How do you analyze interactions in K-space with vector $\rho$ and planes m ± 2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Petar Mali
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Planes Vector
Petar Mali
Messages
283
Reaction score
0
If I have cubic structure where plane is define by vector \rho and in z direction I have planes ...m-2,m-1,m,m+1,m+2...

and if I have for example

\sum_{m,\vec{\rho}}\hat{B}_{m,\vec{\rho}}\hat{B}_{m+1,\vec{\rho}}

how to go with that in K-space?

If I had\sum_{m,\vec{\rho}}\hat{B}_{m,\vec{\rho}}\hat{B}_{m,\vec{\rho}}

I will say

(m,\vec{\rho})=\vec{n}

and then I will have\sum_{\vec{n}}\hat{B}_{\vec{n}}\hat{B}_{\vec{n}}=\sum_{\vec{n}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\sum_{\vec{k}}\hat{B}_{\vec{k}}e^{i\vec{k}\cdot\vec{n}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\sum_{\vec{q}}\hat{B}_{\vec{q}}e^{i\vec{q}\cdot\vec{n}}

=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{\vec{k},\vec{q}}\hat{B}_{\vec{k}}\hat{B}_{\vec{q}}N\delta_{\vec{k},-\vec{q}}=\sum_{\vec{k}}\hat{B}_{\vec{k}}\hat{B}_{-\vec{k}}

But what to do in case with m+1. Thanks for your answer!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I am not familiar with these equations, but I try to give some opinions for discussion.

The problem is that there will be an unexpected term, i.e. exp(i*q), if the B(m)B(m+1) are transformed in K-space.

As I learned, B(m)B(m+1) denotes the transition process between state m and state m+1.

The complete formula is usually written in the sum of V(m,m+1)B(m)B(m+1), where V(m,m+1) is the transition matrix element.

When the formula is transformed in K-space, V(m,m+1) are also transformed as V(m,k,m+1,q), or written in V(k,q) for the shortness.

And what i am thinking is that the unexpected term exp(i*q) will be absorbed in V(k,q).
That means you can do the transformation in the case of (m,m+1) just like what you did in the case of (m,m). The difference for the m and m+1 only appears in the transition matrix elements.
 
Yes, as shawl mentions you get an extra factor of exp(i*q). With the right symmetry in your lattice you will be able to combine the exponentials to end up with something like \sum_q f(q) B_q B_{-q} where f(q) is some real function, probably composed of cosines. This is exactly the sort of thing you get in tight binding, except there you have a creation and annihilation operator on different sites.
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Back
Top