A Simultanious eigenstate of Hubbard Hamiltonian and Spin operator in tw

schwarzg
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Hubbard Hamiltonian seems not to commute to S^2 operator. help
Please see this page and give me an advice.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/q...hamiltonian-and-spin-operator-in-two-site-mod
Known fact

1. If two operators ##A## and ##B## commute, ##[A,B]=0##, they have simultaneous eigenstates. That means ##A|a,b\rangle=a|a,b\rangle## and ##B|a,b\rangle=b|a,b\rangle##.
2. Hubbard Hamiltonian ##H_\text{hub}## is symmetric w.r.t. SU(2) spin operators. Thus ##[H,S^z]=[H,\vec{S}^2]=0##.

##\Rightarrow## Thus, eigenstates of ##H_\text{hub}## are also eigenstates of ##\vec{S}^2##.

To verify the above conclusion, I set a two-site Hubbard model with one ##\uparrow## and one ##\downarrow## fermions.
$$H=-t\sum_{\sigma=\uparrow,\downarrow}(c^\dagger_{1\sigma}c_{2\sigma}+h.c.)+U\sum_{i=1,2}(n_{i\uparrow} n_{i,\downarrow})$$
Without interaction, the ground state of the Hamiltonian is given by
$$|g\rangle=\frac{1}{2}(|\uparrow\downarrow ,0\rangle+|\uparrow,\downarrow\rangle+|\downarrow,\uparrow\rangle+|0,\uparrow\downarrow\rangle)$$
The total spin operator ##\vec{S}^2## is written in fermionic operator as
$$\vec{S}^2=\frac{1}{2}(S^+ S^- + S^- S^+)+(S^z)^2\\=\sum_{i=1,2}\sum_{j=1,2}[\frac{1}{2}(S_i^+ S_j^- + S_i^- S_j^+)+S_i^z S_j^z]$$
where each local operators are
$$
S^+_i=c^\dagger_{i,\uparrow} c_{i,\downarrow}\\
S^-_i=c^\dagger_{i,\downarrow} c_{i,\uparrow}\\
S^z_i=\frac{1}{2}(c^\dagger_{i,\uparrow} c_{i,\uparrow}-c^\dagger_{i,\downarrow} c_{i,\downarrow})
$$
Since ##|g\rangle## is an eigenstate of ##H##, so it must be an eigenstate of ##\vec{S}^2##. However, for each basis, we have
$$\vec{S}^2|\uparrow\downarrow,0\rangle=0\\
\vec{S}^2|\uparrow,\downarrow\rangle=|\uparrow,\downarrow\rangle+|\downarrow,\uparrow\rangle\\
\vec{S}^2|\downarrow,\uparrow\rangle=|\uparrow,\downarrow\rangle+|\downarrow,\uparrow\rangle\\
\vec{S}^2|0,\uparrow\downarrow\rangle=0$$
Thus we have
$$\vec{S}^2|g\rangle=|\uparrow,\downarrow\rangle+|\downarrow,\uparrow\rangle\\
\neq j(j+1)|g\rangle
$$

Where does the contradiction come from?

<Moderator's note: use ## ## to enclose inlined equations, not $ $.>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
schwarzg said:
##\Rightarrow## Thus, eigenstates of ##H_\text{hub}## are also eigenstates of ##\vec{S}^2##.
That is incorrect. Commutating operators have a common basis of eigenstates, but that does not mean that any eigenstate of one operator is also an eigenstate of the other. In the case of degenerate eigenstates of one operator, there might be only certain linear combinations of these eigenstates that will result in eigenstates of the other operator. This appears to be what you have here.
 
  • Like
Likes schwarzg
DrClaude said:
In the case of degenerate eigenstates of one operator, there might be only certain linear combinations of these eigenstates that will result in eigenstates of the other operator.
Thank you for your explanation. However, the ground state of the Hubbard model is non-degenerated. Thus, it is not the case you mentioned. Thus I still guess that ##|g\rangle## must be an eigenstate of ##\vec{S}^2## still. Is there are another error in my logic?
 
Last edited:
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
61
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
527
Back
Top