You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.
HOWTO /
FreeFermionFor free fermions, the 'single mode approximation' produces an exact groundstate. We test this numerically. First we obtain a wavefunction for m=200 for spinful fermions (fermi-Hubbard model at U=0). I choose half-filling, 2-site unit cell, so quantum numbers 2,0 per unit cell. Now we use the excitation ansatz {$$ \ket{k} = \sum_n e^{ikn} c_{\uparrow} \ket{0} $$} Firstly, the norm is obtained from the expectation value {$\langle k \vert k \rangle$}, #mp-imoments psi "lat:sq(sum_k(sites=2,0.0*2*pi, Cup(0) + exp(i*pi*0.0)*Cup(1)))"\ --degree 2 -u 1 --cart #Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 21:24:00 +1000 #quantities are calculated per unit cell size of 1 site #moment #degree #real #imag 2 1 0.99999297436009 -2.8939912587968e-18 2 2 0 0 Not sure why this isn't exactly 1, probably related to the local particle number variance, eg {$(N(0)-1)^2 = 0.4997$}, rather than the exact value of 0.5. Now for the energy: #mp-imoments psi "lat:ad(sum_k(sites=2,0.0*2*pi, Cup(0) + exp(i*pi*0.0)*Cup(1))) * H_t * \ (sum_k(sites=2,0.0*2*pi, Cup(0) + exp(i*pi*0.0)*Cup(1)))" --degree 3 -u 1 --cart #Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 21:27:28 +1000 #quantities are calculated per unit cell size of 1 site #moment #degree #real #imag 3 1 1.9999444636889 1.1292149123974e-18 3 2 -1.2731305836167 1.8047273831357e-18 3 3 0 0 Dividing by the norm, this gives {$E(N) = -1.273139528236581 + 1.999958514677259$}. Now the variance: #mp-imoments psi "lat:ad(sum_k(sites=2,0.0*2*pi, Cup(0) + exp(i*pi*0.0)*Cup(1))) * H_t^2 * \ (sum_k(sites=2,0.0*2*pi, Cup(0) + exp(i*pi*0.0)*Cup(1)))" --degree 3 -u 1 --cart #Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 21:27:31 +1000 #quantities are calculated per unit cell size of 1 site #moment #degree #real #imag 3 1 3.9995504874594 6.2411815245896e-17 3 2 -5.0922528637021 -7.4503672735005e-18 3 3 1.6208728706093 3.6493891722751e-19 We recall from SMA, that the contribution at 3rd order is the cube of the groundstate energy. At second order, the largest part is {$2E\Delta = -5.092416702000496$}. There is also a term equal to the groundstate variance, which is 0.00016383944952958. There is also a part from {$\bigbraket{0}{H}{k}$}, but this is zero in this case due to symmetry. Summing these up (and remembering to factor in the norm), we get exactly -5.0922528637021, which is good. The 1st order part has two contributions, {$\Delta^2 = 3.999862162021308$}, and the variance due to the excitation, which comes out to be {$\sigma^2_A = -0.000284$}. So we have a reasonably good quality excited state. Now this excitation cannot be in the tangent space, because we have {$\expect{c^\dagger_i c_j} \neq 0$}. We can test this further by looking at the transfer operator for {$\braket{0}{k}$}. Unfortunately I can't test this immediately as there is a quantum-number bug in the mp-fluctuation program. |