4
$\begingroup$

I'm working with the standard Boson Hubbard model. It's Hamiltonian is defined in Fock space and commutes with total particle number N. $$[{{\hat H}_{BH}},\hat N] = 0$$

So I can simultaneously diagnonalize ${{\hat H}_{BH}}$ and ${\hat N}$. And in this process the ground state of ${{\hat H}_{BH}}$ I get will have definite total particle number.

Then for my ground state $$\left\langle {{\psi _g}} \, \middle| \,\hat b \,\middle| \, {{\psi _g}} \right\rangle = 0$$ will always holds because $$\hat b\left| {{\psi _g}} \right\rangle $$ has different total particle number thus is orthogonal to $\left| {{\psi _g}} \right\rangle $. But $\left\langle {\hat b} \right\rangle $ is the order parameter for superfluid phase. I deduce that Boson Hubbard model never has a superfluid phase, which is certainly wrong. But I don't understand what's wrong with my arguments. I'm confusing these days. Help please.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
4
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The fact that $[H,N]=0$ implies that there exist shared eigenstates between $H$ and $N$, not that all eigenstates of $H$ must be shared with $N$, so on that level there is no contradiction. But, on the other hand, the contention of the physical relevance of states that do not have a well-defined particle number, i.e. the possibility of coherence in superpositions of states of different $N$, was controversial for a pretty long time and its resolution (if it was achieved? I'm not sure) is definitely nontrivial. $\endgroup$
    – Emilio Pisanty
    Jun 13, 2018 at 10:29
  • $\begingroup$ The references in this answer might be helpful in that regard. $\endgroup$
    – Emilio Pisanty
    Jun 13, 2018 at 10:50
  • $\begingroup$ This question discussed the similar problem for the BCS groundstate: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/284314/… . $\endgroup$
    – Sebastian Riese
    Jun 13, 2018 at 13:26
  • $\begingroup$ May I ask a little further? Yes the eigenstates can be not unique. But by such a simultaneouse diagonalization the ground state I find IS a ground state isn't it? Otherwise I can't diagonalize my Hamiltonian. So is there some limitations that I have to find the ground state in some specific way instead of by any means to get superfluid state? Why is diagonalization not free?😌 $\endgroup$
    – WSnow
    Jun 14, 2018 at 16:09

0

Reset to default

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.