2
$\begingroup$

I would like to follow up on this question. The Bogoliubov transformation is written as follows (I assume that $u_{\mathbf{k}} = u_k$ and $v_{\mathbf{k}} = v_k$ as well as $u_k, v_k\in\mathbb{R}$):

\begin{equation}\begin{aligned} c_{k, \uparrow} &=u_{k} d_{k, \uparrow}+v_{k} d_{-k, \downarrow}^{\dagger} \qquad (1.1) \\ c_{-k, \downarrow}^{\dagger} &=u_{k} d_{-k \downarrow}^{\dagger} - v_{k} d_{k, \uparrow} \qquad \ (1.2) \end{aligned}\end{equation}

Question: Why do we get in the transition from Eq. $(1.1)$ to $(1.2)$ a minus sign in front of the second term in Eq. $(1.2)$? After all, shouldn't we able to derive $(1.2)$ from $(1.1)$?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Can you elaborate on why you think the minus sign should not be there? $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 28, 2021 at 10:20
  • $\begingroup$ Sure! I assumed $v_k$ to be real, so $v_k^{\star} = v_k$. The adjoint of $d_{-k, \downarrow}^{\dagger}$ is just $d_{-k, \downarrow}$. Now we just have to change the sign of the $k$ and flip over the spin, but why is there a minus sign? $\endgroup$
    – Hermi
    Commented Jul 28, 2021 at 11:09

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

The transformation should be unitary. In other words, if we write $$ \begin{pmatrix} c_{k,\uparrow}\\ c_{-k,\downarrow} \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} u_k & v_k\\ -v_k & u_k \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} d_{k,\uparrow}\\ d_{-k,\downarrow} \end{pmatrix}= \mathcal{S} \begin{pmatrix} d_{k,\uparrow}\\ d_{-k,\downarrow} \end{pmatrix}, $$ the determinant of the transformation matrix should be $1$, and $\mathcal{S}^\dagger=\mathcal{S}^{-1}$, i.e.: $$ |\mathcal{S}|=u_k^2+v_k^2=1,\\ \mathcal{S}^{-1}=\frac{1}{u_k^2+v_k^2} \begin{pmatrix} u_k & -v_k\\ v_k & u_k \end{pmatrix} =\mathcal{S}^T $$ with the parametrization as is, it can be viewed as a simple rotation with $$ u_k=\cos\phi_k,v_k=\sin\phi_k $$

Note also that the transformation is that of a pair of states with different quantum numbers: $k,\uparrow$ and $-k,\downarrow$ - they have different spin and momentum, i.e.$c_{-k,\downarrow}^\dagger$ is not the same as $c_{k,\uparrow}^\dagger= u_kd_{k,\uparrow}^\dagger + v_kd_{-k,\downarrow}$, which the OP seems to suggest.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Okay, but if I did not write a minus sign, then for the determinant, I would simply get the condition $\vert S\vert = u_k^2 - v_k^2 = 1$, so I am not sure this explains why we have to put there a minus sign.. $\endgroup$
    – Hermi
    Commented Jul 28, 2021 at 11:46
  • $\begingroup$ Unitarity is not just a unitary determinant, but $|S|=1$ and $S^\dagger=S^{-1}$. $\endgroup$
    – Roger V.
    Commented Jul 28, 2021 at 11:47
  • $\begingroup$ @Hermi what you are saying is unitary but then that would require v_k to be totally imaginary $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 18, 2022 at 9:57
  • $\begingroup$ Flipping the spin and momentum is a time reversal operation, which requires a $-i\sigma_y$. Tha is probably the source of the minus sign. $\endgroup$
    – mike stone
    Commented May 25 at 18:42

Your Answer

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

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