Quantum Hydrodynamics for Supersolid Crystals and Quasicrystals
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Quantum hydrodynamics for supersolid crystals and quasicrystals The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Heinonen, Vili et al. "Quantum hydrodynamics for supersolid crystals and quasicrystals." Physical Review A 99, 6 (June 2019): 063621 © 2019 American Physical Society As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.99.063621 Publisher American Physical Society (APS) Version Final published version Citable link https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/123298 Terms of Use Article is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use. PHYSICAL REVIEW A 99, 063621 (2019) Quantum hydrodynamics for supersolid crystals and quasicrystals Vili Heinonen,1,* Keaton J. Burns,2 and Jörn Dunkel1,† 1Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139-4307, USA 2Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139-4307, USA (Received 3 August 2018; published 24 June 2019) Supersolids are theoretically predicted quantum states that break the continuous rotational and translational symmetries of liquids while preserving superfluid transport properties. Over the last decade, much progress has been made in understanding and characterizing supersolid phases through numerical simulations for specific interaction potentials. The formulation of an analytically tractable framework for generic interactions still poses theoretical challenges. By going beyond the usually considered quadratic truncations, we derive a systematic higher-order generalization of the Gross-Pitaevskii mean-field model in conceptual similarity with the Swift- Hohenberg theory of pattern formation. We demonstrate the tractability of this broadly applicable approach by determining the ground-state phase diagram and the dispersion relations for the supersolid lattice vibrations in terms of the potential parameters. Our analytical predictions agree well with numerical results from direct hydrodynamic simulations and earlier quantum Monte Carlo studies. The underlying framework is universal and can be extended to anisotropic pair potentials with a complex Fourier-space structure. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.99.063621 I. INTRODUCTION surface crystals [22], and active fluids [23–25]. Whereas higher PDEs are often postulated as effective phenomenologi- Supersolids are superfluids in which the local density spon- cal descriptions of systems with crystalline or quasicrystalline taneously arranges in a state of crystalline order. The existence order [26], it turns out that such equations can be derived of supersolid quantum states was proposed in the late 1960s directly within the established GP framework. The resulting by Andreev, Lifshitz, and Chester [1,2] but the realization in mean-field theory yields analytical predictions that agree with the laboratory has proven extremely difficult [3]. Recent ex- direct quantum hydrodynamic and recent qMC simulations perimental breakthroughs in the control of ultracold quantum [12,27] and specify the experimental conditions for realizing gases [4–7] suggest that it may indeed be possible to design periodic supersolids and coexistence phases, as well as super- quantum matter that combines dissipationless flow with the solid states exhibiting quasicrystalline symmetry (Sec. V). intrinsic stiffness of solids. Important theoretical insights into the expected properties of supersolids and experimental II. MEAN-FIELD THEORY candidate systems have come from numerical mean-field calculations and quantum Monte Carlo (qMC) simulations As in the classical GP theory [13,14], we assume that a for specific particle interaction potentials [8–12]. What is system of spinless particles can be described by a complex still lacking, however, is a general analytically tractable scalar field (t, x) and that quantum fluctuations about the framework that allows the simultaneous characterization of mean density n(t, x) =||2 are negligible. Considering an whole classes of potentials as well as the direct computation isotropic pairwise interaction potential u(|x − x |), the total of ground-state phase diagrams and dispersion relations for potential energy density is given by a spatial convolution supersolid lattice vibrations in terms of the relevant potential integral which can be expressed as a sum over Fourier-mode parameters. contributions ∝ uˆ|nˆ|2, where hats denote Fourier transforms To help overcome such conceptual and practical limita- (see Appendix A for a detailed derivation). If u is isotropic tions, we introduce here a generalization of the classical with finite moments, then its Fourier expansion can be written = ∞ 2 j =| | Gross-Pitaveskii (GP) mean-field model [13,14]bydrawing asu ˆ(k) j=0 g2 jk [28], where k k is the modulus guidance from the Swift-Hohenberg theory [15], which uses of the wave vector, yielding the potential energy density 1 ∞ − j ∇2 j ∇2 fourth-order partial differential equations (PDEs) to describe 2 n j=0( 1) g2 j ( ) n, with denoting the spatial Lapla- pattern formation in Rayleigh-Bénard convection. Our ap- cian. The constant Fourier coefficients g2 j encode the spatial proach is motivated by the successful application of higher- structure of the potential. Variation of the total energy func- than-second-order PDE models to describe classical solidifi- tional with respect to yields the generalized GP equation cation phenomena [16–18], electrostatic correlations in con- (Appendix A) centrated electrolytes and ionic liquids [19,20], nonuniform ⎡ ⎛ ⎞⎤ 2 ∞ FFLO superconductors [21], symmetry breaking in elastic h¯ ih¯∂ = ⎣− ∇2 + ⎝ (−1)jg (∇2 ) j||2⎠⎦. (1) t 2m 2 j j=0 *[email protected] The classical GP model, corresponding to repulsive point † [email protected] interactions u = g0δ(x − x ), is recovered for g0 > 0 and 2469-9926/2019/99(6)/063621(16) 063621-1 ©2019 American Physical Society HEINONEN, BURNS, AND DUNKEL PHYSICAL REVIEW A 99, 063621 (2019) g2 j = 0 otherwise. The authors of Ref. [29] studied the case the interaction parameter (Appendix C). In an infinite domain, g0, g2 > 0 and g2 j4 = 0, keeping partial information about the internal energy U[ρ] is completely parameterized by αu long-range (k → 0) hydrodynamic interactions by effectively and the average densityρ ¯ = ρdx/ dx. For the Rydberg- 2 −1 adding a surface energy term ∝|∇n| to the energy density. dressed BEC in Ref. [27], which has q0 = 1.87 μm , corre- However, as we see shortly, to describe supersolid states, the sponding to a hexagonal lattice spacing of 3.88 μm, one finds long-wavelength expansion has to be carried out at least to αu =−0.043 andρ ¯ ≈ 9.4 (Appendix G). order k4. To show this explicitly, it is convenient to express the III. GROUND-STATE STRUCTURE complex√ dynamics, (1), in real Madelung form [31]. Writing = n exp(iS) and defining the irrotational velocity field An advantageous aspect of the above framework is that ρ α , ρ v = (¯h/m)∇S,Eq.(1) can be recast as the quantum hydro- the ground-state structure of U[ ]inthe( u ¯ )-phase plane dynamic equations (Appendix C; see also [32]) can be explored both analytically and numerically in a fairly straightforward manner (Fig. 1). Standard linear stability anal- ysis (Appendix D3) for uniform constant-density solutions ∂t n =−∇·(nv), (2) predicts a symmetry-breaking transition at αu =−1 when ρ¯ 1/8 and m(∂t + v ·∇)v =−∇(δU/δn), (3) 1 − 16¯ρ 4 α = whenρ> ¯ 1/8, (7) with the effective potential energy U[n] to order O(k ), u 64¯ρ2 h¯2 |∇n|2 g g g indicated by the thin dashed line in Fig. 1(a). Refined analyt- = + 0 2 + 2 |∇ |2 + 4 ∇2 2 . U dx n n ( n) (4) ical estimates for the ground-state phases can be obtained by 8m n 2 2 2 ρ = ρ + φ · considering the Fourier ansatz ¯ j j exp (iq j x). +∇2 2 The first term is the kinetic quantum potential [31] and the The pattern forming operator (1 ) penalizes modes with 2 | | = kinetic energy is K = (m/2) dx nv . For nonleaky boundary q j 1, suggesting that single-wavelength expansions can conditions, Eqs. (2) and (3) conserve the total particle number yield useful approximations for the ground-state solutions. N = dx n and energy E[n, v] = K[n, v] + U[n]. The quan- Conceptually similar studies for classical phase field models tum hydrodynamics defined by Eqs. (2)–(4) is Hamiltonian [18] imply that 2D and 1D close-packing structures realizing in terms of the momentum density mnv = hn¯ ∇S, thereby hexagonal and stripe patterns are promising candidates. The differing, for example, from generalized Ginzburg-Landau one-mode approximation ansatz for a hexagonal lattice reads theories for nonuniform FFLO superconductors [21] and 3 finite-temperature hydrodynamic approaches [1,33–35]. ρ = ρ¯ + φ [exp (iq · x) + c.c.], (8) , ≡ 0 j Local minima of E[n v] have zero flow, v 0, and hence j=1 the corresponding density fields must minimize U[n]. As- · suming short-range repulsion g0 > 0, we see that uniform where the lattice vectors q j form the “first star” with qi = 2 = − 2/ constant-density solutions minimize U[n] when g2 0 and q j q ,ifi j and q 2 otherwise (c.c. denotes complex g = 0 (Appendix F); this case was studied in Ref. [29]. If, conjugate terms). Similarly, the stripe phase is defined by 4 ρ = ρ + φ + however, we consider the more general class of pair inter- ¯ [ 0 exp (iqx1) c.c.]. These trial functions have to φ action potentials with g2 ≷ 0, then short-wavelength stabil- be minimized with respect to the amplitudes 0 and the 4 ity at order k requires that g4 > 0. This situation arises, magnitudes q of the reciprocal lattice vectors, which can be for example, for the two-dimensional (2D) Rydberg-dressed done analytically (Appendix D4). Our analytical calculations Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) studied in Ref. [27], which predict four distinct pure ground-state types, which can be 2 2 2 has g0 = 0.189¯h /m, g2 =−0.113 (¯h /m) μm , and g4 = identified as uniform (U), supersolid (SS), normal solid– 2 4 / 0.016 (¯h /m) μm (Appendix G).