Problem Set 3: Difference between revisions
(New page: Problem Set 3: Ising antiferromagnet on a ”bipartite” lattice, is defined by the Hamiltonian H = J 2 X<ij> SiSj − hXi Si. Note that now the interaction between spins minimizes the ...) |
m (beta) |
||
(17 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Ising antiferromagnet on a ”bipartite” lattice''' | |||
Hamiltonian: | |||
The average magnetization then can be written as | <math> H = \frac{J}{2} \sum_{<ij>} S_i S_j -− h\sum_i S_i </math>, | ||
m = | |||
1 | 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 | ||
2 | |||
( | <math>m_A = < S^{(A)} >; \; \; m_B = < S^{(B)} >.</math> | ||
and the so-called ”staggered” magnetization is defined by the difference between | |||
the two sublattices | |||
The average magnetization then can be written as | |||
1 | |||
2 | <math>m = \frac{1}{2} (m_A + m_B ),</math> | ||
( | |||
For perfect ferromagnetic order m = 1, while for perfect antiferromagnetic order | and the so-called ”staggered” magnetization is defined by the difference between the two sublattices | ||
( | <math>m^{\dagger} = \frac{1}{2} (m_A - m_B ),</math> | ||
by its thermal average. The Weiss field experienced by a given spin is | |||
then proportional to the sublattice magnetization on the other sublattice. Write | For perfect ferromagnetic order <math>m = 1\;</math>, while for perfect antiferromagnetic order | ||
down self-consistent equations for | <math>m^{\dagger} = 1</math>. | ||
order parameters m and | |||
( | |||
by expanding in | (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 <math>m_A\;</math> and <math>m_B\;</math>, and express them through the | ||
the order-parameter exponent | order parameters <math>m\;</math> and <math>m^{\dagger}</math>. | ||
( | |||
can assume a nonzero value (Note: m will be small). By keeping only the leading | |||
terms in h and m, calculate the uniform spin susceptibility | (2) Assume that <math>h = 0\;</math>, so that <math>m = 0\;</math>, and solve the mean-field equations by expanding in <math>m^{\dagger}</math>. Determine the Neel (ordering) temperature, and calculate the order-parameter exponent <math>\beta</math> . | ||
function of temperature. | |||
( | |||
on sublattice A, but would be negative on sublattice B. Concentrate on the system | (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>. | ||
with no uniform field (h = 0), and determine the behavior of the staggered | |||
susceptibility | |||
(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 |
Latest revision as of 20:40, 3 February 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.