42 CHAPTER 2.

SECOND QUANTISATION

2.4 Problem Set

2.4.1 Questions on the Second Quantisation
1. (a) Starting †
⇥ with
†
⇤ the commutation relation for bosonic creation a and annihilation oper-
ators a, a, a = 1, show that

[a† a, a] = a, [a† a, a† ] = a† .
Using this result, show that, if |↵i represents an eigenstate of the operator a† a with
eigenvalue ↵, a|↵i is also an eigenstate with eigenvalue (↵ 1) (unless a|↵i = 0). Similarly,
show that a† |↵i is an eigenstate with eigenvalue (↵ + 1).
(b) If |↵i represents a normalised eigenstate of the operator a† a with eigenvalue ↵ for all
↵ 0, show that
p p
a|↵i = ↵|↵ 1i , a† |↵i = ↵ + 1|↵ + 1i .
[Hint: consider the norm of the state.] Defining |⌦i the normalised vacuum state, annil-
iated by the operator a, show that |ni = p1n! (a† )n |⌦i is a normalised eigenstate of a† a
with eigenvalue n.
As an additonal exercise, consider the generalisation of parts (a) and (b) to the case of
fermionic operators a.
——————————————–

2. Starting from first principles, show that the second quantised representation of the one-
body kinetic energy operator is given by
Z L
p̂2
T̂ = dx a† (x) a(x).
0 2m
[Hint: it may be helpful to start with the Fourier representation in which the one-body
kinetic energy operator is diagonal and carefully transform to the real space basis.]
——————————————–

3. Transforming to the Fourier basis, show that the non-interacting three-dimensional cubic
lattice tight-binding Hamiltonian,
X⇣ ⌘
Ĥ (0) = t c†m cn + h.c. ,
hmni

assumes a diagonal form. Here hmni denotes the sum over all neighbouring sites and h.c.
is short-hand for the Hermitian conjugate.
——————————————–

4. Show that the Holstein-Primako↵ transformation,

⇣ ⌘1/2
Ŝ = a† 2S a† a , Ŝ + = (Ŝ )† , Ŝ z = S a† a ,

is consistent with the quantum spin algebra [Ŝ + , Ŝ ] = 2Ŝ z . [Hint: you may prove this
result without explicitly expansion of the square root!]
——————————————–

Quantum Condensed Matter Field Theory

2.4. PROBLEM SET 43

5. Confirm that the bosonic commutation relations of the operators ↵ and ↵† are preserved
by the Bogoluibov transformation,
✓ ◆ ✓ ◆✓ ◆
↵ cosh ✓ sinh ✓ a
= .
↵† sinh ✓ cosh ✓ a†

How and why is this transformation related to the Lorentz transformation?

——————————————–

6. (a) Making use of the spin commutation relation, [Ŝm ↵ , Ŝ ] = i ↵ Ŝ (~ = 1), apply
n mn ✏ m
˙
the identity iŜi = [Ŝi , Ĥ], to express the equation of motionP of a spin in a nearest neighbour
spin S one-dimensional Heisenberg ferromagnet, Ĥ = J m Ŝm · Ŝm+1 .
(b) Interpreting the spins as classical vectors, and taking the continuum limit, show that
the equation of motion of the hydrodynamic modes takes the form

Ṡ = Ja2 S ⇥ @ 2 S,

where a denotes the lattice spacing. [Hint: in transferring to the continuum limit, apply
2
a Taylor expansion to the spins viz. Sm+1 = Sm + a@Sm + a2 @ 2 Sm + · · ·.]
(c) Confirm that thep equation of motion is solved by the Ansatz, S(x, t) = (c cos(kx
!t), c sin(kx !t), S 2 c2 ), and determine the dispersion. Sketch a ‘snapshot’ configu-
ration of the spins in the chain.
——————————————–

7. † Valence Bond Solid: Starting with the spin 1/2 Majumdar-Ghosh Hamiltonian
N ✓ ◆
4|J| X 1 N |J|
ĤMG = Ŝn · Ŝn+1 + Ŝn · Ŝn+2 + ,
3 2 2
n=1

where the total number of sites N is even, and ŜN +1 = Ŝ1 , show that the two dimer or
QN/2
valence bond states |⌦± i = ⌦ n=1 p12 (| "i2n ⌦ | #i2n±1 | #i2n ⌦ | "i2n±1 ), are exact
ground states, i.e. |⌦+ i describes the state where neighbouring spins on sites 2n and
2n + 1 are in a total spin singlet (S = 0) state. [Hint: recast the Hamiltonian in terms of
the total spin of a triad Ĵn = Ŝn 1 + Ŝn + Ŝn+1 , and consider what this representation
implies.] Consider what would happen if the total number of sites was odd.
——————————————–

8. Su-Shrie↵er-Heeger Model: Polyacetylene consists of bonded CH groups forming an

isomeric long chain polymer. According to molecular orbital theory, the carbon atoms
are expected to be sp2 hybridised suggesting a planar configuration of the molecule. An
unpaired electron is expected to occupy a single p-orbital which points out of the plane.
The weak overlap of the p-orbitals delocalise the electrons into a ⇡-conduction band (cf.
benzene) — see Fig. 2.13a. Therefore, according to the nearly free electron theory, one
might expect the half-filled conduction band of a polyacetylene chain to be metallic.
However, the energy of a half-filled band of a one-dimension system can always be lowered
by imposing a periodic lattice distortion known as the Peirels instability (see Fig. 2.13b).

Quantum Condensed Matter Field Theory

44 CHAPTER 2. SECOND QUANTISATION

(b)

(c)

(a)

Figure 2.13: (a) Schematic diagram showing the ⇡-bonding orbitals in long chain polyacetylene.
(b) One of the configurations of the Peirels distorted chain. The double bonds represent the
short links of the lattice. (c) A topological defect separating a two domains of the ordered phase.

One can think of an enhanced probability of finding the ⇡ electron on the short bond where
the orbital overlap is stronger — the “double bond”. The aim of this problem is to explore
the instability.
(a) At its simplest level, the conduction band of polyacetylene can be modelled by a simple
Hamiltonian, due to Su-Shrie↵er-Heeger, in which the hopping matrix elements of the
electrons are modulated by the lattice distortion of the atoms. Taking the displacement
of the atomic sites from the equilibrium separation a ⌘ 1 to be un , and treating their
dynamics as classical, the e↵ective Hamiltonian takes the form
N X
X h i XN
ks
Ĥ = t (1 + un ) c†n cn+1 + h.c. + (un+1 un ) 2 ,
2
n=1 n=1

where, for simplicity, the boundary conditions are taken to be periodic. The first term
describes the hopping of electrons between neighbouring sites with a matrix element mod-
ulated by the periodic distortion of the bond-length, while the last term represents the
associated increase in the elastic energy. Taking the lattice distortion to be periodic,
un = ( 1)n ↵, and the number of sites to be even, diagonalise the Hamiltonian. [Hint:
the lattice distortion lowers the symmetry of the lattice. The Hamiltonian is most easily
diagonalised by distinguishing the two sites of the sublattice — i.e. doubling the size of
the elementary unit cell — and transforming to the Fourier representation.] Show that
the Peierls distortion of the lattice opens a gap in the spectrum at the Fermi level of the
half-filled system.
(b) By estimating the total electronic and elastic energy of the half-filled band (i.e. an
average of one electron per lattice site), show that the one-dimensional system is always
unstable towards the Peirels distortion. To complete this calculation, you will need the
approximate formula for the (elliptic) integral,
Z ⇡/2
1/2
dk 1 1 ↵2 sin2 k ' 2 + (a1 b1 ln ↵2 )↵2
⇡/2

where a1 and b1 are (unspecified) numerical constants.

† (c)For an even number of sites, the Peierls instability has two degenerate configurations
(see Fig. 2.13b) — ABABAB.. and BABABA... Comment on the qualitative form of the
ground state lattice configuration if the number of sites is odd (cf. Fig. 2.13c).
——————————————–

Quantum Condensed Matter Field Theory

2.4. PROBLEM SET 45

9. In the Schwinger boson representation quantum mechanical spin is expressed in terms

of two bosonic operators, a and b, in the form Ŝ + = a† b, Ŝ = (Ŝ + )† , Ŝ z = 12 (a† a b† b).
(a) Show that this definition is consistent with spin commutation relations [Ŝ + , Ŝ ] = 2Ŝ z .
(b) Using the bosonic commutation relations, show that
(a† )S+m (b† )S m
|S, mi = p p |⌦i,
(S + m)! (S m)!
is compatible with the definition of an eigenstate of the total spin operator Ŝ2 and Ŝ z .
Here |⌦i denotes the vacuum of the Schwinger bosons, and the total spin S defines the
physical subspace {|na , nb i : na + nb = 2S}.
——————————————–

10. † The Jordan-Wigner Transformation: So far we have shown how the algebra of
quantum mechanical spin can be expressed using boson operators. Here we show that a
representation for spin 1/2 can be obtained in terms of Fermion operators. Specifically,
let us represent an up spin as a particle and a down spin as the vacuum |0i, viz. | "i ⌘
|1i = f † |0i, and | #i ⌘ |0i = f |1i. In this representation the spin raising and lowering
operators are expressed in the form Ŝ + = f † and Ŝ = f , while Ŝ z = f † f 1/2.
(a) With this definition, confirm that the spins obey the algebra [Ŝ + , Ŝ ] = 2Ŝ z .
However, there is a problem: spins on di↵erent sites commute while fermion operators
anticommute, e.g. Si+ Sj+ = Sj+ Si+ , but fi† fj† = fj† fi† . To obtain a faithful spin represen-
tation, it is necessary cancel this unwanted sign. Although a general procedure is hard to
formulate, in one dimension, this can be achieved by a non-linear transformation, viz.
P P 1
Ŝl+ = fl† ei⇡ j<l n̂j , Ŝl = e i⇡ j<l n̂j fl , Ŝlz = fl† fl .
2
Operationally, this seemingly complicated transformation has a straightforward interpre-
tation: in one dimension, the particles can be ordered on the line. By counting the number
of particles ‘to the left’ we can assign an overall phase of +1 or 1 to a given configuration
and thereby transmute the particles into a fermions. (Put di↵erently, the exchange to two
fermions induces a sign change which is compensated by the factor arising from the phase
— the ‘Jordan-Wigner string’.)
+ Ŝ †
(b) Using the Jordan-Wigner representation, show that Ŝm m+1 = fm fm+1 .
(c) For the spin 1/2 anisotropic quantum Heisenberg spin chain, the spin Hamiltonian
assumes the form
X J? ⇣ + ⌘
+
Ĥ = Jz Ŝnz Ŝn+1
z
+ Ŝn Ŝn+1 + Ŝn Ŝn+1 .
n
2
Turning to the Jordan-Wigner representation, show that the Hamiltonian can be cast in
the form
X  J? ⇣ ⌘ ✓
1 †
◆
† † †
Ĥ = fn fn+1 + h.c. + Jz fn fn + fn fn fn+1 fn+1 .
n
2 4

(d) The mapping above shows that the one-dimensional quantum spin 1/2 XY-model (i.e.
Jz = 0) can be diagonalised as a non-interacting theory of spinless fermions. In this case,
show that the spectrum assumes the form ✏k = J? cos ka.
——————————————–

Quantum Condensed Matter Field Theory