Sign up ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free.

The dispersion of ferromagnetic spin wave at low energy is $E\propto k^2$, while $E\propto k$ for antiferromagnetic case. Is there a simple/physical argument (such as symmetry) for these results?

Moreover, in a generic system with spontaneous continuous symmetry breaking, what determines the value of $n$ in the low energy dispersion $E\propto k^n$ of the Goldstone mode?

In the Wikipedia, the last paragraph of theory of spin wave states that the difference between the dispersion relation of phonon ($E\propto k$) and ferromagnetic magnon ($E\propto k^2$) results from the time reversal symmetry breaking of the ferromagnetic state. I'm confused about it since antiferromagnetic state also breaks time reversal symmetry but possesses dispersion $E\propto k$ as phonon. Can someone explain this statement further please?

share|cite|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 8 down vote accepted

In non-relativistic systems both $E\sim k$ and $E\sim k^2$ are possible. Quadratic dispersion relations occur if $\langle 0|[Q_i,Q_j]|\rangle\neq 0$ for some of the generators. This occurs in a ferromagnet because rotational invariance is broken and $J_z$ has an expectation value. In terms of effective lagrangians the difference between ferromagnets and anti-ferromagnets is the appearance of first order time derivatives in the ferromagnetic case.

There is a long literature on this subject, starting with H.B. Nielsen and S. Chadha, Nucl. Phys. B105 (1976) 445, which introduced the distinction between type I and type II Goldstone modes (with odd/even dispersion relation). More recent papers are T. Schafer et al, arXiv:hep-ph/0108210, which contains the criterion mentioned above, and H. Watanabe, H. Murayama, arXiv:1203.0609, which has the most complete statement about the relation between the number of Goldstone modes and the number of broken generators.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks a lot! So the Wikipedia statement is not quite true. And the papers in your list are wonderful! – Tengen Dec 30 '12 at 11:45

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.