{\dagger} = \frac{1}{2} (m_A - m_B ),</math>
<math>m^{\dagger} = \frac{1}{2} (m_A - m_B ),</math>


For perfect ferromagnetic order <math>m = 1</math>, while for perfect antiferromagnetic order
For perfect ferromagnetic order <math>m = 1\;</math>, while for perfect antiferromagnetic order
<math>m^{\dagger} = 1</math>.
<math>m^{\dagger} = 1</math>.



Revision as of 23:04, 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.