Many body problem -> non-interacting particles

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter JustinLevy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Body Particles
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the many-body problem in quantum mechanics, specifically the idea of representing interacting particles as non-interacting quasi-particles through the grand partition function. Participants explore the implications of this approach, including the mathematical formulation and physical interpretations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the grand partition function allows any problem to be reformulated in terms of non-interacting quasi-particles, providing a specific Hamiltonian example for interacting fermions.
  • Another participant questions the commutation relations of the new creation and annihilation operators, raising concerns about whether the Hamiltonian remains Hermitian and how this affects the particle interpretation.
  • A different participant argues that the new operators may not diagonalize the Hamiltonian in the interacting case, implying that particle number conservation may not hold.
  • One participant points out a potential algebraic issue, suggesting that the polynomial needs to be factored differently to achieve the proposed quasiparticle form.
  • Another participant provides a specific form for the roots of the polynomial, indicating a need to factor out the coefficient of the lambda squared term to correctly express the partition function.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the proposed approach to rewriting the partition function and the implications for the physical interpretation of the states involved. There is no consensus on the correctness of the algebra or the physical meaning of the quasi-particles.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the algebraic manipulation of the partition function and the implications for the Hamiltonian's properties, indicating that assumptions about the operators and their relationships may not hold in the interacting case.

JustinLevy
Messages
882
Reaction score
1
many body problem --> non-interacting particles

Okay, this is a question I brought up elsewhere, but I guess I was off topic from the original thread so I decided to post here. Any help would be appreciated.

It appears to me that the grand partition function indicates any problem can be rewritten in terms of non-interacting quasi-particles. Below is an example to "demonstrate" the method, and also to give specifics in which to discuss. I haven't been able to find a flaw or make physical sense of it yet, which is where my questions lie. Any help understanding this would be much appreciated.


Consider a potential with two sites for interacting fermions.
H = \epsilon c_1^\dagger c_1 + \epsilon c_2^\dagger c_2 + t (c_2^\dagger c_1 + c_1^\dagger c_2) + A (c_1^\dagger c_2^\dagger c_1 c_2 + c_2^\dagger c_1^\dagger c_2 c_1)
Where t is a tunnelling term coupling the two sites, and A is a repulsion term. t is real. A is real and greater than zero.

zero fermion eigen solution:
|0\rangle, energy is H |0\rangle = 0 |0\rangle

one fermion eigen solutions:
let |1+\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(c_1^\dagger + c_2^\dagger)|0\rangle, energy is H|1+\rangle = (\epsilon+t) |1+\rangle
let |1-\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(c_1^\dagger - c_2^\dagger)|0\rangle, energy is H|1-\rangle = (\epsilon-t) |1-\rangle

two fermion eigen solution:
let |2\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(c_1^\dagger c_2^\dagger - c_2^\dagger c_1^\dagger)|0\rangle, energy is H|2\rangle = (2 \epsilon+A) |2\rangle

The grand partition function is therefore:
\mathcal{Z} = 1 + e^{-\beta ((\epsilon+t)-\mu)} + e^{-\beta ((\epsilon-t)-\mu)} + e^{-\beta (2\epsilon+A-2\mu)}

let \lambda = e^{-\beta (\epsilon-\mu)}, then we can clearly see the polynomial:
\mathcal{Z} = 1 + e^{-\beta t}\lambda + e^{-\beta (-t)} \lambda + e^{-\beta A} \lambda^2}
\mathcal{Z} = 1 + (e^{-\beta t}+ e^{\beta t})\lambda + e^{-\beta A} \lambda^2


And of course we can factor this polynomial to rewrite the partition function as:
\mathcal{Z} = \prod_i Q_i
Where Q_i = (\lambda - \lambda_i) and \lambda_i are the zero's of the polynomial. Notice that for this example, \lambda_i are real, less than zero, and \prod_i \lambda_i = 1.

So I can rewrite this as:
\mathcal{Z} = \prod_i Z_i
Where Z_i = (1 + e^{-\beta (\epsilon_i-\mu)}). And now the partition functions are of non-interacting quasiparticle states!

So the Hamiltonian should be able to be rewritten as such:
H = \sum_i \epsilon_i b_i^\dagger b_i
Where b_i^\dagger is the creation operator for non-interacting state i with energy \epsilon_i.

This should probably work for any interacting system of particles. You can always rewrite the polynomial as a product of the zeros. So you can always rewrite the paritition function as a system of non-interacting quasi-particles. But what are these states physically? And how do they relate to the original creation operators c_1^\dagger and c_2^\dagger ?

Any insight people can provide on this would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've thought about this some more, and started wondering: what is the commutation relation for these new creation/annihilation operators? Are they still fermions? I'm not sure how to check. Basically I want to someone prove whether or not the Hamiltonian is still Hermitian. If not, then clearly there is a mistake and using this can help me track down the mistake (hopefully).

Any ideas anyone?
 
Those operators will probably not diagonalize the Hamiltonian in the interacting case, so calling them "particles" isn't a good idea. In other words, particle number will not be conserved (doesn't commute with H)
 
hmmm... phys forums isn't letting me quote and post... so maybe this will work.

anyway, you have to factor out the e^{\beta A} in order to write your polynomial in the way yuo wrote it. and then I don't see how you rewrite it in the "quasiparticle" form. the algebra doesn't work.
 
I.e.,

you have to factor our the coefficient of the lambda^2 term.
<br /> Z=e^{-\beta A}(\lambda-\lambda_+)(\lambda-\lambda_-)<br />
where
<br /> \lambda_{\pm}=\frac{-\cosh(\beta t)e^{\beta A}\pm\sqrt{\cosh^2(\beta t)e^{2\beta A}-e^{\beta A}}}{}<br />
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K