arXiv:1907.12196v2 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 21 Feb 2020 ehnc,ti neato nedi eaiitccor- relativistic a is quantum indeed nonrelativistic the interaction of coupling this realm spin-orbit mechanics, the the in Although cou- measured spin-orbit 19]. is to [18, related systems features pled understand to tempt of variety wide a [11–17]. feasible applications rendering achieved, spintronics theo- been concerning both have in features progress experimental sys- outstanding and spin an retical since, ferromagnet suggested Ever in was tems. excitations swit- it magnetic dynamic 10], induce and [9, may ching current Refs. spin-polarized a in effect that recently, Hall spin More extrinsic Hall the conside- [5–8]. forecast electronic were anomalous theoretically phenomena in the to scattering freedom red where Mott of the 1970s, degree and to a effect back as spin date concerning Con- ideas the advices first of in The use phenomena the [1–4]. transport further Physics of charge, of Matter electric study densed spin its the intrinsic to in addition the explored in which is, electron in the technology spin-based a § ‡ † ∗ lcrncades [email protected] address: Electronic lcrncades [email protected] address: Electronic [email protected] address: Electronic lcrncades [email protected] address: Electronic urnl,teehsbe rwn neeti h at- the in interest growing a been has there Currently, is short, for spintronics or electronics, transport Spin pnplrzdcret pntase oqeadsi Hal spin and torque spin-transfer current, Spin-polarized org Turcati, Rodrigo 3 eatmnod srfsc,Csooi neaõsFund Interações e Cosmologia Astrofísica, de Departamento 4 ASnumbers: PACS emer positions. components no distinct -down the in and and localized c regime spin-up planar the the the of where of fractionalization contemplated, stud consequence is a the As system in re-assessed. the interest of particular scenario of calculat (planar) are then spin-t systems are the fields coupled currents, external orbit spin electric and the magnetic Hamiltonia to both non-relativistic related Features the in coupling. emerge naturally terms ftefil qainu otelaigodrin order leading the to up non-re the equation inspect field to momen addition, the angular In of orbital well. as the derived is and t tensor symme density due the Furthermore, torque spin approach. relativistic the relativistic-covariant the Both of effect account. Mak the where densit Lagrangian attained, field. the is electromagnetic from deriving external canonically of an instead to coupled minimally nttt oiénc,Uiesdd oEtd oRod Jan de Rio do Estado do Universidade Politécnico, Instituto nti otiuin esato rmaflyrltvsi d relativistic fully a from off start we contribution, this In .INTRODUCTION I. 1, ∗ u r airSgu 5,Uc,22010 i eJnio R Janeiro, de Rio 22290-180, Urca, 150, Sigaud Xavier Dr. Rua alsAde oil Quintero, Bonilla Andres Carlos 2 1 bevtroNcoa,CP29140 i eJnio J B RJ, Janeiro, de Rio 20921-400, CEP Nacional, Observatório eatmnod íia nvriaeFdrld at Cata Santa de Federal Universidade Física, de Departamento E 84-0,Foinpls at aaia Brasil Catarina, Santa Florianópolis, 88040-900, CEP lcrmgei o-iia coupling non-minimal electromagnetic 2, ( † v/c neato ewe h lcrnsi n h magnetic the and right the spin ensure electron to the sucessful between was interaction Pauli by proposed tion and ment h iei emb nrdcn h al arcs i.e., matrices, Pauli the introducing p by term modified and kinetic space the three-dimensional of the algebra me- and Clifford spinors quantum fi- (non-relativistic) intro- two-component non-relativistic by magnetic ducing equation of external Schrödinger formulated framework an interac- Pauli chanics, with the the spin intrinsic in for electron account eld an the To of of tion existence momentum. mag- the inhomogeneous angular an spin demonstrated of field ex- presence netic Stern–Gerlach in magnetic famous moment electron of the dipole measurements to where [24], back periment dates spin instance. for tron 23], [22, effect interesting 21] Hall several [20, spin precession for the spin and responsible the as is such has phenomena, which quantum coupling spin, nature spin-orbit quantum the relativistic the of the sense, with relation this o intrinsic description an In relativistic fully electron. a the from arises that rection in nteohrhn,we n ae h electromag- the takes coupling, one when minimal equa- hand, netic Schrödinger other the the respect On with tion. difference no is there where ed oteapaac fasi-eedn interaction spin-dependent a of Hamiltonian appearance the to leads oéAdlaHelayël-Neto, Abdalla José 2 ) h nesadn fteqatmntr fteelec- the of nature quantum the of understanding The → mnas etoBaier ePsussFísicas, Pesquisas de Brasileiro Centro amentais, scridot hr pnobtinteraction spin-orbit where out, carried is rcadgueivratenergy-momentum invariant gauge and tric ,terltvsi oa nua momentum angular total relativistic the y, aiitcrgm,aprubtv expansion perturbative a regime, lativistic daddsusd osdrn htspin- that Considering discussed. and ed sacneuneo h non-minimal the of consequence a as n ( ase oqeadterdpnec on dependence their and torque ransfer µ h xenlsucsi lotkninto taken also is sources external the o fsi aleet two-dimensional a effect, Hall spin of y σ e ihtedffrn pncomponents spin different the with ges nrbtost h adulvl are levels Landau the to ontributions io 82-7 oaFiug,Brazil Friburgo, Nova 28625-570 eiro, -iia opig euirsr of sort peculiar a coupling, n-minimal · = B n ietueo h edequation, field the of use direct ing srpino igeeeto non- electron single a of escription p )( 2 steetra antcfil.Teprescrip- The field. magnetic external the is u esr r dnie nthe in identified are tensors tum e mc ~ σ σ · p ) steeeto antcdpl mo- dipole magnetic electron the is ffc npeec fan of presence in effect l H 2] nteasneo interactions, of absence the In [25]. I p = ,Brazil J, rina, µ rasil − 3, → µ ‡ p n niu Arias Enrique and · µ B − , eA µ noacut it account, into ,§ 4, (1) f 2
field. Nevertheless, one year later, Dirac succeeded in II. The non-relativistic regime is described in Sec. III. In proposing a fully relativistic quantum description of the Sec. IV, we evaluate the influence of the Pauli interaction electron [26], given by the equation on the charge density current. In Sec. V, the relativistic e total angular momentum and the time evolution of the i~γµ∂ − mc − γµA ψ =0, (2) µ c µ spin density tensor, along with the stress-energy tensor, are derived. The rôle of the relativistic torque is inves- where m is the electron mass, Aµ is the external electro- tigated. Sec. VI is devoted to the discussion of the spin magnetic four-potential subject to a U(1)-transformation currents. Features related to the spin Hall effect, as well and γ refers to the Dirac gamma-matrices. Indeed, when as aspects of Landau levels in our study are discussed in one goes over into the low-relativistic limit of Eq. (2), Sec. VI. Our Conclusions and Future Perspectives are the Hamiltonian term (1) automatically appears in the presented in Sec. VII. Schrodinger wave equation, showing that the relativis- We shall adopt the Heaviside-Lorentz units system. In tic Dirac equation can naturally accommodate the spin- our conventions, the signature of the Minkowski metric ad hoc 1/2 nature of the electron without any assumpti- is (+, −, −, −). ons. Furthermore, the spin magnetic moment generated in this framework provides the correct gyromagnetic ra- tio, g =2, for the electron. II. ELECTROMAGNETIC NON-MINIMALLY Besides its undoubtful success, the Dirac equation does COUPLED DIRAC EQUATION not provide a complete description for spin-1/2 particles at very high energies. The reason is due to correcti- In this Section, basic features of the relativistic Dirac ons to observable quantities that only Quantum Elec- equation minimally and non-minimally coupled to the trodynamics is able to account for through phenomena electromagnetic field are briefly reviewed. We start off such as vacuum polarization and pair production, for with the relativistic wave equation for the massive spinor instance. Besides that, experimental measurements con- field ψ, namely, cerning the gyromagnetic ratio, g, of the electron reveal that its value was not exactly g = 2 [27], as predicted µ (i~γ ∂µ − mc) ψ =0. (3) by the Dirac equation. The so-called anomalous magne- tic moment of the electron (and for the muon and tau As it is well-known, the relativistic description of the leptons) is correctly reproduced by Quantum Electrody- electron is fully accomplished when the Dirac field is cou- namics and, more generally, by the Standard Model. One pled to the gauge potential, Aµ. This is the so-called of the first attempts to solve the mentioned problem was minimal prescription, and it is implemented by means of due to Pauli, who suggested that, besides the electro- the covariant derivative magnetic minimal coupling, one should also take a cou- pling directly with the Maxwell tensor F . Later on, ie µν ∂µ → Dµ ≡ ∂µ + ~ Aµ, (4) the advent of the Quantum Electrodynamics provided c the correct description of the aforementioned problems and by the local phase transformation of the spinor field, [28]. Nevertheless, the Pauli anomalous moment interac- ′ − ie α(x) ψ = e ~c ψ, where α(x) is the local gauge parame- tion is still used to describe several physical phenomena ter related to the U(1)-symmetry group. Although the such as the Aharonov-Casher effect for neutral particles minimal coupling is commonly used to describe electri- [29], among others [30–36]. Indeed, this coupling may be cally charged particles, there are other gauge interacti- interpreted as an effective interaction of fermions with a ons that can be introduced into the electron dynamical non-zero magnetic dipole moment. equation and still preserve the gauge symmetry. Thus, In the attempt to further extend ideas related to elec- besides the gauge field Aµ, one may also couple the Di- tron spin beyond the electromagnetic minimal coupling, rac particle to the Maxwell tensor F µν . One possible way we here discuss a fully relativistic description of the spin to introduce an electromagnetic non-minimal coupling is in presence of the Pauli interaction and investigate the through the so-called Pauli interaction, which reads as consequences at the non-relativistic limit. In particu- 2 µν LP auli = − e~κ/8mc ψσ¯ ψFµν . lar, spin-orbit coupling terms come out. Afterwards, the The Lagrangian that describes the Dirac field mini- dynamics of spin currents is investigated, as well as mo- mally and non-minimally coupled to the electromagnetic difications in the charge continuity equation associated field is to the local U(1) gauge symmetry. We also comment on the spin Hall current. To conclude, contributions to the i~ e L = ψ¯ (γµ∂ ψ)− ∂ ψ¯ γµψ −mcψψ¯ − ψγ¯ µψA quantum Landau levels are derived and a sort of fractio- 2 µ µ c µ nalization between the spin-up and -down electron states e~κ − ψσ¯ µν ψF , (5) is observed. 8mc2 µν The structure of this paper is organized as follows. µν We start by introducing and briefly re-deriving the Di- where the matrix σ is defined as rac equation in the presence of both minimal and non- i σµν = [γµ,γν ] , (6) minimal electromagnetic couplings. This is done in Sec. 2 3 and κ is a dimensionless parameter measuring the III. NON-RELATIVISTIC strength of the electron anomalous magnetic moment PAULI-SCHRÖDINGER EQUATION AND THE contribution. SPIN-ORBIT INTERACTION The corresponding field equation for the Dirac spinor ψ is Several phenomena, such as the spin Hall effect, the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation, among others, are e~κ fairly-well described at the domain of the non-relativistic i~γµD − mc − σµν F ψ =0. (7) µ 8mc2 µν quantum mechanics. In this sense, it would be instruc- tive to investigate what sort of effects may emerge in the We should highlight the reason why we introduce the dynamics of the electron at the low-relativistic approxi- electromagnetic non-minimal coupling. Ref. [37] inves- mation whenever the non-minimal (Pauli) interaction is tigates and derives the spin-transfer and the spin-orbit included. torques from the Dirac equation in its relativistic regime In order to obtain the non-relativistic limit of the Dirac by considering minimal electromagnetic coupling. In our Hamiltonian (8), one initially splits the spinor ψ in its contribution, we also inspect the same issues but we in- relativistic ξ and non-relativisticic ϕ components, i.e., ϕ troduce from the very onset the non-minimal coupling ψ = . Inserting the mentioned decomposition in Eq. as shown in Eq. (7). The inclusion of the non-minimal ξ term brings about new effects involving the electric field. (7), the equations for ξ and φ are, in momentum space, This point shall become more evident when we will be respectively, commenting below Eq. (13) of Sec. (III) on the speci- e~κ fic contributions arising from the non-minimal coupling E − eφ − mc2 + σ · B ϕ = which involve the purely electric sector. 4mc e ie~κ We also motivate the inclusion of the non-minimal cou- = cσ · −i~∇ − A + E ξ, (10) pling based on arguments of effective quantum field the- c 4mc2 ories. Ultraviolet finite radiative corrections in QED ~ 2 e κ naturally induce this non-minimal coupling; therefore, E − eφ + mc − σ · B ξ = 4mc its inclusion corresponds to taking into account a (one- e ie~κ loop) contribution that affects the electric sector with = cσ · −i~∇ − A − E ϕ. (11) new terms that depende on the electric field and corrects c 4mc2 the value g = 2 of the electron gyromagnetic ratio by Let us now decouple the weakly-relativistic component including a field-theoretic effect. ϕ from the above set of equations. If one takes the non- One readily derives the Hamiltonian that arises from relativisticic limit, i.e., the regime where v/c ≪ 1, the Eq. (7), namely, rest-frame energy reduces to E ≈ mc2, and the inte- raction terms may be neglected on the lhs of Eq. (11). e~κ e~κ H = cα · Π + βmc2 + eφ + i βα · E − βΣ · B, Under these approximations, Eq. (11) is then as follows: D 4mc 4mc 1 e ie~κ (8) ξ ≈ σ · −i~∇ − A − E ϕ. (12) 2mc c 4mc2 where Π = −i~∇ − e A is the generalized kinetic ope- c Inserting Eq. (12) into the Eq. (10), one promptly A rator, φ and are the electric and magnetic vector po- finds the non-relativisticic gauge invariant Hamiltonian tentials, respectively. In addition, we adopt the standard Dirac γ-matrices representation, i.e., 1 e e~κ 2 H = −i~∇ − A + E × σ − µ · B 2m c 4mc2 eff 1 0 0 σi 0 1 γ0 = γi = γ5 = e2~2κ2 e~2κ 0 −1 −σi 0 1 0 +eφ − E2 − ∇ · E, (13) 32m3c4 8m2c2 together with the following definitions e~ 2+κ where µeff ≡ 2mc 2 σ is the electron magnetic di- pole moment corrected by the Pauli coupling. β = γ0, αi = γ0γi and Σµ = γ0γµγ5. (9) Now, let us return to Eq. (13). As far as the mag- netic dipole moment is concerned, one promptly notices Notice that the first three terms on the rhs of (8) re- that µ receives a small contribution that depends on the present the standard Dirac Hamiltonian for the electron. strength of the κ-parameter. It should not come as a Besides that, there is the presence of two additional terms surprise, since the Pauli non-miminal coupling was his- at the rhs of the Hamiltonian (8), which stem from the torically introduced to explain the deviation from the electromagnetic non-minimal coupling. Indeed, unlike theoretical prevision of the electron gyromagnetic factor the minimal coupling case, the Pauli interaction indu- g = 2. In addition, there is a quadratic electric-field- ces the appearance of both electric and magnetic fields, dependent term e2~2κ2/32m3c4 E2. The latter is rela- instead of the potentials, into the Dirac Hamiltonian. ted to an inhomogeneous background charge distribution. 4
Furthermore, the generalized momentum is modified due and the appearance of e~κ/4mc2 E × σ. In fact, such term ie~ e2 denotes the presence of a geometrical phase due to the j = ∇ϕ† ϕ − ϕ† (∇ϕ) − ϕ†Aϕ 2m mc electric field similar to the Aharonov-Casher effect for neutral particles [29]. e~ e2~κ + ∇ × ϕ†σϕ + E × ϕ†σϕ . (17) Let us then rewrite the above Hamiltonian in order 2m 4m2c2 to get a better understanding of these new terms. The Hermitian Pauli-type Hamiltonian (13) can conveniently Comparing with the conventional electric current, that be cast as is related to the flow of slowly moving charges, the density current (17) receives a contribution from the spin-orbit 2 interaction. Indeed, an external electric field will induce Π e2~2κ2 e~2κ µ B E2 ∇ E a spin-dependent contribution to the electric current, a H = − eff · + eφ + 3 4 − 2 2 · 2m 32m c 8m c term that describes the so-called Anomalous Hall Effect. ie~2κ e~κ − σ · (∇ × E) − σ · (E × Π) . (14) This phenomenon is commonly observed in ferromagnetic 8m2c2 4m2c2 and non-magnetic conductors. To conclude, we would like to remark that the charge Comparing with the Hamiltonian (13), there appear current is conserved even in the presence of the Pauli inte- two new terms. Indeed, the last two terms at the rhs raction. It is an expected result since the non-minimally of (14) denote spin-dependent interactions terms due to coupling maintain the gauge symmetry. the non-miminal coupling. Actually, these terms describe the full spin-orbit coupling, i.e., the particle momentum coupled to its spin. In addition, the anomalous velocity V. THE GAUGE-INVARIANT operator is v = (1/m)Π + (e~κ/4m2c2)E × σ. ENERGY-MOMENTUM TENSOR AND THE As an aside comment, we would also like to remark that RELATIVISTIC TOTAL ANGULAR the spin-orbit coupling is absent in the Pauli-Schrödinger MOMENTUM equation. To obtain the spin-orbit interaction in the non- relativisticic Hamiltonian, one needs to expand the Dirac One of our purposes of this contribution is to discuss equation up to the order (v/c)2 in the perturbative for- the relativistic description of the electron spin in the elec- malism. This is in contrast with our model, where the tromagnetic non-miminal scenario. Such a description spin-orbit coupling term naturally gives rise at the first- can be achieved by first analyzing the total angular mo- order level in the perturbative approach; this is so by mentum of the Lagrangian (5). To go further with our virtue of the non-minimal coupling. program, let us initially exploit the invariance of the La- grangian under Lorentz rotations. Under infinitesimal Lorentz transformations, the fields transform as below:
IV. CONSERVED NOETHER CURRENTS i i δψ =− wαβ Σ ψ, δψ¯= ψ¯Σ wαβ , δAµ =wµν A , 2 αβ 2 αβ ν Let us now focus on the electric current in the non- (18) relativisticic regime. To begin with, it is important αβ βα to notice that the infinitesimal phase variation δψ = where w = −w is a constant parameter of the Lo- αβ αβ − (ie/~c) α(x)ψ, where α(x) is the parameter related to rentz transformations and Σ = σ /2 are the Lo- the U(1) local gauge symmetry, together with the trans- rentz group generators in the representation where the ′ formation of the fields A = Aµ + ∂µα(x), lead the La- spinor fields sit. Furthermore, the space-time coordinates µ µ µν grangian (5) invariant under the gauge symmetry. Accor- undergo the infinitesimal transformation δx = w xν . ding to the Noether’s theorem, there must exist a con- Noether’s theorem, in turn, ensures the existence of served current jµ = (cρ, j) related to such symmetry, a conserved current, J µαβ = Lµαβ + Sµαβ , as a conse- namely, quence of Lorentz symmetry, where
µαβ µα β µβ α jµ = eψγ¯ µψ, (15) L = TD x − TD x e~κ − ψσ¯ µλψ xα∂β − xβ∂α A (19) µ 4mc2 λ which satisfies the continuity equation ∂µj =0. By employing the decomposition of ψ in its relativis- is the orbital angular momentum and tic, ξ, and non-relativistic, ϕ, components into the four- vector current, jµ, the charge density ρ and the spatial ~ e~κ Sµαβ = ψ¯{γµ, σαβ}ψ − ψ¯ σµαAβ − σµβ Aα ψ density current j, up to the leading order in v/c, are, 4 4mc2 respectively, (20)
ρ = eϕ†ϕ (16) is the spin density tensor. 5
µν Furthermore, TD is the standard Dirac energy- where Tαβ is the relativistic torque, which is given by momentum tensor[∗], given by jµ ~ Tαβ = (xαFµβ − xβFµα) µν i ¯ µ ν ν ¯ µ µν c TD = ψγ (∂ ψ) − ∂ ψ γ ψ − η LD, (21) e~κ 2 − ψσ¯ µν ψ (x ∂ − x ∂ ) F 8mc2 α β β α µν where L is the Dirac Lagrangian minimally coupled to ~ D e κ ¯ µ µ the electromagnetic field. − 2 ψ σ αFµβ − σ βFµα ψ. (26) 4mc Although the total canonical angular momentum is conserved, it is not gauge-invariant. The gauge de- Now, the orbital angular momentum takes the form pendence on the angular momentum prevents such this µ µ µ quantity to be associated to an observable. Indeed, the L αβ = θ αxβ − θ βxα (27) standard prescription for computing this tensor suffers and the spin density tensor reduces to the drawback of being neither symmetric, not gauge- invariant. On the other hand, there are many attempts to ~ Sµ = − ψ¯{γµ, σ }ψ. (28) improve both energy-momentum and angular momentum αβ 4 αβ density tensors. To circumvent the gauge-dependence problem, let us then follow another path to obtain the Notice that both the orbital and the spin density com- total angular momentum. ponents are gauge-symmetric, as a physically realizable The algorithm to derive the total angular momentum quantity should be. consists in starting off from the field equations rather In addition, the gauge-invariant energy-momentum than considering the Lagrangian density. To do this, we tensor takes the form below: first consider the Lorentz transformation of the spinor i~ field, i.e., θµν = ψγ¯ µ (Dν ψ) − Dν ψ¯ γµψ − ηµν L. (29) 2 1 δ ψ = wαβ [(x D − x D ) − iΣ ] ψ, (22) It is important to point out that the stress-energy ten- L 2 α β β α αβ sor cast above is obtained by considering the same proce- ¯ 1 αβ ¯ ←−† ←−† dure that was adopted to derive the total angular momen- δLψ = w ψ xα D β − xβ D α + iΣαβ , (23) µαβ 2 h i tum J , namely, by coupling the gauge variation to the field equations. In fact, to derive the energy-momentum, where, in our prescription, the ordinary deriva- one needs to multiply the field equations by the field vari- µ tive is modified by the gauge covariant derivative ations under space-time translations, i.e., δψ = −a Dµ, ~ µ (∂µ → Dµ ≡ ∂µ + (ie/ c) Aµ) in order to ensure the where a is an arbitrary four-vector and Dµ is the cova- gauge invariance of the total angular momentum. riant derivative. Next, we couple the field equation (7) and its Dirac- As for the dynamics of the orbital momentum and spin adjoint to the field variations (22) and (23), which yields density, both tensors fulfill the following gauge-invariant equations: e~κ ¯ ~ µ µν µ δLψ i γ Dµ − mc − σ Fµν ψ j 8mc2 ∂ Lµ = θ − θ + (x F − x F ) µ αβ βα αβ c α µβ β µα e~κ ~ † ¯ µ ¯ ¯ µν e~κ − i Dµψ γ + ψmc + ψσ Fµν δLψ =0. ¯ µν 8mc2 − ψσ ψ (xα∂β − xβ ∂α) Fµν (30) 8mc2 (24) and ~ After some steps of algebraic manipulations, the equa- µ e κ µ µαβ ¯ µ tion for the total angular momentum J turns out to ∂µS αβ = θαβ − θβα − 2 ψ σ αFµβ − σ βFµα ψ, 4mc be (31) µ ∂µJ αβ = Tαβ, (25) which are not separately conserved. Furthermore, the energy-momentum tensor obeys the equation
[∗]Notice that T µν is not the energy-momentum tensor that 1 e~κ D ∂ θµν = F νµj + ψσ¯ αβψ ∂ν F . (32) would arise from the invariance under space-time translation of µ c µ 8mc2 αβ the Lagrangian. The canonical stress tensor corresponding to the Lagrangian (5) is as follows: In order to get a more accurate understanding of the i~ e~κ terms presented in the relativistic torque (26), let us in- T µν = ψγ¯ µ (∂ν ψ) − ∂ν ψ¯ γµψ − ψσ¯ µν ψ − ηµν L. 2 4mc2 troduce the Maxwell field strength into the Lagrangian (5). 6
Therefore, the field equations associated to the gauge Now, for the time evolution of the spin density, we µ µ field A are perform the spatial integration of S ij , to obtain jν e~κ µν ¯ µν 3 0 k 3 ∂µF = − 2 ∂µ ψσ ψ , (33) d x ∂0S + ∂kS = d x [θij − θji c 4mc Z ij ij Z e~κ or, equivalently, − ψ¯ σ0 F − σ0 F + σk F − σk F ψ . 4mc2 i 0j j 0i i kj j ki ∇ · D = ρ, (34) (37) 1 j ∇ × H − ∂ D = , (35) c t c This equation can be rewritten in a more convenient form as below: where D ≡ E + P is the electric displacement and ~ 0 † ic H ≡ B − M is the auxiliary field. The set of equati- dtS + c∇S = cψ α × Πψ − ∇ × J ons above assume the same form of the Maxwell equati- 2 e~κ ons in presence of matter, where we here have identified − ψ†β (iα × E − Σ × B) ψ,(38) P = − ie~κ/4mc2 ψ†βαψ as the electric polarization 4mc ~ 2 † tensor and M = e κ/4mc ψ βΣψ as the magneti- where S0 = (~/2) ψ†γ5ψ and J = ψ†αψ is the proba- zation tensor of the electron. bility density current. We return now to Eq. (25). Considering the space In the absence of the non-miminal coupling (κ = 0), components (α = i,β = j), the time evolution of the an- the standard time evolution of the spin density is reco- 0 k k gular momentum component J ij = −ǫijkJ , where J vered. Again, Pauli interaction leads to a torque on the is the standard total angular momentum, takes the form spin density due to the external electric and magnetic fields. dtJ = r × f + cPi (r × ∇) Ei + cMi (r × ∇) Bi +cP × E + cM × B, (36) VI. SPIN CURRENT, SPIN HALL EFFECT where f = ρE + j × B is the Lorentz force density. AND THE LANDAU LEVELS At this point, some comments are in order. To model the spintronics phenomenology, one needs (i) In the absence of external sources, the relativistic to inspect the non-relativisticic regime of the spin den- torque (26) vanishes, and the total angular momen- sity tensor. In what follows, we shall investigate the α tum J µν is conserved, as expected. Furthermore, dynamical equation of the low-relativistic spin density the energy-momentum tensor is conserved as well. s = (~/2)ϕ†σϕ, where σ are the Pauli matrices. Hence, to obtain such a limit, one may follow the same (ii) The first term on the rhs of (26) is the torque due procedure discussed in Sec. IV. to the standard Lorentz force. The second is a con- Therefore, after algebraic manipulations, the time evo- sequence of the couple between the orbital and spin lution of the spin density s in the non-relativisticic limit degrees of freedom. From Eq. (30), it is clear that obeys the equation both torques influence the the dynamics of the or- bital angular momentum. ←→ e~2κ d s = −∇ · J + µ × B − ∇ × ϕ†Eϕ t s eff 8m2c2 (iii) The third term on the rhs of (26) is a torque on the e~κ ←→ † E σ − 2 2 ϕ × Π × ϕ, (39) spin degrees of fredoom due to the external electro- 8m c h i magnetic field on the spin density, which is felt by ←→ its polarization and magnetization vectors. where Π ≡ ϕ† (Πϕ) + (Πϕ)† ϕ . This equation tells us that bothh the electric and magnetici fields contribute (iv) Besides the Lorentz force, the divergence of the to the torque exerted on the spin density. Indeed, it stress-energy tensor (32) receives an additional con- is essential to point out that, in our prescription, the tribution coming from the Pauli interaction. spin precession depends on the applied electric field. It should be contrasted with the situation of the minimal Let us now focus our attention on the spin density coupling, where only magnetic fields contribute to the tensor. As it is well-known, the notion of spin is related to time evolution of the spin. the purely spatial component of the spin tensor density, ←→ J i.e., S0 = −ǫ Sk, where Sk = (~/2) ψ†Σkψ is the Furthermore, s (≡ Jji) is the tensor spin current, ij ijk which is of the form relativistic spin operator. Such notion relies on the fact that the σij matrices are the generators of the SO(3) i~ e J = (∇ ϕ†)s ϕ − ϕ†s (∇ ϕ) − A s . (40) rotation subgroup of Lorentz group. ji 2m j i i j mc j i 7 ←→ It is clear that ∇ · J may be associated to a torque z-component of the spin density s, i.e., [H, σz]=0, the- on the 1/2-spin density [38]. For κ = 0, one obtains the refore providing a conserved quantity to compute the spin standard time evolution for the spin density flux in spin-orbit coupled systems. Furthermore, the sys- ←→ e tem is also translationally invariant along the y-direction, dts + ∇ · J s = s × B, (41) which allows us to decompose the energy eingenstates mc into plane waves, e−iky y, that propagate along the y- where the term on the rhs is the usual torque exerted by direction. This decomposition motivates us to use se- a magnetic field on a spin-1/2 magnetic dipole moment paration of variables for the wave function of the form density. This torque is a consequence of the interaction −iky y ψky (x, y) ∼ e fk(x). If one applies the Hamilto- −µ · B present in the Hamiltonian (13). nian (42) to the aforementioned wave function, then, the In absence of external fields, the system above redu- energy eingenvalues, E↑,↓, turn out to be ces to the continuity equation for the spin current, as ~ expected. On the other hand, the two new torques on 1 ~ 2 eE0 κ E0 E↑,↓ = n + wB +eE0 lBky − 2 ± the spin degree of freedom that appear on the rhs of Eq. 2 mwB 8mc B0 (39) come out as a consequence of the spin-orbit interac- ~ 2 e 2+ κ 1 2 E0 tion. Let us then discuss the meaning of each of them. ∓ B0 + mc , (43) The third term on the rhs of Eq. (39) may be associated 2mc 2 2 B0 to a torque due to local changes in the electron charge where wB = (eB0/mc) is the cyclotron frequency and density, as well as time-varying magnetic fields via the re- lB = (~c/eB0) is the strength of the magnetic field. lation ∇×E = − (1/c) ∂tB. Indeed, such a term has the Although the last term of the rhs of the Hamiltonian form required by the spin Hall effect, a phenomenon that (42) has a dependence on the momentum py, the energy takes place when there is an electric field applied along eingeinvalues (43) of each level depends linearly on ky, in the perpendicular direction of the electrical current pro- the same way as it occurs in the case of minimal coupling. pagation. As a consequence, a transverse spin current Furthermore, the splitting between each Landau level is emerges and gives rise to the so-called intrinsic spin Hall exactly the same as in the standard case, i.e., △En = effect, a phenomenon which is entirely due to the spin- ~wB. On the other hand, the energy splitting between orbit interaction presented in the non-relativistic Hamil- spins is △ = (~κ/4mc) (E0/B0) − (e~/mc) B0 (2 + κ) /2. tonian of a single electron. Regarding the last term, one From the energy eingenvalues above, one notices that notices that a moving electron with a magnetic dipole the first term of the rhs of (43) denotes a wave packet ~ † moment, m = (e /2mc) ϕ σϕ, and velocity, v, under with momentum ky localized at x = xu,d, where the influence of an electric field, E, experiences a torque ′ 2 ~ m × B , where the effective magnetic field turns out to 2 mc E0 κ E0 xu,d = l ky − ± (44) ′ ←→ B 2 be B ≈− e~κ/8m2c2 ϕ† E × Π × σ ϕ. The 1/2- e B0 4mc B0 h i factor present in the effective magnetic field B′ takes into is the location of both spin projections, up (u) and down account the Thomas precession, a kinematical effect that (d) in the x-direction. The latter is simply the kinetic occurs when a charged particle is accelerated due to an energy of the electron. The other terms can be unders- applied electric field. tood as the potential energy of the wave packet. Note It should also be highlighted that Eq. (39) may be de- that each spin orientation holds its own Landau level rived from the local SU(2) gauge symmetry in the Pauli- structure, where each level depends linearly on ky. Com- Schrödinger non-relativisticic theory [39, 40], as well as paring with the Pauli equation, one realizes that the by carrying out a Gordon-like decomposition of the total spin-orbit coupling in the Hamiltonian (42) influences angular momentum current [41]. the quantum Landau levels, which can be seen by the This general approach may be applied to specific sys- κ-contribution in the potential energy (43). tems. In order to evaluate the relevance of the electro- The wave function, which corresponds to the electron magnetic non-minimal coupling in Eq. (14), let us con- in presence of both electrostatic and magnetostatic fields, sider a static electric field, E = E0xˆ, together with a is, up to a normalization factor, given by 2 constant magnetic field, B = B0zˆ . The moving elec- (↑,↓) −iky y −ξ /2 ψ (x, y) ∼ e Hn(ξ)e , (45) trons are then confined to move on the plane-(x, y). In n,ky such a configuration, the non-relativisticic Hamiltonian where Hn stand for the standard Hermite polynomials of (14) for the up, (↑), and down, (↓), spin, σz, assumes the the harmonic oscillator and ξ ≡ x + xu,d. Note that the form wave function is exponentially localized around x = xu,d, 2 ~ 1 2 e e 2+ κ but extended over the y-direction. H↑,↓ = px + py − B0x ∓ B0 2m c 2mc 2 2~2 2 2 ~ e κ E0 e κE0 e VII. CONCLUSIONS AND NEW PROSPECTS −eE0x+ 3 4 ∓ 2 2 py − B0x , (42) 32m c 4m c c where the Landau gauge (A = xB0yˆ) has been adop- The rôle of the electron spin in electronic systems is a ted. The Hamiltonian given above commutes with the central subject in solid state systems. Typically, in spin- 8 orbit coupled systems, the spin transport is affected by tromagnetic fields similar to the situations contemplated this coupling, which gives rise to interesting phenomena in [44]. Furthermore, a relativistic generalization of the such as the spin Hall effect, for instance. In this vein, we corresponding many-particle theory may be established have considered the relativistic Dirac equation coupled in [37, 46–48], which may lead to a relativistic version of a non-minimal way to an external electromagnetic field. the semi-classical transport theory for the spin Hall ef- By considering the non-relativistic regime, the spin-orbit fect and for the current-induced switching dynamics, for interaction shows up. It motivates us to explore the chan- instance. Also, we point out that the investigation of ges in the charge density current, as well as in the spin the Landau levels in the case of neutral particles (the current. As an immediate application, we have studied neutron, for example whose electric and magnetic dipole the quantum Landau levels and a peculiar effect has ap- moments are non-vanishing) non-minimally coupled to peared as a consequence of the non-minimal coupling in an external electromagnetic field is another issue we shall the non-relativistic limit: a spatial splitting between the pursue, and we shall report on it elsewhere in a forthco- peak of the wave functions corresponding to the up and ming work. We hope that these interesting features will down spin components, which may be interpreted as due stimulate further work on the subject. the appearance of two electronic excitations. As a future prospect, we intend to extend our analysis and investigate spin polarization effects and their time evolutions corresponding to the Bargmann-Wigner po- Acknowledgments larization operator [42, 45] in the context of the Dirac equation non-minimally coupled with the electromagne- Rodrigo Turcati thanks the Physics Department of the tic field. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina for full support. Finally, we would like to stress that there is an in- Carlos Andres Bonilla Quintero acknowledges the PCI- tense research in effects related to laser-matter interac- DA program of the Observatório Nacional for financial tion in the dynamics of the plasmas. In this sense, it support. This study was financed in part by the Coorde- might be worthy to compute and study exact solutions to nação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior the Dirac equation non-minimally coupled to strong elec- - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001.
[1] G. A. Prinz, ibid. 282, 1660 (1998) [18] Murakami, S., N. Nagaosa, and S.-C. Zhang, Science 301, [2] S. A. Wolf, D. D. Awschalom, R. A. Buhrman, J. M. 1348 (2003). Daughton, S. von Molnár, M. L. Roukes, A. Y. Chtchel- [19] Sinova, J., D. Culcer, Q. Niu, N. A. Sinitsyn, T. kanova, and D. M. Treger, Science 294, 1488 (2001). Jungwirth, and A. H. MacDonald, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, [3] D. D. Awschalom, M. E. Flatte, and N. Samarth, Scien- 126603 (2004). tific American Magazine, 286(6), 66 (2002). [20] S. Datta and B. Das, Appl. Phys. Lett. 56, 665 (1990). [4] I. Zutic, J. Fabian, and S. Das Sarma, Rev. Mod. Phys. [21] T. Matsuyama, C.-M. Hu, D. Grundler, G. Meier, and 76, 323 (2004). U. Merkt, Phys. Rev. B 65, 155322 (2002); F. Mireles [5] Dyakonov, M., and V. I. Perel, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. and G. Kirczenow, ibid. 64, 024426 (2001); J. Wang, H. Fiz. 13, 657, (1971) [Sov. Phys. JETP Lett. 13, 467 B. Sun, and D. Y. Xing, ibid. 69, 085304 (2004). (1971)]. [22] J. Sinova, S. Murakami, S.-Q. Shen, and M.-S. Choi, So- [6] M.I. Dyakonov and V.I. Perel, Phys. Lett. A 35, 459 lid State Commun. 138, 214 (2006) (1971). [23] H.-A. Engel, E. I. Rashba, and B. I. Halperin, in Hand- [7] N.F. Mott, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 124, 425 (1929). book of Magnetism and Advanced Magnetic Material, Vol. [8] N.F. Mott and H.S.W. Massey, The theory of atomic col- 5, edited by H. Kronmuller and S. Parkin Wiley, New lisions (Clarendon Press, 3rd edn., 0xford, 1965) York, (2007). [9] J. C. Slonczewski, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 159, L1 [24] W. Gerlach and O. Stern, Z. Phys. 8 110 (1922), W. Ger- (1996). lach and O. Stern, Z. Phys. 9 349 (1922), W. Gerlach and [10] L. Berger, Phys. Rev. B 54, 9353 (1996). O. Stern, Z. Phys. 9 353 (1922). [11] J. E. Hirsch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1834 (1999). [25] W. Pauli, Zeit. f. Phys. 43, 601-623 (1927). [12] Zhang, S., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 393 (2000). [26] P. A. M. Dirac, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 117 610 (1928). [13] Y. K. Kato, R. C. Myers, A. C. Gossard, and D. D. [27] P. Kusch and H. M. Foley, Phys. Rev. 74 no.3, 250 Awschalom, Science 306, 1910 (2004). (1948). [14] J.Wunderlich, B. Kaestner, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, [28] J. S. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 73 416 (1948). Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 047204 (2005). [29] Y. Aharonov and A. Casher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53 319 [15] Saitoh, E., M. Ueda, H. Miyajima, and G. Tatara, Appl. (1984). Phys. Lett. 88, 182509 (2006). [30] J. Anandan, Phys. Lett. A 138 (1989) 347. [16] Valenzuela, S. O., and M. Tinkham, Nature (London) [31] R. R. Sastry, hep-th/9903179. 442, 176 (2006). [32] K. Bakke, J. R. Nascimento and C. Furtado, Phys. Rev. [17] Zhao, H., Loren, E. J., van Driel, H. M., Smirl, A. L., D 78 (2008) 064012 Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 246601 (2006). [33] K. Bakke, L. R. Ribeiro, C. Furtado and J. R. Nasci- 9
mento, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 024008 [42] V. Bargmann and E. P. Wigner, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. [34] K. Bakke, Eur. Phys. J. B 85 (2012) 354 34 211 (1948). [35] G. R. Pérez Teruel, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 29 (2014) [43] D.M. Fradkin and R.H. Good, Rev. Mod. Phys. 33 343 1450098 (1961). [36] H. Hassanabadi and M. Hosseinpour, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 [44] E. Raicher and S. Eliezer, Phys. Rev. A 88 (2013) no.2, (2016) no.10, 553 022113 [37] Ritwik Mondal, Marco Berritta, and Peter M. Oppeneer, [45] D.M. Fradkin and R.H. Good, Rev. Mod. Phys. 33 343 Phys. Rev. B 98, 214429 (2018) (1961). [38] Vernes, A., Gyorffy, B. L., Weinberger, P., Phys. Rev. B [46] P. Strange, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics: With Ap- 76 (2007) 012408. plications in Condensed Matter and Atomic Physics [39] C. A. Dartora, G. G. Cabrera, Phys. Rev. B 78 (2008) [47] A. Crépieux and P. Bruno, Phys. Rev. B 64, 094434 012403 (2001) [40] C. A. Dartora, G. G. Cabrera, Phys. Lett. A 374 (2010) [48] Ritwik Mondal, Marco Berritta, Karel Carva, and Peter 2596–2599 M. Oppeneer, Phys. Rev. B 91, 174415 (2015) [41] Y. Wang, K. Xia, Z. B. Su, and Z. Ma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 066601 (2006)