Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,082 questions , 2,232 unanswered
5,353 answers , 22,789 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
820 active unimported users
More ...

  Is it possible to make statements about bosonic/fermionic systems by taking the limit $\theta\to \pi$ or $\theta\to 0$, of an anyonic system?

+ 5 like - 0 dislike
1689 views

One might naïvely write the (anti-)commutation relations for bosonic/fermionic ladder operators as limits

$$ \delta_{k,\ell} = \bigl[ \hat{b}_{k}, \hat{b}_{\ell}^\dagger \bigr] = \hat{b}_{k} \hat{b}_{\ell}^\dagger - \hat{b}_{\ell}^\dagger \hat{b}_{k} = \lim_{\theta\to\pi} \Bigl( \hat{b}_{k} \hat{b}_{\ell}^\dagger + e^{i\theta}\cdot\hat{b}_{\ell}^\dagger \hat{b}_{k} \Bigr) $$ $$ \delta_{k,\ell} = \bigl\{ \hat{c}_{k}, \hat{c}_{\ell}^\dagger \bigr\} = \hat{c}_{k} \hat{c}_{\ell}^\dagger + \hat{c}_{\ell}^\dagger \hat{c}_{k} = \lim_{\theta\to 0} \Bigl( \hat{c}_{k} \hat{c}_{\ell}^\dagger + e^{i\theta}\cdot\hat{c}_{\ell}^\dagger \hat{c}_{k} \Bigr). $$ I.e. as limits of Abelian anyonic commutation relations. Assuming now that some system could be solved for anyons with $0 < \theta < \pi$, would taking the limits of e.g. the energy eigenstates for $\theta\to \pi$ yield in general the correct eigenstates of the bosonic system (which might be harder to solve directly)?

I'm inclined to think it would work, but after all, the whole Fock space looks different depending on $\theta$, with all kinds of possible topological nontrivialities.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 17:35 (UCT), posted by SE-user leftaroundabout
asked Oct 31, 2012 in Theoretical Physics by leftaroundabout (25 points) [ no revision ]

1 Answer

+ 6 like - 0 dislike

There is no such thing as "Abelian anyonic commutation relations", in the sense that the "Abelian anyonic commutation relations" that you write down does not describe Abelian anyons. So the starting point of the question is not valid.

Also anyons do not have a Fock space description. The standard many-body text books stress on Fock space too much, which lead people to think about many-body systems only in terms of Fock space. Such Foack-space picture can only describe a very small subset of many-body states. Most many-body states (the interesting ones) require a new picture (such as tensor network) to visualize.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 17:36 (UCT), posted by SE-user Xiao-Gang Wen
answered Oct 31, 2012 by Xiao-Gang Wen (3,485 points) [ no revision ]
Could you elaborate on why the Fock space picture fails, and what are the properties of these more exotic beasts (e.g. tensor networks) that allow them to save the day?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 17:36 (UCT), posted by SE-user Doug Packard
Quite honestly, I've never actually dealt with anyons, so I can't much judge what you say here. It would be nice if you could make your points a bit clearer. — Anyway, the main question wasn't really about Fock space / creator/annihilator commutations, but about the $\theta\to k\pi$-limit of observables in anyonic systems. How about that?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 17:36 (UCT), posted by SE-user leftaroundabout
Fock space picture only lead to totally symmetric or total antisymmetric many-body wave-function. So it fails on anyons. Also, $\theta$ is always a rational number for anyons and the properties of an anyon system is not a continuous function of $\theta$. So we cannot take the limit.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-05 17:36 (UCT), posted by SE-user Xiao-Gang Wen

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsO$\varnothing$erflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...