Determining Energy Values for a One-Dimension Spin Chain

  • Thread starter Thread starter PenKnight
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Eigenvalues Spin
PenKnight
Messages
11
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Same problem as this old post
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=188714


What I'm having problems with is determining the H_{ij} components of the Hamiltonian of a one dimension N site spin chain. And then getting out somehow energy value to prove

<br /> \lim_{n-&gt;\inf}\frac{E_{0}}{N} = \ln{2}+ \frac{1}{4}<br />

Homework Equations



The hamitonian of the spin chain

<br /> \sum^{k=0}_{N-1}[H_{z}(k)+H_{f}(k)]<br />

where

<br /> H_{z}(k)=S^{z}(k)S^{z}(k+1)<br />

<br /> H_{f}(k)=\frac{1}{2}[S^{+}(k)S^{-}(k+1)+S^{-}(k)S^{+}(k+1)]<br />

The above can be gain from determing Sx and Sy from the rasing and lowering operators.

The Attempt at a Solution



I can see that at any site location within a state ,( a state is some configuration of site which hold either +- 1/2), the hamilotinan will pull out these eigenvalues.

<br /> H|...\uparrow\uparrow... \rangle = S^{z}(k)S^{z}(k+1)|...\uparrow\uparrow... \rangle<br />

<br /> = S^{z}(k)\frac{1}{2}|...\uparrow\uparrow ...\rangle =\frac{1}{4}|...\uparrow\uparrow ...\rangle<br />

And for the other possible combinations

<br /> H|...\uparrow\downarrow... \rangle = -\frac{1}{4}|...\uparrow\downarrow ...\rangle + \frac{1}{2}|...\downarrow\uparrow... \rangle<br />

<br /> H|...\downarrow\uparrow ...\rangle = -\frac{1}{4}|...\downarrow\uparrow... \rangle + \frac{1}{2}|...\uparrow\downarrow... \rangle<br />

<br /> H|...\downarrow\downarrow...\rangle = \frac{1}{4}|...\downarrow\downarrow...\rangle<br />

But then finding the energy values ( taking the &lt;\phi | H|\phi &gt; )
will lead all states to having the same energy which is not correct. So either I've missed somthing or computing the H matrix incorrectly.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
PenKnight said:
The hamitonian of the spin chain

<br /> \sum^{k=0}_{N-1}[H_{z}(k)+H_{f}(k)]<br />

Surely you mean:

H= \sum_{k=1}^{N}[H_{z}(k)+H_{f}(k)]

Right?
I can see that at any site location within a state ,( a state is some configuration of site which hold either +- 1/2), the hamilotinan will pull out these eigenvalues.

<br /> H|...\uparrow\uparrow... \rangle = S^{z}(k)S^{z}(k+1)|...\uparrow\uparrow... \rangle<br />...

This makes no sense to me...All N particles can each be in the up or down state, and the Hamiltonian acts on all N particles... you can't just pick out two particles in a chain and calculate the effect of H that way...You can however, say H(k)|...\uparrow\uparrow... \rangle = \frac{1}{4}|...\uparrow\uparrow... \rangle and so on, for H(k)=H_z(k)+H_f(k)
 
Last edited:
Yep your right.

I was trying to show what the spin operators pulls out for a particular pairing but mucked up in notation. I think going through a couple of examples may get my head around this.

Here the first one with N = 3 and considering periodic boundary condition.

<br /> H|\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\rangle =<br /> H_z|\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\rangle +<br /> H_f|\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\rangle<br />

<br /> =<br /> (-\frac{1}{4} -\frac{1}{4}+ \frac{1}{4} )|\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\rangle +<br /> \frac{1}{2} ( |\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow\rangle +|\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow\rangle)<br />

I'm not actually sure how to get the energy value with the H_f terms eigenstates. Do i just add up all the co-efficient?

Edit
I think I've got it now. I'll be back if I can't get the eigenvalues from the Hamiltonian.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top