Problem Set 3: Difference between revisions

From PhyWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
Hamiltonian:
Hamiltonian:


<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>


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  
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  
Line 21: Line 21:
<math>m^{\dagger} = 1</math>.
<math>m^{\dagger} = 1</math>.


(a) 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
(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
then proportional to the sublattice magnetization on the other sublattice. Write
order parameters <math>m</math> and <math>m^{\dagger}</math>.
down self-consistent equations for mA and mB, and express them through the
 
order parameters m and m†.
 
(b) Assume that h = 0, so that m = 0, and solve the mean-field equations
(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.
by expanding in m†. Determine the Neel (ordering) temperature, and calculate
 
the order-parameter exponent .
 
(c*) Now consider a small external field h > 0, so that both order parameters
(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. Show that <math>\chi</math> has a cusp around <math>T_N</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 = @m/@h, as a
 
function of temperature. Show that has a cusp around TN.
(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
(d*) Imagine adding a ”staggered” external field h†, which would be positive
 
on sublattice A, but would be negative on sublattice B. Concentrate on the system
<math>\chi^{\dagger}= \partial m^{\dagger} / \partial h^{\dagger} </math>
with no uniform field (h = 0), and determine the behavior of the staggered
susceptibility
�† =
@m†
@h†
.
.
Show that �† blows up at the Neel temperature.
Show that <math>\chi^{\dagger}</math> blows up at the Neel temperature.

Revision as of 15:49, 27 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 }

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. Show that 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.