Please correct me if I make any mistakes along the way.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Suppose we have a simple tight-binding Hamiltonian

[itex]H=\sum_i \epsilon _i c_i^\dagger c_i - t\sum_{\langle i j\rangle} c_i^\dagger c_j + h.c.,[/itex]

In half-filling systems, we tend to impose a constraint such that each site has only one electron on average, i.e.,

[itex]\langle c^\dagger_i c_i\rangle = 1[/itex]

Suppose I were to ensure that this constraint is in the Hamiltonian, I add a Lagrange multiplier (which ends up to be a chemical potential?)

[itex]H=\sum_i \epsilon _i c_i^\dagger c_i - t\sum_{\langle i j\rangle} c_i^\dagger c_j + h.c. - \mu_i (c^\dagger_i c_i-1),[/itex]

Now my confusion comes in, how does the constraint work here, since the 1 is a constant, and can be effectively ignored to obtain a Hamiltonian like

[itex]H=\sum_i (\epsilon_i - \mu_i) c_i^\dagger c_i - t\sum_{\langle i j\rangle} c_i^\dagger c_j + h.c.,[/itex]

so how can I ensure that my constraint is really doing anything in mean-field (MF) since I could have the constraint be any other number?

I'm working only in the mean-field approximation.

I received a suggestion to square the constraint, and hence end up with a quartic term, that can be solved perturbatively. However, it seems at zeroth (first?) order in mean-field, the entire term disappears

[itex](c^\dagger_i c_i-1)^2 = c_i^\dagger c_i c_i^\dagger c_i -2 c_i^\dagger c_i +1[/itex]

Under MF, with the equation [itex]AB \approx \langle A\rangle B + A\langle B\rangle - \langle A\rangle \langle B \rangle,[/itex]

[itex] 2\langle c_i^\dagger c_i \rangle c_i^\dagger c_i - \langle c_i^\dagger c_i \rangle \langle c_i^\dagger c_i \rangle -2 c_i^\dagger c_i +1 = 2 c_i^\dagger c_i - 1\cdot 1 - 2c_i^\dagger c_i +1=0[/itex]

I hope someone can relieve some of my confusion.

Specifically, I am working with slave fermions and want to impose [itex]\langle f_i^\dagger f_i \rangle=2[/itex] for a spin, [itex]S=1[/itex] system, and with itinerant electrons with [itex]\langle c_i^\dagger c_i \rangle=1[/itex]

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Constraints in Hamiltonian

Loading...

Similar Threads - Constraints Hamiltonian | Date |
---|---|

A The Hamiltonian of the XY model -- when is it called the XX model? | Mar 2, 2018 |

A Physical meaning of terms in the Qi, Wu, Zhang model | Jan 20, 2018 |

A Eigenvectors of a Floquet Hamiltonian | Aug 24, 2017 |

The Constraint Based Statistics - Beyond the Entropy Based Statistical Mechanics | Apr 24, 2010 |

States counting of many particales under a constraint | Oct 27, 2009 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**