Prove 2 and 3 state clock model is equivalent to Potts model

In summary, the conversation discusses the equivalence between a p-state clock model and a Potts model with q states. The Hamiltonian for the Potts model is described by a delta function, while the clock model is described by a cosine function. The conversation explores different values of p and q, and concludes that for p=q=2, the two models are equivalent with the addition of a constant factor. However, for higher values of p and q, the models are not identical. The conversation also suggests using a Fourier transform and an identity involving exponentials to potentially find a transformation between the two models.
  • #1
Fb.Researcher
9
0

Homework Statement


A p-state clock model is a spin model in which states can be viewed as hands of a clock!
Now knowing the models we should prove these two models are equivalent for ##p=q=2## or ##p=q=3##

Homework Equations



Potts model is described by $$ H = -J \sum_{<ij> } \delta_{ \sigma_i \sigma_j} ~ ~ ,~ ~\sigma_i = 0,1 , \dots, q $$
and clock model is described by $$ H = -K \sum_{<ij> } \cos (2 \pi (n_i - n_j ) / p) ~ ~ ~, ~ n_i = 1, 2, ..., p $$ in which ## n_i ## is our state. In this models states are vectors in a circle( or hands of a clock ).

The Attempt at a Solution


As far as I know two equivalent model have same Hamiltonian; which means the shape of the sentences in the Hamiltonian should be the same up to constant factor.
for ## q = p = 2 ## we can say that a two state clock model will have two states with ## 0 ~ , ~ \pi ~, -\pi ## deference. So $$ \cos (2 \pi (n_i - n_j ) / p) = \begin{cases} 1, & n_i = n_j \\ -1, & |n_i - n_j| = 1\end{cases} $$.
Which is two possible values for the parameter inside the sum. Now I think adding a 1 to the Hamiltonian of clock model with ## K = \frac{J}{2} ## plus a constant, which is ##\frac{1}{2}## will produce the same results as Potts model, so these two models are identical.

for ## q = p = 2 ## with the same procedure I obtained
$$ \cos (2 \pi (n_i - n_j ) / p) = \begin{cases} 0, & n_i = n_j \\ - \frac{1}{2}, & |n_i - n_j| = 2\end{cases} $$.
Which means for ## K = -2J ## or ## k = 2J ## and a constant factor of ##\frac{1}{2}##, these model produce the same results and they are identical.

For higher values of p and q clock model will always produce more than two numbers and we can not say these models are identicalAs you can see I have not find a way to transform delta function to a function similar to the clock model.In fact I do not have a transformation. My solutions does not seem to be professional nor is an advanced solution for a advanced Physics problem.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think youre answer is almost there, I worked out a bit of it and got the same thing. I think the next step would be to use an identity of the form

[itex] N\delta_{k,k'} = \sum_1^N e^{i(k-k')x}[/itex]

this is an identity commonly used during a Fourier transform. Before using this you need to convert your cosine into exponentials as [itex] cos(\theta) = \frac{1}{2}\left(e^{i\theta}+e^{-i\theta}\right)[/itex]. Obviously you need to manipulate it a bit, but once you get it into a form appropriate to your problem I think it will work out.
 

FAQ: Prove 2 and 3 state clock model is equivalent to Potts model

What is the 2 and 3 state clock model?

The 2 and 3 state clock model is a theoretical model used in statistical mechanics to study the behavior of systems with discrete states and interactions. It is commonly used to describe phase transitions in magnetic materials and has been extended to other physical systems such as fluid dynamics.

What is the Potts model?

The Potts model is a mathematical model used to study the behavior of systems with discrete states and interactions. It is commonly used in statistical mechanics to describe phase transitions in ferromagnetic materials and has been applied to a wide range of physical systems, including social networks and neural networks.

How are the 2 and 3 state clock model and Potts model related?

The 2 and 3 state clock model and Potts model are considered equivalent because they both describe systems with discrete states and interactions. The only difference between the two models is the type of interactions considered - the clock model has nearest-neighbor interactions, while the Potts model has both nearest-neighbor and next-nearest-neighbor interactions.

Can the equivalence between the clock model and Potts model be proven?

Yes, the equivalence between the clock model and Potts model can be proven mathematically. This was first shown by Wu in 1982 and has been confirmed by numerous studies and simulations since then.

What are the implications of the equivalence between the clock model and Potts model?

The equivalence between the clock model and Potts model allows for the use of different theoretical and computational techniques in studying these systems. It also provides a deeper understanding of the underlying principles and behaviors of these systems, allowing for more accurate predictions and applications in various fields of science and engineering.

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
726
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top