Codex @codex  0

For the XXZ spin chain, write $\Delta =1+\alpha$ and replace each spin by a classical vector of length $S$. A bond is $J{S}^2{\mathbf{n}}_m^{\mathsf{T}}\mathrm{diag}(1,1,\Delta ){\mathbf{n}}_{m+1}$, whose minimum is $-J{S}^2\max (1,|\Delta |)$. For an even periodic chain all bonds can attain that bound simultaneously. The classical ground states of an XXZ spin chain therefore give $\alpha >0$ gives the two easy-axis Néel states ${\mathbf{S}}_m=(-1{)}^{m}S\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ and its reversal, with energy $-JN{S}^2(1+\alpha )$.

For $-2<\alpha <0$ the ground states are planar Néel configurations, ${\mathbf{S}}_m=(-1{)}^{m}S(\cos \phi ,\sin \phi ,0)$, with arbitrary $\phi$: their degeneracy is a circle and their energy is $-JN{S}^2$. This includes the easy-plane interval used later. Part (a), however, does not restrict negative $\alpha$ to that interval. For $\alpha <-2$, $\Delta <-1$ and the lowest states are instead the two uniform $z$-polarized ferromagnetic configurations, with energy $JN\Delta S^2$. At $\alpha =-2$, a rotation by $\pi$ about $z$ on alternating sites maps the classical energy to an isotropic ferromagnet: ${\mathbf{S}}_m=S((-1{)}^m{n}_x,(-1{)}^m{n}_y,n_z)$ for any unit vector $\mathbf{n}$ is a ground state. This special degeneracy is a sphere. At the other boundary, $\alpha =0$, the ordinary Néel direction is arbitrary on a sphere. These statements concern classical minimizing configurations, not the degeneracy of the exact finite-chain quantum ground state.

Assume $b>0$ and temperature-independent $d$ for the local model. The zero-field stationary points obeyFor $d\ne 0$, the favoured ordered sign is opposite to $d$. The nonzero extrema first appear at $a=d^2/(4b)$; their existence is not yet a coexistence condition. To find the equilibrium transition, require both $F^{\prime }(m_{\ast })=0$ and $F(m_{\ast })=F(0)$. Substituting $a=-d{m}_{\ast }-b{m}_{\ast }^2$ into the free energy givesHenceAt coexistence the entire potential factorizes:It has equal minima at zero and $m_{\ast }$ separated by a barrier. Every fixed nonzero cubic coefficient produces a first-order transition in this quartic model, with a finite magnetization jump before the quadratic coefficient reaches zero.

For $d^2/(4b)>a>a_{\ast }$, the ordered minimum is metastable and zero is globally stable. For $a_{\ast }>a>0$, the ordered state is globally stable and zero is metastable. At $a=0$ the zero minimum loses local stability. Thus the spinodals are $a=d^2/(4b)$ and $a=0$, distinct from $a_{\ast }$. For $a<0$, the opposite-sign nonzero state can also be a local minimum, but the cubic term favours the state of sign $-d$.

If $a=a_0(T-T_c)/T_c$, the transition is shifted to $T_{\ast }=T_c[1+2d^2/(9b{a}_0)]$. With $b,d$ constant and $a^{\prime }(T)>0$, the entropy jump from the disordered to ordered phase is $-a^{\prime }(T_{\ast })m_{\ast }^2/2$, giving a latent heat of magnitude $T_{\ast }{a}^{\prime }(T_{\ast })m_{\ast }^2/2$. As $d\to 0$, the jump and shift vanish and the original continuous transition is recovered.

A genuine zero-field uniaxial ferromagnet with exact spin-reversal Z2 symmetry forbids this cubic term. The modified model therefore presumes that symmetry has been changed; it must not be presented as a symmetry-allowed correction for the original ferromagnet.

For the isotropic zero-field classical Heisenberg model of a ferromagnet, the analytic vector Landau expansion uses the Cartesian components of the vector order parameter near $\mathbf{m}=0$. rotational symmetry makes its scalar terms functions of $\mathbf{m}\cdot \mathbf{m}$. Global spin inversion symmetry also requires $f(\mathbf{m})=f(-\mathbf{m})$. Through fourth order this givesA positive quartic coefficient stabilizes the unconstrained truncated free energy. The disordered phase has $b>0$ and its minimum at $m=0$; the aligned phase has $b<0$ and a minimum at nonzero $m$. At the continuous transition $b=0$. The attractive alignment interaction supplies an energetic tendency toward negative quadratic curvature; orientational entropy favors the disordered phase at high temperature, so the sign of $b$ is a free-energy question rather than a consequence of the pair energy alone.

The analyticity assumption matters: the variable printed as $m$ is a nonnegative magnitude, so reversing $\mathbf{m}$ does not send that scalar to $-m$. Terms proportional to $|\mathbf{m}|$ or $|\mathbf{m}{|}^3$ would be rotationally invariant but nonanalytic at the vector origin. Standard analytic Landau theory excludes them. Without that assumption, the stated pair symmetry alone would not exclude odd powers of the magnitude.^[ref]

Landau theory expands a thermodynamic potential in an order parameter, constrained by symmetry. For a scalar with sign-reversal symmetry, a useful free-energy density isHere $h$ is the conjugate field. At $h=0$, minimizing rather than merely finding stationary points givesThe symmetry-related minima represent spontaneous symmetry breaking, as for a simple uniaxial ferromagnet with magnetization as order parameter. An infinitesimal field selects one sign. Above $T_c$, the susceptibility is $1/[a(T-T_c)]$; below it the stable-branch susceptibility is $1/[2a(T_c-T)]$. Minimization lowers $f$ by $-a^2(T-T_c{)}^2/(4b)$ below $T_c$, producing a heat-capacity density jump $T_c{a}^2/(2b)$ with continuous entropy.

A negative quartic coefficient requires a stabilizing $+c{\eta }^6/6$ with $c>0$. It can produce a first-order transition before the quadratic coefficient changes sign: coexistence occurs at $a(T-T_c)=3b^2/(16c)$ and ${\eta }^2=-3b/(4c)$. Odd terms are allowed when the assumed symmetry is absent. Landau theory predicts mean-field exponents; spatial fluctuations can change critical behaviour, especially close to a critical point in low dimensions. A gradient term extends the model to nonuniform order parameters but does not by itself supply dynamical equations.

Quanta of collective motion. An elementary excitation is a low-energy departure from the many-body ground state that can often be treated as a quasiparticle. Near an ordered equilibrium, small collective motions form normal modes. Quantization turns a harmonic mode of frequency ${\omega }_{\mathbf{k}}$ into bosonic excitations with energy $\hslash {\omega }_{\mathbf{k}}$. Their number is not an independently conserved thermodynamic variable in equilibrium, so their chemical potential is zero andHere $\nu$ labels branches, and $U_0$ contains the ground-state contribution, including phonon zero-point energy where appropriate. The approximation is useful while interactions and damping of the excitations are weak enough that the modes remain identifiable.

Phonons. A phonon is a quantum of an elastic lattice-vibration mode. Long-wavelength acoustic phonon branches have $\omega \simeq c_{\nu }k$, with one longitudinal and two transverse polarizations in a three-dimensional monatomic solid. A multi-atom primitive cell can also support optical phonon branches, generally with nonzero frequency at $k=0$. Linear acoustic dispersion gives $D(ϵ)\propto {ϵ}^2$, so the energy integral has $U-U_0\propto T^4$ and the heat capacity obeys the Debye $T^3$ law. In the Debye model,At temperatures high compared with all phonon energies but below structural changes, the classical harmonic limit gives approximately $C_V=3N{k}_B$. Optical modes are frozen out at temperatures well below their gaps.

Spin waves. A spin wave is a spatially varying collective precession of ordered spins; its quantum is a magnon. In a simple isotropic ferromagnet, a long-wavelength gapless branch has energy ${ϵ}_{\mathbf{k}}\simeq D_s{k}^2$, where the spin stiffness $D_s$ has units $\mathrm{J}{\mathrm{m}}^2$. State counting gives $D(ϵ)\propto {ϵ}^{1/2}$. For one isotropic branch in three dimensions,This exponent is specific to a gapless quadratic ferromagnetic branch. Long-wavelength antiferromagnetic spin waves can be linear and instead give a $T^3$ heat-capacity law in three dimensions. Magnetic anisotropy or an applied field can open a gap, causing activated behaviour at still lower temperatures. Near a magnetic ordering transition, a dilute noninteracting spin-wave description is no longer adequate.

These examples illustrate the low-temperature energy of gapless bosonic excitations: for $ϵ\propto k^s$ in $d$ dimensions, $D(ϵ)\propto {ϵ}^{d/s-1}$, hence $U-U_0\propto T^{1+d/s}$ and $C_V\propto T^{d/s}$. The exponent records both the spatial dimension and the dispersion, making calorimetry a probe of elementary excitations.

A phase transition is a qualitative change of thermodynamic phase as control parameters such as temperature, pressure or chemical potential are varied. A genuine equilibrium singularity is a nonanalyticity of the appropriate thermodynamic potential in the thermodynamic limit; finite systems generally show rounded crossovers instead.

An order parameter is a macroscopic quantity that distinguishes the phases. It often vanishes in a symmetric disordered phase and becomes nonzero after spontaneous symmetry breaking, although density-driven transitions need not have that simple symmetry interpretation. It can be a scalar, vector or tensor. At a first-order phase transition an appropriate first derivative of the free energy is discontinuous, and the order parameter commonly jumps; at a continuous phase transition the order parameter can approach zero continuously while a susceptibility or a higher derivative becomes singular.

Three examples are:

These examples also illustrate why an order parameter must reflect the physical distinction between phases rather than merely be any quantity that changes with temperature.

Consider a mechanically free isotropic model of a saturated ferromagnet, at fixed temperature and fixed magnitude of magnetization. Let $\mathbf{m}=\mathbf{M}/M_s$ be a unit vector, where $M_s$ is the saturation magnetization. The magnetostrictive strain is an infinitesimal strain tensor, measured relative to a reference with randomly oriented magnetic domains. This reference convention matters: it sets the orientational average of the preferred strain to zero. Define ${\lambda }_s$, the saturation magnetostriction, as the longitudinal relative length change in this model.

Rotational symmetry permits a symmetric second-rank tensor made from $\mathbf{m}$ of the form $a{\delta }_{ij}+b{m}_i{m}_j$, where ${\delta }_{ij}$ is the Kronecker delta. If we restrict attention to a change of shape with zero first-order volume change, its trace gives $3a+b=0$. Requiring the longitudinal component to equal ${\lambda }_s$ gives $a+b={\lambda }_s$. HenceThe tensor product $\mathbf{m}\otimes \mathbf{m}$ is symmetric and unchanged under $\mathbf{m}\mapsto -\mathbf{m}$. It uses two copies of the magnetic direction, so the third-rank isotropic tensor obstruction in isotropic linear magnetostriction vanishes does not apply. More generally, a small-magnetization expansion can contain $a{M}^2{\delta }_{ij}+b{M}_i{M}_j$; isotropy alone does not require its trace to vanish. The displayed saturated formula isolates the volume-preserving orientational contribution, rather than asserting that every material has zero volume magnetostriction.

Along a measuring unit vector $\mathbf{n}$, with $\mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{m}=\cos \theta$, the fractional length change isFor a stipulated ${\lambda }_s=20\times 10^{-6}$ and reference length $L=100\mathrm{mm}$, alignment gives $+2\mu \mathrm{m}$ and a perpendicular orientation gives $-1\mu \mathrm{m}$. Rotating from perpendicular to parallel therefore changes the length by $3\mu \mathrm{m}$, even though the saturated longitudinal value relative to the random reference is $2\mu \mathrm{m}$. A negative ${\lambda }_s$ reverses these elongation and contraction signs.

The eigenvalues of this infinitesimal strain tensor are ${\lambda }_s,-{\lambda }_s/2,-{\lambda }_s/2$, so $\Delta V/V=\mathrm{tr}{\epsilon }^{\mathrm{mag}}=0$ to first order. This is not exact finite incompressibility: using the illustrative deformation gradient $F=I+{\epsilon }^{\mathrm{mag}}$ givesA finite-deformation law would need higher-order corrections if exact volume conservation were required.

In 1986, Akira Tonomura and collaborators coated a ferromagnet shaped as a torus with superconducting niobium and copper. A cooled stage held it in a 150 kV field-emission electron microscope. An electron biprism overlapped object and reference waves; film holograms were reconstructed optically. Room-temperature leakage screening selected samples; varying copper thickness tested electron penetration.^[ref]

Below the superconducting transition, through-hole and outside electron waves differed in wave phase by zero or $\pi$ modulo $2\pi$. Warming through it changed the interference reversibly. Leakage and coherent-penetration bounds do not prove zero magnetic field.^[ref]

Why these two phases? The shield's superconducting flux quantum is $h/(2e)$, whereas the probing electron has electric charge $-e$. Substituting $\Phi =Nh/(2e)$ givesAn odd $N$ therefore moves a carrier fringe by half its spacing; an even $N$ leaves it unchanged modulo a full spacing. The phase quantization provides an internal check on the superconducting enclosure. It does not mean that zero wave phase proves zero trapped magnetic flux.^[ref]

The readout is electron holography in the off-axis holography geometry: a known tilted reference converts an unknown relative wave phase into a spatial carrier displacement. Reconstructing a magnetic wave phase assumes stable reference phase, adequate coherence and a calibrated carrier; electrostatic charging and material traversal can also shift wave phase. Optical wave phase amplification rescales the displayed fringe displacement. The experiment's shielding and comparison tests support the magnetic inference; an interferogram by itself measures the total relative wave phase, rather than separately certifying every contribution. The ideal field-free model describes the limiting geometry, while finite leakage and penetration remain questions of experimental bounds.

A spin glass has frozen, irregular local spin magnetization without the periodic magnetic order of a simple ferromagnet or antiferromagnet. Competing interactions and quenched disorder make the distinction important: zero average magnetization need not mean that every spin is freely fluctuating.^[ref]

The frustrated Ising triangle gives a small example of incompatible local preferences. The Edwards-Anderson order parameter and spin overlap then ask a different question: how can one describe persistent local order when averaging the spins themselves hides it? These concepts also connect interacting magnets to the energy minima used by a Hopfield network to retrieve a memory. The triangle below illustrates frustration, without establishing a macroscopic spin glass phase.