Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/HTML-CSS/jax.js
Page preview panel
ON OFF

This is the graph of pages.

All pages ("nodes") in Knowen belong to a directed acyclic graph: more general nodes are to the left (upstream), and more specific to the right (downstream).

Hover over a node to see the node preview; click to select a specific node; mouse scroll to zoom; click and drag to move.

Now you are in the subtree of Special Topics in Many-Body Theory, Spring 2016 project. 

Introduction: thermodynamics and Landau argument

We introduce the main ideas of the Fermi liquid and motivate many-body perturbation theory. A reference for the Fermi liquid ideas is the first chapter of Landau and Lifshitz volume 9.

The assumption of Fermi liquid theory is that, whatever the interactions may be, we can identify "elementary excitations" that are like particles (and hence are called "quasi-particles"): they have well-defined momentum, spin-12, and charge e. Furthermore, they are spatially "local" relative to macroscopic sizes like a sample size, and are long-lived if their excitation energy is small. This last point is quite important: quasiparticles of finite excitation energy E>0 do interact with each other and can decay, but the lifetime becomes larger as E0.

As an intuitive picture of the quasiparticles, think of them as a single electron dressed by a cloud of electron-hole pairs: as a result, the effective mass may be modified by the "screening cloud". But, since the electron-hole pairs are neutral and bosonic (actually we'll assume them usually to be spin-zero), the charge and fermionic statistics are unmodified.

The Fermi momentum is determined through
N/V=24πp3F/3(2π)3.
We will assume that this continues to hold because of the adiabatic connection between quasiparticles and original fermions. Define the normalized quasiparticle distribution through
αnααdτ=tr ˆndτ=NV,dτ=d3p(2π)2.
In the following we will use the Einstein summation convention that repeated indices are implicity summed over. The meaning of the indices on the Hermitian density matrix ˆn is that diagonal elements correspond to the density of spin-up or spin-down electrons.

In case you haven't seen a density matrix in a while, here is a lightning review. Recall that the off-diagonal term reflects the fact that spin is a quantum variable. For instance, for a single particle in a mixed state with half spin-up and half spin-down, we would have
n=(120012)
while for a pure state with spin aligned along some axis in the x-y plane,
n=(12121212).
The spin operator along the x-axis is given by σx in this two-component space, so
sx=tr nσx
where here this is a quantum statistical expectation value, which for a pure state coincides with the ordinary quantum expectation value. Pure states are essentially projection operators, so n2=n; any state, pure or mixed, has a trace related to the total number of particles.

The change in energy due to a change δn in the quasiparticle occupancies should be written, for a small change from the equilibrium distribution obtained below, as
δEV=ϵ(p)δndτ.
Actually, let us make a slightly more general form to account for situations where the distribution of up-spin particles is different from that of down-spin particles.

δEV=ϵαβ(p)δnβαdτ=tr ˆϵ(p)δˆndτ.
For the spin-symmetric case, the tensors ˆϵ and δˆn are both diagonal: ϵαβ=ϵδαβ, nαβ=nδαβ.

The assumption of Fermi liquid theory can now be stated: we will allow the effective energy ˆϵ(p) in equation (7) to depend on the occupancy of other quasiparticle states, in a simple way. Denote by δϵαβ(p) the change in the effective energy of quasiparticles of momentum p induced by a given nonequilibrium distribution of the other quasiparticles:
δϵαβ(p)=fαγ,βδ(p,p)δn(p)γδdτ.
Here f is some effective interaction about which we will have much more to say. The important thing is that we kept only the linear term δn on the right-hand side and neglected higher powers in the deviation from equilibrium. So, even though the interaction f in the above may be quite strong, any three-body interactions or other interactions not of the above form are neglected.

Now let me explain why the equilibrium distribution of quasiparticles has formally the same form as in the noninteracting case, even though the quasiparticles are interacting and the meaning of this distribution is quite different. The simplest derivation of the equilibrium distribution comes from maximizing the entropy
SV=tr (ˆnlogˆn+(1ˆn)log(1ˆn))dτ
subject to the constraints of constant total particle number and energy,
δNV=tr δˆndτ=0,δEV=tr ˆϵδˆndτ=0.
Note that this expression for the entropy depends only on the fermionic statistics of the quasiparticles.

Introducing Lagrange multipliers λ1 and λ2, the total variation is
logˆn1ˆnλ1λ2ˆϵ=0.
We leave it to the reader to show that λ1=βμ and λ2=β, so a solution of the above is
ˆn=1eβ(ˆϵμ)+1
since this gives
logeβ(μˆϵ)βμ+βˆϵ=0.
For spin-symmetric quasiparticle energies, this becomes a single-component equation
n=1eβ(ϵμ)+1
This, of course, looks the same as what we had for free particles. However, note that now it is actually a complicated self-consistency equation, since ϵ on the right side is effectively a function of n.

There is a simple self-consistent calculation that partly illustrates why the Fermi liquid is so stable to repulsive interactions in three dimensions. Consider two excitations of small energy above the Fermi level, and ask what is the cross-section for their scattering. Suppose the two initial particles have total energy E and total momentum p.
The scattering linewidth, from Fermi's golden rule, is
Γ=2π|M|2δ(E1+E2E)δ(p1+p2p).
In the above the integral is over all final states, and the matrix element M is something dependent on the details of the interparticle interaction. Suppose that M's variation is unimportant, and just look at the available phase space for scattering as E is small. At zero temperature, the only final states available are outside the Fermi sea. Noting that there are six integrals and four constraints, and linearizing around the Fermi surface as usual: Ekμ=vF(kkF), we guess that Γ(Eμ)2, which is borne out by a detailed calculation.

Hence in 3D ΓEμ, so the lifetime of quasiparticles increases rapidly as the
quasiparticle moves toward the Fermi level. Another way to look at this, which will be used later, is that the linewidth of the quasiparticle becomes very narrow as Eμ. This gives some support for the contention that the Fermi liquid is a stable picture in 3D.