Time reversal symmetry in Topological insulators of HgTe quantum Wells


by Minato
Tags: hgte, insulators, quantum, reversal, symmetry, time, topological, wells
Minato
Minato is offline
#1
Apr2-12, 02:31 AM
P: 4
Hi everyone,

While reading about the BHZ model used to describe HgTe quantum well topological insulators, I read at many places that the effective Hamiltonian (which is a 4 x 4 matrix) can be written in block diagonal form and the lower 2x2 block can be derived from upper 2x2 block as follows:
[H(k)][/lower]=[H(-k)][/*]

This effective Hamiltonian is said to be Time reversal symmetric and then using Cramer's degeneracy, it is said that the dispersion relations for upspin and down spin should intersect at [k][/x]=0.

I want to just show this through simple mathematical steps, but I am unable to get this result. In order to show time reversal invariance, I tried the following equation:
[T][/-1]HT=H, where T is the Time reversal symmetry operator.
but I am not sure what form of T should be used. I tried to use the following form:
T=-i x [0 [σ][/y];[σ][/y] 0]K {K is complex conjugation which is a 4x4 matrix with [0][/2x2] in the diagonals and Pauli matrix in y as off diagonal elements.}

But this is not giving me that BHZ Hamiltonian is time reversal symmetric.
Can anybody help me where I am going wrong?

Thanks

Regards
Minato
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Researchers develop scalable methods for manufacturing metamaterials
Researchers find tin selenide shows promise for efficiently converting waste heat into electrical energy
After 13 years, progress in pitch-drop experiment (w/ video)
M Quack
M Quack is offline
#2
Apr2-12, 03:30 AM
P: 638
Can you show us the explicit form of the Hamiltonian you start out with?

Time reversal inverts the sign of momentum k and of spin/magnetic moment s.

In the Schroedinger equation, complex conjugation of a wave function it will result in time reversal.

With that you practically have your relation.

T H(k) T psi = T H(k) psi* = H*(-k) psi

btw, I have trouble reading your notation with []. Can you try to use [itex]?
Minato
Minato is offline
#3
Apr2-12, 04:10 AM
P: 4
I am sorry for the formatting in the previous post.

The original Hamiltonian for BHZ model used to describe HgTe quantum well Topological insulators is
[tex]H=\left(\begin{array}{cc}h_{+}(k)&0\\0&{h_{-}(k)}\end{array}\right)[/tex]

[tex]{h_{-}(k)}=h_{+}^{*}(-k)[/tex]

here the meaning of * is to take the complex conjugate of the matrix.
[tex]h_{+}(k)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}M-(B_{+})(k_{x}^{2}-\frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial y^{2}}) & {A(k_x-\frac{\partial}{\partial y})}\\{A(k_x+\frac{\partial}{\partial y})} & {-M+B_{-}(k_{x}^{2}-\frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial y^{2}}) }\end{array}\right)[/tex]

where [tex] M, A, B_{+},B_{-} [/tex] are various system parameters.
The form of Time reversal operator which I have used is:
[tex]T=-i\left(\begin{array}{cc}0&0&0&-i\\0&0&i&0\\0&-i&0&0\\i&0&0&0\end{array}\right)K[/tex]
where K is the conjugation operator
I am trying to prove the following equation to show that the above Hamiltonian is Time reversal symmetric:
[tex]H=T^{-1}HT[/tex]


Regards
Minato

M Quack
M Quack is offline
#4
Apr2-12, 06:43 AM
P: 638

Time reversal symmetry in Topological insulators of HgTe quantum Wells


Should that not be [itex]A(k_x \pm i \frac{\partial}{\partial y})[/itex]???

Also, with the time reversal operator you write, I get [itex]T^2 = -1[/itex] instead of [itex]T^2=1[/itex], so there are too many "i"s.
DrDu
DrDu is offline
#5
Apr2-12, 07:30 AM
Sci Advisor
P: 3,370
Quote Quote by M Quack View Post
Should that not be [itex]A(k_x \pm i \frac{\partial}{\partial y})[/itex]???

Also, with the time reversal operator you write, I get [itex]T^2 = -1[/itex] instead of [itex]T^2=1[/itex], so there are too many "i"s.
He wrote something about the system showing Cramers degeneracy. Then I would expect T^2=-1.
Minato
Minato is offline
#6
Apr2-12, 09:10 AM
P: 4
Quote Quote by M Quack View Post
Should that not be [itex]A(k_x \pm i \frac{\partial}{\partial y})[/itex]???

Also, with the time reversal operator you write, I get [itex]T^2 = -1[/itex] instead of [itex]T^2=1[/itex], so there are too many "i"s.
Regarding the first point, it is [itex]A(k_x \pm i k_{y})[/itex] which will give the form I have earlier written.([itex]k_{y}=-i \frac{\partial}{\partial y}[/itex])

Regarding the second point, the system is fermionic. That is why, [itex]T^2=-1[/itex] is required.

Regards
Minato
M Quack
M Quack is offline
#7
Apr3-12, 07:32 AM
P: 638
Thanks for clarifying that.

Going with the 2x2 block motif, let's write [itex]
T = -i \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & t \\ t & 0 \end{array} \right)K
[/itex] with [itex]
t = \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & -i \\ i & 0 \end{array} \right)
[/itex] such that [itex] t^\star t = -1 [/itex]

We already know that [itex] T^2 = -1[/itex] and therefore [itex]T^{-1} = -T[/itex]

Then

[itex] T^{-1} H T = i \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & t \\ t & 0 \end{array} \right) K
\left( \begin{array}{cc} h_+(k) & 0 \\ 0 & h_-(k) \end{array} \right)
(-i) \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & t \\ t & 0 \end{array} \right) K
=
-\left( \begin{array}{cc} t h^*_-(k) t^* & 0 \\ 0 & t h_+^*(k) t^* \end{array} \right)
[/itex]

We still have to show [itex] h_{\pm}(k) = -t h_{\mp}^*(k) t^*[/itex], but at least we're down to 2x2 matrices.
M Quack
M Quack is offline
#8
Apr3-12, 07:43 AM
P: 638
[itex]
-t h_+^* t^*
[/itex] gives [itex]
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-M^* + B_-^* (k_x^2 - \frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2})
&
-A^*(k_x + \frac{\partial}{\partial y})
\\
-A^*(k_x - \frac{\partial}{\partial y})
&
M^* - B_+^* (k_x^2 - \frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2})
\end{array}
\right)
[/itex]
Minato
Minato is offline
#9
Apr3-12, 08:28 AM
P: 4
Quote Quote by M Quack View Post
[itex]
-t h_+^* t^*
[/itex] gives [itex]
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-M^* + B_-^* (k_x^2 - \frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2})
&
-A^*(k_x + \frac{\partial}{\partial y})
\\
-A^*(k_x - \frac{\partial}{\partial y})
&
M^* - B_+^* (k_x^2 - \frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2})
\end{array}
\right)
[/itex]
You are right regarding this. I forgot to tell that all the parameters are real so you can remove the conjugation. But by no means, I have [itex]B_{+}=\pm B_{-}[/itex].

I have come to know 2 ways to solve this problem.
(1) First is, I am probably choosing wrong matrix for Time reversal transformations. As my equation is for massless Dirac fermions, I should use proper relativistic quantum mechanics to calculate the transformation matrix for time reversal.
(2)Second is to use CPT symmetry. The argument goes as : if I apply Parity operation, [itex]h(k)-> h(-k)[/itex] and applying Conjugation operation, it should go to [itex]h(-k)-> h^{*}(-k)[/itex] which is the lower 2 χ 2 matrix of the Hamiltonian. These 2 are equivalent to applying [itex]T^{-1}[/itex]. I know that there are some loop holes in this derivation also, but I just want to give a general idea on how it can be solved.

I am trying these methods if they work.

Regards
Minato


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Time reversal symmetry General Physics 2
Time reversal symmetry breaking Quantum Physics 8
Time Reversal Symmetry General Physics 17
Time reversal symmetry breaking in EM Classical Physics 1
Time Reversal Symmetry Question Cosmology 2