Graduate Pierels substitution integral approximation

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the Peierls substitution in the context of a tight binding model as presented in the textbook "Topological Insulators and Topological Superconductors." A specific approximation involving the vector potential A(s,t) is debated, particularly the transition from equation 3.9a to 3.10, where a factor of 1/2 appears to vanish. Participants argue that this factor should not be included in the final expression, suggesting a potential error in the textbook. The consensus is that the textbook contains multiple inaccuracies, and expressions should be treated as correct "up to multiple numerical factors." This highlights the need for careful scrutiny of mathematical formulations in physics literature.
DeathbyGreen
Messages
83
Reaction score
15
In the textbook "Topological Insulators and Topological Superconductors" by B. Andrei Bernevig and Taylor L. Hughes, there is a chapter titled "Hall conductance and Chern Numbers". In section 3.1.2 (page 17) they are discussing including an external field in a tight binding model, the Peierls substitution. They make the statement that "if the vector potential" A(s,t) "does not vary widely over the integration path" (when moving from lattice site R to R') we can use the approximation

\int_R^{R'}A(s,t)\cdot ds \approx (R-R')\cdot \frac{1}{2}(A(R',t)+A(R,t)) \approx. (R'-R)\cdot \frac{1}{2}A\left(\frac{R'+R}{2},t\right)

which is equation (3.9a). In equation 3.10, they use this substitution (changing variables with r=i-j):

<br /> H_{ext} = \sum_{k_1k_2\alpha\beta}c^{\dagger}_{k_1\alpha}c_{k_2\beta}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{rj}e^{i(k_2-k_1)j - ik_1r}h^{\alpha\beta}_r(t)i\int_j^{j+r}A_p(t)dl\\<br /> \approx<br /> \sum_{k_1k_2\alpha\beta}c^{\dagger}_{k_1\alpha}c_{k_2\beta}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{rj}e^{i(k_2-k_1)j - ik_1r}h^{\alpha\beta}_r(t)irA_p(j<br /> +\frac{r}{2},t)<br />

I don't understand where the \frac{1}{2} goes. It seems to disappear going from equation 3.9a to 3.10.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
DeathbyGreen said:
In the textbook "Topological Insulators and Topological Superconductors" by B. Andrei Bernevig and Taylor L. Hughes, there is a chapter titled "Hall conductance and Chern Numbers". In section 3.1.2 (page 17) they are discussing including an external field in a tight binding model, the Peierls substitution. They make the statement that "if the vector potential" A(s,t) "does not vary widely over the integration path" (when moving from lattice site R to R') we can use the approximation

\int_R^{R&#039;}A(s,t)\cdot ds \approx (R-R&#039;)\cdot \frac{1}{2}(A(R&#039;,t)+A(R,t)) \approx. (R&#039;-R)\cdot \frac{1}{2}A\left(\frac{R&#039;+R}{2},t\right)
The factor 1/2 you have in the last expression on the right should not be there. (## A(s,t) ## is simply getting evaluated at the midpoint of the interval.)
 
  • Like
Likes DeathbyGreen
Thank you! Do you have a source for that? The equation I wrote

\int_R^{R&#039;}A(s,t)\cdot ds \approx (R-R&#039;)\cdot \frac{1}{2}(A(R&#039;,t)+A(R,t)) \approx. (R&#039;-R)\cdot \frac{1}{2}A\left(\frac{R&#039;+R}{2},t\right)

Is straight from the textbook, no typos.
 
DeathbyGreen said:
Thank you! Do you have a source for that? The equation I wrote

\int_R^{R&#039;}A(s,t)\cdot ds \approx (R-R&#039;)\cdot \frac{1}{2}(A(R&#039;,t)+A(R,t)) \approx. (R&#039;-R)\cdot \frac{1}{2}A\left(\frac{R&#039;+R}{2},t\right)

Is straight from the textbook, no typos.
Then they goofed. This is basic calculus. The 1/2 in the 3rd expression (in front of the ## A ##), is in error.
 
  • Like
Likes MisterX and DeathbyGreen
That textbook is full of errors. They did a really bad job.
 
From my lecturers and students in QFT,Electromagnetism, Statistical Mechanics and Solid State Physics every expression should be regarded as "upto multiple numerical factor" correct.

In your case it's only half, that's superb! :-D
 
Thread 'Unexpected irregular reflection signal from a high-finesse cavity'
I am observing an irregular, aperiodic noise pattern in the reflection signal of a high-finesse optical cavity (finesse ≈ 20,000). The cavity is normally operated using a standard Pound–Drever–Hall (PDH) locking configuration, where an EOM provides phase modulation. The signals shown in the attached figures were recorded with the modulation turned off. Under these conditions, when scanning the laser frequency across a cavity resonance, I expected to observe a simple reflection dip. Instead...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
536
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K