tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5439168179960787195.post6403719140402683670..comments2024-03-28T17:13:01.117+10:00Comments on Condensed concepts: Desperately seeking spin liquidsRoss H. McKenziehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09950455939572097456noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5439168179960787195.post-7140376251784671462010-01-13T02:52:49.748+10:002010-01-13T02:52:49.748+10:00Dear Prof. McKenzie,
Thank you for maintaining th...Dear Prof. McKenzie,<br /><br />Thank you for maintaining this blog.<br /><br />The following is a procedure by which one may construct SU(2)-invariant spin models which realize the phase diagrams of quantum dimer models (which can display spin liquid-like phases, as you might know):<br /><br />http://prb.aps.org/abstract/PRB/v72/i6/e064413<br /><br />The Hamiltonians may appear complicated but, I think, provide a counterexample to the conjecture as you state it. A different (perhaps easier) place to read about this is section 1.10 of this review paper:<br /><br />http://arxiv.org/aps/0809.3051<br /><br />Footnote [27] in that review alludes to a different sort of construction where the Hamiltonians involve many more spins but the required decoration should be less (in principle, two sites should be enough) and the results are "exact". <br /><br />In either case, these Hamiltonians are not particularly physical but, I believe, fulfill the requirement of a "proof of principle"....or am I missing something?<br /><br />With best regards,<br />Kumar RamanAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17494951281975347678noreply@blogger.com