DOCSLIB.ORG

The Stochastic Ising and Potts Models at Criticality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Stochastic Ising and Potts Models at Criticality Courant Institute (NYU) Wilhelm Lenz Introduced by Wilhelm Lenz in 1920 1888-1957 as a model of ferromagnetism: Place iron in a magnetic field: increase field to maximum , then slowly reduce it to zero. There is a critical temperature 푇푐 (the Curie point) below which the iron retains residual magnetism. Magnetism caused by charged particles spinning or moving in orbit in alignment with each other. How do local interactions between nearby particles affect the global behavior at different temperatures? Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Gives random binary values (spins) to vertices accounting for nearest-neighbor interactions. Initially thought to be over-simplified Sociology Biology to capture ferromagnetism, but Chemistry Economics turned out to have a crucial role in Physics … understanding phase transitions & critical phenomena. One of the most studied models in Math. Phys.: more than 10,000 papers About 13,300 results over the last 30 years… Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Cyril Domb Proposed in 1951 by C. Domb to his 1920-2012 Ph.D. student R. Potts. Generalization of the Ising model to allow 푞 > 2 states per site. Special case 푞 = 4 was first studied in 1943 by Ashkin and Teller. Renfrey Potts Rich critical phenomena: 1925-2005 first/second order phase transitions depending on 푞 and the dimension. figure taken from: The Potts model FY Wu – Reviews of modern physics, 1982 Cited by 2964 Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Underlying geometry: Λ = finite 2D grid. Set of possible configurations: + + + - Λ Ω = ±1 - + + + (each site receives a plus/minus spin) - + - + Probability of a configuration 휎 ∈ Ω given by the Gibbs distribution: + - + + 1 휇 휎 = exp 1훽 ෍ 휎 푥 휎(푦) I 푍 훽 2 푥∼푦 Inverse Partition Josiah W. Gibbs temperature 1839-1903 function 훽 ≥ 0 Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Underlying geometry: Λ = finite 2D grid. Set of possible configurations: Ω = 1, … , 푞 Λ (each site receives a color) Probability of a configuration 휎 ∈ Ω given by the Gibbs distribution: 1 휇 휎 = exp 훽 ෍ 핝 P 푍 훽 휎 푥 =휎 푦 푥∼푦 Inverse Partition Josiah W. Gibbs temperature 1839-1903 function 훽 ≥ 0 Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute MCMC sampler introduced in 1963 by Roy Glauber (Nobel in Physics 2005). Time-dependent statistics of the Ising model RJ Glauber – Journal of mathematical physics, 1963 Cited by 3186 R.J. Glauber One of the most commonly used samplers for the Ising/Potts model: + + Update sites via IID Poisson(1) clocks - + - Each update replaces a spin at 푥 ∈ 푉 - - by a new spin ∼ 휇 given spins at 푉 ∖ {푥}. (heat-bath version; famous other flavor: Metropolis) + + + + - + - - +- - Time it takes to converge to 휇 ? - - - - Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute 1 σ Λ 휇I 휎 ∝ exp 2훽 푥∼푦 휎 푥 휎(푦) for 휎 ∈ Ω = ±1 Larger 훽 favors configurations with + + + - aligned spins at neighboring sites. - + + + Spin interactions: local, justified by rapid - + - + decay of magnetic force with distance. + - + + The magnetization is the (normalized) sum of spins: 1 푀 휎 = ෍ 휎(푥) Λ 푥∈Λ Distinguishes between disorder (푀 ≈ 0) and order. Symmetry: 피 푀 휎 = 0. What if we break the symmetry? Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute 1 [recall 푀 휎 = σ 휎(푥)] Ferromagnetism in this setting: Λ Condition on the boundary sites + + + + all having plus spins. + + + + + + - + Let the system size Λ tend → ∞ + + + + (≈ a magnetic field with effect → 0). What is the typical 푀(휎) for large Λ ? Does the effect of plus boundary vanish in the limit? Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute 1 [recall 푀 휎 = σ 휎(푥)] Ferromagnetism in this setting: Λ Condition on the boundary sites + + + + all having plus spins. + + + + + + - + Let the system size Λ tend → ∞ + + + + Expect: phase-transition at some critical 훽푐: 0 if 훽 < 훽푐 lim 피+ 푀(휎) = ቐ Λ →∞ 푚훽 > 0 if 훽 > 훽푐 all-plus spontaneous boundary magnetization Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute The magnetization +1 phase-transition at 훽푐 : 0 훽푐 훽 Replace magnetization ↭ price to find this diagram in “Why Stock Markets Crash” / D. Sornette (2001) [Chapter 5 “Modeling bubbles and crashes”] Such applications of the Ising Model emphasize the dimension of time: D. Sornette How does the system evolve? From a given starting state, how long does it take for certain configurations to appear? Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Bacteria growth with mutation modelled by an evolution of a Potts-type interface. K.S. Korolev, O.M. Avlund, O. Hallatschek, and D.R. Nelson, Genetic demixing and evolution in linear stepping stone models. Reviews of Modern Physics 82(2) (2010), 1691–1718. Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Behavior for the Ising distribution: + + 피 푀(휎) 0 피 푀(휎) 푐훽 > 0 Λ →∞ Λ →∞ Expected behavior for the inverse-gap of dynamics: power constant exponential Torus/free law Symmetry breaking: + power law Plus b.c. + + + + + + + + + + - + + + + + Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Static behavior for the Potts distribution: ` Expected behavior for the inverse-gap of dynamics: 훽푐(푞) exponential Torus constant power law 푞 Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Ph.D. in Physics in 1924 from U. Hamburg under the supervision of Lenz. Studied the 1D model of Lenz in his thesis: Exact solution for the 1D model. Ernst Ising 1900-1998 Unfortunately: no phase-transition… . 피+ 푀(휎) 0 for any 훽 ≥ 0. Λ →∞ . Intuition: ( + + + + + + + + ) similar to (+ + + + - - - - ) Heuristic arguments why there would not be a phase-transition in higher dimensions either. Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Ising [letter to S. Brush in 1967]: ”...I discussed the result of my paper widely with Prof. Lenz and with Dr. Wolfgang Pauli, who at that time was teaching in Hamburg. There was some disappointment that the linear model did not show the expected ferromagnetic properties...” Left research after a few years at the German General Electric Co. and turned to teaching in public schools. Survived WW2 in Luxembourg isolated from scientific life. Came to the US in 1947 and only then “...did I learn that the idea had been expanded.” Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Heisenberg (1928) proposed his own theory of ferromagnetism, motivated by Ising’s result. Followed by other models attempting to W. Heisenberg explain order/disorder in metallic alloys. 1901-1976 In 1936 Rudolf Peierls published the paper R. Peierls 1907-1995 arguing that the 2D and 3D Ising models do have spontaneous magnetization at low enough temperature (contrary to Ising’s prediction). Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Peierls’ combinatorial argument is simple and robust. Key idea: represent Ising configurations as contours in the dual graph: the edges are dual to disagreeing edges. Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute When all boundary spins are + ‘s the Peierls contours are all closed [marking “islands” containing of - ‘s ]. The proof will follow a first moment argument on the number of sites inside such a - component. Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Setting: Λ ⊂ ℤ2 is an 푛 × 푛 box with all-plus boundary. Fix a contour 퐶 of length ℓ. For any 휎 containing 퐶 flip all spins in the interior of 퐶 : bijection 1 1 ℙ 휎 = 푒퐵 ℙ 휎′ = 푒퐵+훽ℓ 푍 훽 푍 훽 ⇒ ℙ C belongs to contours ≤ 푒−훽ℓ. Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute For a fixed contour 퐶 of length ℓ : ⇒ ℙ C belongs to contours ≤ 푒−훽ℓ. 퐶 can contain ≤ ℓ2 sites (isoperimetric). 푂(푁 3ℓ) possible such contours, where 푁 = Λ = 푛2. Summing we get: ℓ 피 # 푥 ∶ 휎 푥 = −1 ≲ 푁 ෍ ℓ2 3푒−훽 < 휀푁 ℓ where 휀 < 1/2 for a suitably large 훽. Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Critical point candidate 훽푐 = log 1 + 2 ≈ 0.88 found by Kramers and Wannier in 1941 via duality. 2D Ising model exactly solved in 1944 in seminal work of Lars Onsager (Nobel in Chemistry 1968). Proof analyzed the 2푛 × 2푛 transfer matrix using the theory of Lie algebras. L. Onsager 1903-1976 Understanding of critical geometry boosted by advent of SLE [Schramm ’00] and breakthrough results of Smirnov. O. Schramm S. Smirnov 1961-2008 In parallel: extensive study of the dynamical model... Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Glauber dynamics dynamics (1963): + + Update sites via IID Poisson(1) clocks - + - Each update replaces the state of 푥 ∈ 푉 by a new 푆 ∼ 휇P(⋅ ∣ other states of 푉 ∖ 푥 ). - - Local: ℙ S = 푠 ∝ exp 훽 # 푦 ∼ 푥: 휎 푦 = 푠 Advantage: easy to simulate. + + + + Drawback: susceptible to - + - - +- - bottlenecks in energy landscape. - - - - 1 1 푒퐵+ퟐ휷 푒퐵+ퟒ휷 푍 훽 푍 훽 Swendsen–Wang dynamics (1987) : Draw percolation clusters as per the Fortuin–Kasteleyn representation (1969) of the Potts model. Let each cluster choose its color i.i.d. uniformly. Global (able to treat the Ising model double-well). Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Spectral gap in the spectrum of the generator: gap = smallest positive eigenvalue of the heat-kernel 퐻푡 of the dynamics. ℰ(푓,푓) = inf for ℰ 푓, 푓 the Dirichlet form. Var휇(푓) Mixing time (according to a given metric): Standard choice: 퐿1 (total-variation) mixing time to within distance 휀 is defined as 푡 푡mix 휀 = inf 푡 ∶ max 푝 푥0,⋅ − 휇 ≤ 휀 푥0 tv where 휇 − 휈 tv = sup 휇 퐴 − 휈(퐴) 퐴⊂Ω Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute For some critical inverse-temperature 훽푐: free or periodic b.c. 푑−1 gap−1: 푂(1) ≍ 푛푧 ≍ 푒휏훽 푛 universal Analogous picture verified for: Ising model on complete graph [Ding, L., Peres ‘09a, ‘09b], [Levin, Luczak, Peres ’10] Regular tree [Berger, Kenyon, Mossel, Peres ‘05], [Ding, L., Peres ’10] Potts model on complete graph [Cuff, Ding, L., Louidor, Peres, Sly ‘12], [Galanis, Stefankovic, Vigoda ‘15] , [Blanca, Sinclair ‘15] Eyal Lubetzky, Courant Institute Intuition: low temperature Exponential mixing due to a bottleneck between the “mostly-plus” and the “mostly-minus” states Intuition: high temperature Stationary magnetization At 훽 = 0 there is complete independence. For very small 훽 > 0 a spin is likely to choose the same update given 2 very different neighborhoods (weak “communication” between sites).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ecamp12 Book Online.Pdf
    , Industrial Exhibition Welcome to ECAMP 2016 Questions/Support: , In case of any problems please contact either the conference office or ask the conference staff for help. The staff is wearing easily recognizable “ECAMP 12” T-shirts. Conference Office: HSZ, 3rd Floor, HZ13 Help Hotline: +49 (0)69 798-19463 +49 (0)1590-8146358 (cell) WiFi Access: • Eduroam is available on campus. • In case you do not have eduroam, a personal WiFi-account can be requested at the conference office. 1 The ECAMP 12 is organized by the Institut für Kernphysik Frankfurt and hosted by the Goethe-Universität Frankfurt ECAMP 12 Local Organizing Committee: Reinhard Dörner Markus Schöffler Till Jahnke Lothar Schmidt Horst Schmidt-Böcking Scientific Committee Dominique Vernhet (Chair) Igor Ryabtsev Fritz Aumayr (Vice-Chair) Nina Rohringer Thomas Schlathölter Pierre Pillet Reinhard Dörner Olga Smirnova Alexander Eisfeld Tim Softley Jan-Petter Hansen Sergio Diaz Tendero Guglielmo Tino 2 Campus map P Parking Lot (no public parking!) H Bus Stop U Metro Station (Lines: U1,U2,U3,U8) The scientific part of the conference is held at the “HSZ” (designated as “Hörsaalzentrum” on the campus map) located in the middle of the Westend-Campus of Frankfurt University. 3 Site plan HSZ Ground floor entrance to lecture halls, industrial exhibition and registration (Sunday and Monday) 4 HSZ 1st floor entrance to lecture halls 5 HSZ 3rd floor conference office and poster sessions 6 Talks Talks will be held at the HSZ in the lecture halls HZ1 and HZ2. Duration of talks + discussion: Plenary talks: 50 + 10 minutes Progress reports: 25 + 5 minutes Hot topics: 12 + 3 minutes Please make sure to upload / test your presentation during the break prior to your talk.
    [Show full text]
  • Otto Stern Annalen 4.11.11
    (To be published by Annalen der Physik in December 2011) Otto Stern (1888-1969): The founding father of experimental atomic physics J. Peter Toennies,1 Horst Schmidt-Böcking,2 Bretislav Friedrich,3 Julian C.A. Lower2 1Max-Planck-Institut für Dynamik und Selbstorganisation Bunsenstrasse 10, 37073 Göttingen 2Institut für Kernphysik, Goethe Universität Frankfurt Max-von-Laue-Strasse 1, 60438 Frankfurt 3Fritz-Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin Keywords History of Science, Atomic Physics, Quantum Physics, Stern- Gerlach experiment, molecular beams, space quantization, magnetic dipole moments of nucleons, diffraction of matter waves, Nobel Prizes, University of Zurich, University of Frankfurt, University of Rostock, University of Hamburg, Carnegie Institute. We review the work and life of Otto Stern who developed the molecular beam technique and with its aid laid the foundations of experimental atomic physics. Among the key results of his research are: the experimental test of the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of molecular velocities (1920), experimental demonstration of space quantization of angular momentum (1922), diffraction of matter waves comprised of atoms and molecules by crystals (1931) and the determination of the magnetic dipole moments of the proton and deuteron (1933). 1 Introduction Short lists of the pioneers of quantum mechanics featured in textbooks and historical accounts alike typically include the names of Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Arnold Sommerfeld, Niels Bohr, Max von Laue, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Paul Dirac, Max Born, and Wolfgang Pauli on the theory side, and of Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, Ernest Rutherford, Arthur Compton, and James Franck on the experimental side. However, the records in the Archive of the Nobel Foundation as well as scientific correspondence, oral-history accounts and scientometric evidence suggest that at least one more name should be added to the list: that of the “experimenting theorist” Otto Stern.
    [Show full text]
  • The World Around Is Physics
    The world around is physics Life in science is hard What we see is engineering Chemistry is harder There is no money in chemistry Future is uncertain There is no need of chemistry Therefore, it is not my option I don’t have to learn chemistry Chemistry is life Chemistry is chemicals Chemistry is memorizing things Chemistry is smell Chemistry is this and that- not sure Chemistry is fumes Chemistry is boring Chemistry is pollution Chemistry does not excite Chemistry is poison Chemistry is a finished subject Chemistry is dirty Chemistry - stands on the legacy of giants Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier (1743-1794) Marie Skłodowska Curie (1867- 1934) John Dalton (1766- 1844) Sir Humphrey Davy (1778 – 1829) Michael Faraday (1791 – 1867) Chemistry – our legacy Mendeleev's Periodic Table Modern Periodic Table Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev (1834-1907) Joseph John Thomson (1856 –1940) Great experimentalists Ernest Rutherford (1871-1937) Jagadish Chandra Bose (1858 –1937) Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman (1888-1970) Chemistry and chemical bond Gilbert Newton Lewis (1875 –1946) Harold Clayton Urey (1893- 1981) Glenn Theodore Seaborg (1912- 1999) Linus Carl Pauling (1901– 1994) Master craftsmen Robert Burns Woodward (1917 – 1979) Chemistry and the world Fritz Haber (1868 – 1934) Machines in science R. E. Smalley Great teachers Graduate students : Other students : 1. Werner Heisenberg 1. Herbert Kroemer 2. Wolfgang Pauli 2. Linus Pauling 3. Peter Debye 3. Walter Heitler 4. Paul Sophus Epstein 4. Walter Romberg 5. Hans Bethe 6. Ernst Guillemin 7. Karl Bechert 8. Paul Peter Ewald 9. Herbert Fröhlich 10. Erwin Fues 11. Helmut Hönl 12. Ludwig Hopf 13. Walther Kossel 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Wolfgang Pauli 1900 to 1930: His Early Physics in Jungian Perspective
    Wolfgang Pauli 1900 to 1930: His Early Physics in Jungian Perspective A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Minnesota by John Richard Gustafson In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Advisor: Roger H. Stuewer Minneapolis, Minnesota July 2004 i © John Richard Gustafson 2004 ii To my father and mother Rudy and Aune Gustafson iii Abstract Wolfgang Pauli's philosophy and physics were intertwined. His philosophy was a variety of Platonism, in which Pauli’s affiliation with Carl Jung formed an integral part, but Pauli’s philosophical explorations in physics appeared before he met Jung. Jung validated Pauli’s psycho-philosophical perspective. Thus, the roots of Pauli’s physics and philosophy are important in the history of modern physics. In his early physics, Pauli attempted to ground his theoretical physics in positivism. He then began instead to trust his intuitive visualizations of entities that formed an underlying reality to the sensible physical world. These visualizations included holistic kernels of mathematical-physical entities that later became for him synonymous with Jung’s mandalas. I have connected Pauli’s visualization patterns in physics during the period 1900 to 1930 to the psychological philosophy of Jung and displayed some examples of Pauli’s creativity in the development of quantum mechanics. By looking at Pauli's early physics and philosophy, we gain insight into Pauli’s contributions to quantum mechanics. His exclusion principle, his influence on Werner Heisenberg in the formulation of matrix mechanics, his emphasis on firm logical and empirical foundations, his creativity in formulating electron spinors, his neutrino hypothesis, and his dialogues with other quantum physicists, all point to Pauli being the dominant genius in the development of quantum theory.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 X-Ray Crystallography
    Introductory biophysics A. Y. 2016-17 5. X-ray crystallography and its applications to the structural problems of biology Edoardo Milotti Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Trieste The interatomic distance in a metallic crystal can be roughly estimated as follows. Take, e.g., iron • density: 7.874 g/cm3 • atomic weight: 56 3 • molar volume: VM = 7.1 cm /mole then the interatomic distance is roughly VM d ≈ 3 ≈ 2.2nm N A Edoardo Milotti - Introductory biophysics - A.Y. 2016-17 The atomic lattice can be used a sort of diffraction grating for short-wavelength radiation, about 100 times shorter than visible light which is in the range 400-750 nm. Since hc 2·10−25 J m 1.24 eV µm E = ≈ ≈ γ λ λ λ 1 nm radiation corresponds to about 1 keV photon energy. Edoardo Milotti - Introductory biophysics - A.Y. 2016-17 !"#$%&'$(")* S#%/J&T&U2*#<.%&CKET3&VG$GG./"#%G3&W.%-$/; +(."J&AN&>,%()&CTDB3&S.%)(/3&X.1*&W.%-$/; Y#<.)&V%(Z.&(/&V=;1(21&(/&CTCL&[G#%&=(1&"(12#5.%;&#G&*=.& "(GG%$2*(#/&#G&\8%$;1&<;&2%;1*$)1] 9/(*($));&=.&1*:"(."&H(*=&^_/F*./3&$/"&*=./&H(*=&'$`&V)$/2I&(/& S.%)(/3&H=.%.&=.&=$<()(*$*."&(/&CTBD&H(*=&$&*=.1(1&[a<.% "(.& 9/*.%G.%./Z.%12=.(/:/F./ $/&,)$/,$%$)).)./ V)$**./[?& 7=./&=.&H#%I."&$*&*=.&9/1*(*:*.&#G&7=.#%.*(2$)&V=;1(213&=.$"."& <;&>%/#)"&Q#--.%G.)"3&:/*()&=.&H$1&$,,#(/*."&G:))&,%#G.11#%&$*& *=.&4/(5.%1(*;&#G&0%$/IG:%*&(/&CTCL3&H=./&=.&$)1#&%.2.(5."&=(1& Y#<.)&V%(Z.?& !"#$%"#&'()#**(&8 9/*%#":2*#%;&<(#,=;1(21&8 >?@?&ABCD8CE Arnold Sommerfeld (1868-1951) ... Four of Sommerfeld's doctoral students, Werner Heisenberg, Wolfgang Pauli, Peter Debye, and Hans Bethe went on to win Nobel Prizes, while others, most notably, Walter Heitler, Rudolf Peierls, Karl Bechert, Hermann Brück, Paul Peter Ewald, Eugene Feenberg, Herbert Fröhlich, Erwin Fues, Ernst Guillemin, Helmut Hönl, Ludwig Hopf, Adolf KratZer, Otto Laporte, Wilhelm LenZ, Karl Meissner, Rudolf Seeliger, Ernst C.
    [Show full text]
  • Otto Stern Annalen 22.9.11
    September 22, 2011 Otto Stern (1888-1969): The founding father of experimental atomic physics J. Peter Toennies,1 Horst Schmidt-Böcking,2 Bretislav Friedrich,3 Julian C.A. Lower2 1Max-Planck-Institut für Dynamik und Selbstorganisation Bunsenstrasse 10, 37073 Göttingen 2Institut für Kernphysik, Goethe Universität Frankfurt Max-von-Laue-Strasse 1, 60438 Frankfurt 3Fritz-Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin Keywords History of Science, Atomic Physics, Quantum Physics, Stern- Gerlach experiment, molecular beams, space quantization, magnetic dipole moments of nucleons, diffraction of matter waves, Nobel Prizes, University of Zurich, University of Frankfurt, University of Rostock, University of Hamburg, Carnegie Institute. We review the work and life of Otto Stern who developed the molecular beam technique and with its aid laid the foundations of experimental atomic physics. Among the key results of his research are: the experimental determination of the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of molecular velocities (1920), experimental demonstration of space quantization of angular momentum (1922), diffraction of matter waves comprised of atoms and molecules by crystals (1931) and the determination of the magnetic dipole moments of the proton and deuteron (1933). 1 Introduction Short lists of the pioneers of quantum mechanics featured in textbooks and historical accounts alike typically include the names of Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Arnold Sommerfeld, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Paul Dirac, Max Born, and Wolfgang Pauli on the theory side, and of Konrad Röntgen, Ernest Rutherford, Max von Laue, Arthur Compton, and James Franck on the experimental side. However, the records in the Archive of the Nobel Foundation as well as scientific correspondence, oral-history accounts and scientometric evidence suggest that at least one more name should be added to the list: that of the “experimenting theorist” Otto Stern.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of the Quantum-Mechanical Electron Theory of Metals: 1928---1933
    The development of the quantum-mechanical electron theory of metals: 1S28—1933 Lillian Hoddeson and Gordon Bayrn Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, illinois 6180f Michael Eckert Deutsches Museum, Postfach 260102, 0-8000 Munich 26, Federal Republic of Germany We trace the fundamental developments and events, in their intellectual as well as institutional settings, of the emergence of the quantum-mechanical electron theory of metals from 1928 to 1933. This paper contin- ues an earlier study of the first phase of the development —from 1926 to 1928—devoted to finding the gen- eral quantum-mechanical framework. Solid state, by providing a large and ready number of concrete prob- lems, functioned during the period treated here as a target of application for the recently developed quan- tum mechanics; a rush of interrelated successes by numerous theoretical physicists, including Bethe, Bloch, Heisenberg, Peierls, Landau, Slater, and Wilson, established in these years the network of concepts that structure the modern quantum theory of solids. We focus on three examples: band theory, magnetism, and superconductivity, the former two immediate successes of the quantum theory, the latter a persistent failure in this period. The history revolves in large part around the theoretical physics institutes of the Universi- ties of Munich, under Sommerfeld, Leipzig under Heisenberg, and the Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule (ETH) in Zurich under Pauli. The year 1933 marked both a climax and a transition; as the lay- ing of foundations reached a temporary conclusion, attention began to shift from general formulations to computation of the properties of particular solids. CONTENTS mechanics of electrons in a crystal lattice (Bloch, 1928); these were followed by the further development in Introduction 287 1928—1933 of the quantum-mechanical basis of the I.
    [Show full text]
  • Der Erste Professor Für Theoretische Physik an Der Universität Hamburg: Wilhelm Lenz
    Karl-Heinz Schlote, Martina Schneider (eds.) Mathematics meets physics A contribution to their interaction in the 19th and the first half of the 20th century Der erste Professor für Theoretische Physik an der Universität Hamburg: Wilhelm Lenz Karin Reich 1 Die Anfänge der Physik in Hamburg .............. 90 2 Einsteins Vortrag in Hamburg am 17. Juli 1920 ........ 90 3 Die Berufung von Wilhelm Lenz im Jahre 1921 ........ 93 4 Die Karriere von Wilhelm Lenz ................. 94 4.1 Sommerfeldschüler .................... 94 4.2 Zwischenspiel in Rostock ................. 99 4.3 Lenz in Hamburg ..................... 100 5 Wissenschaftler im Umfeld von Lenz .............. 105 5.1 Ernst Ising ......................... 105 5.2 Wolfgang Pauli ...................... 111 5.3 Johannes Hans Daniel Jensen .............. 118 6 Das Verhältnis Lenz – Koch .................... 128 7 Die Nachkriegszeit und Rückblick ............... 133 8 Resümee .............................. 137 9 Literaturverzeichnis ........................ 138 90 Part II. Lokale Kontexte | Local contexts 1 Die Anfänge der Physik in Hamburg Schon lange vor der Gründung der Universität in Hamburg im Jahre 1919 war dort die Physik institutionalisiert worden: 1885 nämlich wurde das sog. «Physikalische Staatslaboratorium» gegründet. Als erster Direktor fungierte Carl August Voller, der dieses Amt bis zur Gründung der Universität innehatte; er konnte sogar erreichen, dass diese Institution 1892 einen Neubau beziehen konnte.1 Im Staatslaboratorium wurde vor allem die Experimentalphysik gepflegt, die theoretische Physik hielt man nicht für so wichtig. Man war der Meinung, dass es genügen würde, diese, wenn überhaupt, einem fest angestellten wissenschaftlichen Beamten übertragen zu können. Aber selbst dazu kam es nicht. So blieb es bei der Experimentalphysik, und dies auch, als die Universität ins Leben gerufen worden war.
    [Show full text]
  • The Beginnings of X-Ray Diffraction in Crystals in 1912 and Its Repercussions1
    Z. Kristallogr. 227 (2012) 27–35 / DOI 10.1524/zkri.2012.1445 27 # by Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag, Mu¨nchen Disputed discovery: The beginnings of X-ray diffraction in crystals in 1912 and its repercussions1 Michael Eckert* Deutsches Museum, Forschungsinstitut, Museumsinsel 1, 80538 Munich, Germany Received August 22, 2011; accepted September 22, 2011 M. von Laue / A. Sommerfeld / W. H. Bragg / W. L. Bragg Crystallography, and other celebratory reviews of the events in 1912, according to Forman, served the purpose Abstract. The discovery of X-ray diffraction is reviewed of maintaining a disciplinary identity among the crystallo- from the perspective of the contemporary knowledge in graphers. “This circumstance, and its evident social func- 1912 about the nature of X-rays. Laue’s inspiration that tion of reinforcing a separate identity, strongly suggests led to the experiments by Friedrich and Knipping in Som- that the traditional account may be regarded as a ‘myth of merfeld’s institute was based on erroneous expectations. origins’, comparable to those which in primitive societies The ensuing discoveries of the Braggs clarified the phe- recount the story of the original ancestor of a clan or nomenon (although they, too, emerged from dubious as- tribe” (Forman, 1969, p. 68). In turn, Ewald regarded this sumptions about the nature of X-rays). The early misap- interpretation as “the myth of the myths”. Forman failed, prehensions had no impact on the Nobel Prizes to Laue in in Ewald’s view, “to appreciate the vagueness of the phy- 1914 and the Braggs in 1915; but when the prizes were sical information confronting Laue before the experiment.
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Physics Shuai Dong
    Computational physiCs Shuai Dong Dice 骰子 Monte Carlo simulations • Sampling and integration • Darts method to calculate p • Random-number generators • The Metropolis algorithm • Ising model What is Monte Carlo? Monte-Carlo, Monaco Monte Carlo Casino Monte Carlo method: computational statistics Birthday: World War II, 1940s Father: S. Ulam Birth Place: neutron reaction in atom bomb, Manhattan Project Von Neumann Stanislaw Ulam (1903-1957) (1909-1984) Principle Physical Problems Simulated by Random Processes Why is it called Monte Carlo? Numerical solutions Sampling and integration If we want to find the numerical value of the integral Divide the region [0, 1] evenly into M slices with x0 = 0 and xM = 1, and then the integral can be approximated as which is equivalent to sampling from a set of points x1, x2, . , xM in the region[0, 1] with an equal weight, in this case, 1, at each point. We can also select xn with n = 1,2,... , M from a uniform random number generator in the region [0,1] to a ccomplish the same goal. If M is very large, we would expect xn to be a set of numbers uniformly distributed in the region [0, 1] with fluctuations proportional to 1/sqrt(M). Then the integral can be approximated by the average where xn is a set of M points generated from a uniform random number generator in the region [0,1]. Example • In order to demonstrate the algorithm clearly, let us take a very simple integrand f (x) = x2 from 0 to 1. • The exact result of the integral is 1/3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fate of Ernst Ising and the Fate of His Model
    The Fate of Ernst Ising and the Fate of his Model Thomas Ising a, Reinhard Folk b, Ralph Kenna c,a, Bertrand Berche d,a, Yurij Holovatch e,a aL4 Collaboration & Doctoral College for the Statistical Physics of Complex Systems, Leipzig-Lorraine-Lviv-Coventry b Institute for Theoretical Physics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, A-4040, Linz, Austria cApplied Mathematics Research Centre, Coventry University, Coventry, CV1 5FB, United Kingdom dStatistical Physics Group, Laboratoire de Physique et Chimie Th´eoriques, Universit´ede Lorraine, F-54506 Vandœuvre-les-Nancy Cedex, France eInstitute for Condensed Matter Physics, National Acad. Sci. of Ukraine, UA–79011 Lviv, Ukraine June 6, 2017 Abstract On this, the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the “Ising Lec- tures” in Lviv (Ukraine), we give some personal reflections about the famous model that was suggested by Wilhelm Lenz for ferromagnetism in 1920 and solved in one dimension by his PhD student, Ernst Ising, in 1924. That work of Lenz and Ising marked the start of a scientific direction that, over nearly 100 years, delivered extraordinary successes in explaining collective behaviour in a vast variety of systems, both within and beyond the natural sciences. The broadness of the appeal of the Ising model is reflected in the variety of talks presented at the Ising lectures (http://www.icmp.lviv.ua/ising/) over the past two arXiv:1706.01764v1 [physics.hist-ph] 6 Jun 2017 decades but requires that we restrict this report to a small selection of topics. The paper starts with some personal memoirs of Thomas Ising (Ernst’s son). We then discuss the history of the model, exact solutions, experimental realisations, and its extension to other fields.
    [Show full text]
  • Göttingen and Quantum Mechanics
    G¨ottingen and Quantum Mechanics K. Sch¨onhammer, U G¨ottingen 1 Introduction In this talk the central role played by G¨ottingen in the formulation of quantum mechanics is elucidated. It starts with a short historical account of the earlier im- portant steps towards achieving this goal in the first twenty years of the twentieth century [1]. The first step in the formulation of quantum theory took place in the year 1900 with Max Planck's explanation of the spectrum of black-body radiation by trea- ting the walls as a system of harmonic oscillators. He made the assumption that the energy quanta emitted and absorbed are integer multiples of hν, where ν is the frequency of the oscillator and h is Planck's constant, which he had introduced a year earlier using thermodynamic arguments. In 1905 Albert Einstein postulated the existence of light quanta (only much later called photons). This allowed him to give a theoretical explanation o f the photoelectric effect. Rutherford's scattering experiments of alpha particles from gold foils (1911) sug- gested a planetary model of atoms, with a heavy positively charged nucleus sur- rounded by electrons. As the electrons perform accelerated motion they radiate according to Maxwell's equations and therefore these atoms cannot be stable within a description by classical physics. This is in contrast to the the plum pudding model proposed J.J. Thomson in 1904. In this model the electrons are assumed to float freely in continuous positive charge background and stationary configurations exist in which no radiation is emitted [2].
    [Show full text]