Why Does My Spin Chain Energy Calculation Differ from the Textbook?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jorgen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chain Energy
AI Thread Summary
The energy calculation for a chain of spins in a magnetic field of H = 0 shows discrepancies between personal calculations and textbook results. For all spins aligned up, the energy is correctly calculated as U = -NJ. However, when half the spins are up and half are down, the individual calculation yields U = -(N-2)J, while the textbook states U = -(N-4)J. The difference arises from considering the energy change at the up-down neighbor locations, which each contribute +2J due to periodic boundary conditions. Understanding these interactions clarifies the textbook's answer.
jorgen
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I am supposed to calculate the energy of chain of spins where the magnetic field H = 0. For the first chain the spins are all aligned in the same direction - up - hence the energy

U = -NJ

where N is the total number of spins. Next, the half the chain is spin up and the other half is spin down with periodic boundary conditions first and last interact.

UpUpUp...UpDownDown...Down

here I get the total energy U = -(N-2)*J but the book says -(N-4)*J which I really don't understand. Any comments appreciated - thanks in advance

Best Jorgen
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi jorgen,

jorgen said:
Hi all,

I am supposed to calculate the energy of chain of spins where the magnetic field H = 0. For the first chain the spins are all aligned in the same direction - up - hence the energy

U = -NJ

where N is the total number of spins. Next, the half the chain is spin up and the other half is spin down with periodic boundary conditions first and last interact.

UpUpUp...UpDownDown...Down

here I get the total energy U = -(N-2)*J but the book says -(N-4)*J which I really don't understand. Any comments appreciated - thanks in advance

Best Jorgen

I hope I am understanding the situation you describe, but the book answer makes sense to me. Each location of where there is an up-down neighbor represents an energy change (relative to the up-up or down-down case) of +2J (where J is the interaction energy magnitude between spin neighbors), because it goes from -J to +J. With the periodic boundary conditions, there are two of these locations.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top