Skip to main content
1 of 2
Níckolas Alves
  • 23k
  • 3
  • 36
  • 109

One-dimensional tight-binding model with two different hoppings in the limit the hoppings are equal

I've recently been watching this lecture series on Condensed Matter. The part I'm currently on covers band theory for the tight-binding model in a few different scenarios. We covered two different models in one-dimension. The first had a Hamiltonian given by $$H = -t \sum_i c_i^\dagger c_{i+1} + c_{i+1}^\dagger c_i,$$ where the sum runs over the $N$ sites in the one-dimensional chain with periodic boundary conditions and $c_i$ is a creation operator for an orbital at site $i$. We solved this model and got to the eigenenergies $$E(k) = - 2 t \cos(k a),$$ where $a$ is the lattice spacing and $k = \frac{2\pi n}{N a}$, with $n = 0, 1, \ldots, N-1$.

The second model had two sites per unit cell. We have $N$ unit cells and have the Hamiltonian $$H = - \sum_i t_1(c_{i,A}^\dagger c_{i,B} + c_{i,B}^\dagger c_{i,A}) + t_2(c_{i-1,B}^\dagger c_{i,A} + c_{i+1,A}^\dagger c_{i,B}),$$ where $A$ and $B$ label the two different sites per unit cell. The eigenenergies we found this time were $$E(k) = \pm \sqrt{t_1^2 + t_2^2 + 2 t_1 t_2 \cos(ka)},$$ where $a$ is the size of one unit cell and $k = \frac{2\pi n}{N a}$, $n = 0,1, \ldots, N_1$ (to the best of my knowledge).

What I find weird is that I would expect that the limit $t_1 \to t_2$ in the second model should reduce it to the first model with $t = t_1 = t_2$, albeit with $2N$ sites instead of $N$. However, that is not what happens, since the second model always has two energy bands, while the first has only one. My question is: why doesn't the second model reduce to the first one in the limit $t_1 \to t_2$?

Níckolas Alves
  • 23k
  • 3
  • 36
  • 109