SU(3)-invariant Heisenberg XXX chain

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maybe_Memorie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chain Heisenberg
Maybe_Memorie
Messages
346
Reaction score
0
I'm studying the SU(3) invariant XXX chain as part of my Bachelor's thesis.

The monodromy matrix of this system can be written as a 3x3 matrix. We perform a 2x2 decomposition of it and write is as ##T(\mu)=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
A(\mu) & B(\mu) \\
C(\mu) & D (\mu)
\end{array} \right)##

For a system to be integrable it has an R-matrix which satisfies the Yang-Baxter relation. I don't know how to decompose the R-matrix though.

Kulish/Resithiken writes it as, for the GL(N) case,
##R(\mu)=\left( \begin{array}{cccc}
\mu & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \mu I & I & 0 \\
0 & I & \mu I & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & S(\mu)
\end{array} \right) ##
where I is the 2x2 identity matrix and S(u) is the SU(2) R-matrix.

The main reason this is confusing me is because when we write the Identity matrix and S(u) in the blocks we don't get the correct R-matrix, so i suspect there's a change of basis going on or something.

Any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks for the post! Sorry you aren't generating responses at the moment. Do you have any further information, come to any new conclusions or is it possible to reword the post?
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top