spin-orbit-induced spin-density wave in quantum wires and spin

47
Oleg Starykh, University of Utah Suhas Gangadharaiah, University of Basel Jianmin Sun, Indiana University Spin-orbit-induced spin-density wave in quantum wires and spin chains Dahlem Center, Freie Universitat Berlin, Sept. 29, 2010 PRL 98, 126408; PRL 100, 156402; PRB 78, 054436; PRB 78, 174420 and work in progress also appears in quasi-1d Kagome antiferromagnet, work with Andreas Schnyder (MPI Stuttgart) and Leon Balents (KITP) Saturday, February 12, 2011

Upload: others

Post on 09-Feb-2022

14 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Oleg Starykh, University of UtahSuhas Gangadharaiah, University of Basel

Jianmin Sun, Indiana University

Spin-orbit-induced spin-density wave in quantum wires and spin chains

Dahlem Center, Freie Universitat Berlin, Sept. 29, 2010

PRL 98, 126408; PRL 100, 156402; PRB 78, 054436; PRB 78, 174420 and work in progress

also appears in quasi-1d Kagome antiferromagnet, work withAndreas Schnyder (MPI Stuttgart) and Leon Balents (KITP)

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Motivation:

Why be interested in weak relativistic interaction -- spin-orbit?

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Spin - Orbital (SO) coupling

—Relativistic effect:

v

EB

spin in magnetic field

—Atoms:

—Magnetic materials: Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction via exchange + SO (1957)

D ~ λ J

requires absence of inversion symmetry r -> -r

Textbook (Landau-Lifshits VIII p.286) example: MnSi pitch ~ 170 A

Saturday, February 12, 2011

50 years later: MnSi - quantum phase transition under pressure

• MnSi – itinerant ferromagnet with long pitch spiral order. At ambient pressure: Tc=30K, Moment =0.3μB

‘Partial Order’ PhaseE

NERGY

Itinerant ferromagnet with long pitch spiral - non-Fermi liquid under pressure

(slide from A. Vishwanath)

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Field-induced gap in 1D antiferromagnet

•Cu benzoate: specific heat in the magnetic field C ~ exp[-Δ/kBT]

δq ~ H: standard Heisenberg

Δ ~ H2/3 : staggered DM

Massive incommensurate S=1 excitations

Dender et al PRL 79, 1750 (1997)

Oshikawa, Affleck PRL 79, 2883 (1997)

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Spintronics

* No inversion symmetry => 2DEG heterostructures (e.g. GaAs)

Surface states (e.g. Au[111])

* Rashba Hamiltonian (1984)

Free electrons + SO :

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Spin splitting of an Au(111) surface states: ARPES

Surface obtained by cutting along (111) plane

Spin-split Fermi surface Brillouin zone

ARPES spectra dispersion fit: Δ ~ 55meV = EF/8 !

LaShell et al. PRL 77, 3419 (1996)

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Topological Insulators,M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane,arxiv 1002.3895

Strong spin-orbit+surface states

Saturday, February 12, 2011

9

Saturday, February 12, 2011

1D setting: magnetized wires with SOI and in proximity with s-wave superconductors

arxiv 1003.1145 and 1006.4395Saturday, February 12, 2011

• Spin-orbit interactions show up in different physical situations— Dresselhaus, Rashba, Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya...

• Result in interesting symmetry reductions— Momentum dependent magnetic field — Symmetry reduction SU(2) => U(1)

• Are not that [ (v/c)2 ] small : can be (and, are) observed currently!

Thus

Interplay of e-e interactions and spin-orbit is very interesting

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Outline• Warm-up: van der Waals like coupling between spins in quantum dots

• Brief intro to quantum wires

Key scattering processes in a single-subband wire Effect of magnetic field: Zeeman splitting

• Spin-orbital effects

Cooper channel Spin-density wave formation (orthogonal magnetic field) Transport: suppressed backscattering Connection with spin chain physics: uniform DM interaction Unusual implications for ESR experiments

Conclusions

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Warm-up exercise: spin-orbit mediated coupling of spins in the absence of exchange (no tunneling!)

Idea: Spin-Orbit correlates spin and orbital motion,while Coulomb correlates orbital motion of electrons

Coupled single-electron quantum dots

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Unitary transformation to “remove” Spin-Orbit

Shahbazyan, Raikh (1994)Aleiner, Fal’ko (2001)

• Spin-orbit form indeed

• Assumes that (SO length) << (confining length)

Unitary rotation:

Transforms SOI into:

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Two single-electron dots coupled by Coulomb interaction

• Four harmonic oscillators: along X (Y), symmetric (anti-symmetric)

• Perturbation: spin-orbit

• 2nd order energy correction

• van der Waals-like spin-spin interaction

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Generalizations

• vdW interaction is absent in strict d=1 limit, when

• Effect of magnetic field: appearance of dipolar coupling

for

• Implications for exchange interactions: expect symmetry breaking of DM form only in αR

4 order.

Hidden SU(2) symmetry (Shekhtman et al 1992, Koshibae et al 1994)

Flindt et al 2006, Trif et al 2007

but external magnetic field will again result in two non-commuting perturbations!

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Serious consequences for Wigner crystals

• Electron lattice with exponentially small exchange competing multi-spin exchanges extensive spin degeneracy (e.g. Pomeranchuk effect)

• Spin vdW coupling: ferromagnetic Ising interaction Non-exchange type (no overlap of wave functions) No frustration lifts degeneracy

• Ferromagnetic ground state (GaAs rs~100; InAs rs~20)

Sun, Gangadharaiah, OS, PRL 100, 156402 (2008)

SOI + Coulomb does lead to interesting new physics

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Outline• Warm-up: van der Waals like coupling between spins in quantum dots

• Brief intro to quantum wires

Key scattering processes in a single-subband wire Effect of magnetic field: Zeeman splitting

• Spin-orbital effects

Cooper channel Spin-density wave formation (orthogonal magnetic field) Transport: suppressed backscattering Connection with spin chain physics: uniform DM interaction Unusual implications for ESR experiments

Conclusions

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Vicinal Au(111) surface states: one-dimensional electrons on terraces

•Cut at small miscut angle α~3.50 : surface composed of {111} steps (terraces)

d ~ 38 A

•Terrace: one-dimensional states (d ~ λF)

Disperses along the terrace

But notperpendicularto it!

•Dispersing states are spin-split :

kF1 = 0.157 A-1

kF2 = 0.184 A-1

Mugarza et al PRL 87, 107601 (2001)PRB 66, 245419 (2002)

no magnetic field here

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Quantum wire

Coulomb interaction is screened by the gate => short-ranged U(x)

Slow modes: right and left movers

-e

+e

-e

+ea/d=0.1-1

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Interaction leads to two-particle scattering

• characterized by momentum transfer q

Forward q~ 0 (mostly controls charge )

Backscattering q~ 2kF (mostly spin )

Screened interaction: U(0) ~ U(2kF)

• Must conserve momentum (at T=0)

Long-range interaction: U(0) >> U(2kF)

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Hydrodynamic description: bosonization

• Two independent liquids: charge and spin are decoupled

• All excitations are density waves

=>

Charge density

Charge current

PE KE

= “coordinate”

jc = “momentum”

controlled by spin-rotational[SU(2)] symmetry

charge

spin

Dual pair φ and θ

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Correlation functions are determined by interaction-dependent Kc & Ks

• Charge correlations

• Spin correlations

(zz) and (xx, yy) are equivalent only if Ks = 1/Ks => Ks =1 ( SU(2) fixed point)

gz0

This happens via BKT renormalization:spin backscattering is marginally irrelevantThus initially

Butat the “end”

initial = high-energy

final = low-energySaturday, February 12, 2011

Spin backscattering is noticeable: NMR in Sr2CuO3

Spin decomposition:

Spin correlations

uniform and staggered magnetization

NMR relaxation rate

noninteracting spinons

(OS, Singh, Sandvik;Takigawa,OS,Sandvik,Singh 1997)

Sr2CuO3

N

M

free part, H0

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Spin backscattering is noticeable: NMR in Sr2CuO3

Spin decomposition:

Spin correlations

uniform and staggered magnetization

NMR relaxation rate

noninteracting spinons

(OS, Singh, Sandvik;Takigawa,OS,Sandvik,Singh 1997)

Sr2CuO3

N

M

free part, H0

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Transport: Ballistic conductance G=I/V

Kc=1 Kc=1Kc<1

wirespin degeneracy

Number of subbands

perfect transmissiondue to multiple scatteringof plasmon waves

• spins play no role !

• Very fragile: single impurity“cuts” the wire

[Kane,Fisher 1992]

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Quantum wire in magnetic field

: BS withspin-flip

: BS withoutspin-flip

marginal+oscillating =irrelevant

without the field

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Renormalization Group: BKT flow in magnetic field

• Initial values of BS constants:

=1+gz

The fixed point

• The meaning: spin-flip scattering is frozen.

• Note

SU(2) U(1) : spins are in the plane perpendicular to BKs

* > 1

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Hint of a new scattering channel: Cooper scattering

• But Sz is conserved

• Consequence of U(1) symmetry - need to break it!

Sz conservation forbids Cooper scattering

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Outline• Warm-up: van der Waals like coupling between spins in quantum dots

• Brief intro to quantum wires

Key scattering processes in a single-subband wire Effect of magnetic field: Zeeman splitting

• Spin-orbital effects

Cooper channel Spin-density wave formation (orthogonal magnetic field) Transport: suppressed backscattering Connection with spin chain physics: uniform DM interaction Unusual implications for ESR experiments

Conclusions

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Spin - orbit interaction

• Two dimensions: Rashba Hamiltonian

• One dimension:

Confining potential Vconf(x) = mω x2/2 Transverse momentum is quantized <px> = 0(standing wave)

SOI = momentum-dependent magnetic fieldPreferred axis - σx : spin-rotational symmetry is reduced to U(1)

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Single particle problem

• Eigenvalues

• Eigenstates

spinors

k > 0:counterclock-wiserotation of spins

k < 0:clock-wise rotation of spins

µ

χ+ and χ− : orthogonal at the same kbut not at the same energy

1 2

N.B: different precessionfrequencies at k1 and k2

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Cooper scattering

U(k1- k2) but small overlap

U(k1+ k2) but bigger overlap

(almost) always:

1 2 1 2

• Cooper channel: spin non-conserving inter-subband pair tunnelingpossible due to Spin-Orbit only

[relative minus sign]

Saturday, February 12, 2011

SDW instability

• Easy limit: EF >> gµB >> αkF

Free charge:

Interacting spin: + Cooper process

Kc < 1

Ks > 1 relevant!

• Strong-coupling limit: minimal energy @

Thus θs is frozen, hence φs fluctuates wildly.

• 2kF component of spin operators:

but

Power-law decay is controlled by charge sector:quasi Long Range Order

Saturday, February 12, 2011

SDW: transport properties• Density: suppressed Friedel oscillations

• Should we expect better conductance? Impurity = potential scatterer => preserves spin

No single particle scattering off the potential impurity in SDW phase!

• But two-particle backscattering off the impurity does get generatedCorrection to conductance

Relevant (divergent) for strong e-e interaction: Kc < 1/2

Sx ordered component

• The physics: k1/2 => -k1/2 backscattering suppressed due to opposite ordering of Sx Inter-subband backscattering k1/2 => -k2/1 suppressed by destructive interference

at 2k1 and 2k2

at 2kF=k1+k2

N.B. magnetic impurity will scatter strongly

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Close parallels with helical liquids and topological insulators

Topological Insulators,M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane,arxiv 1002.3895

Saturday, February 12, 2011

H0 =2πv

3

Z

x

�J2R+ �J2

L→ 2πv

3

Z

x

�M2R+ �M2

L

Spin chain with uniform DM term via non-abelian rotations

•Rotate right (left) current by γ (−γ) about y axis

•Backscattering interaction of spin currents is modified

Gangadharaiah, Sun, OS, PRB 78, 054436; and Schnyder, OS, Balents, PRB 78, 174420

∑j

Dx̂ · �S j×�S j+1→ D̃Z

x(Jx

R− JxL)

•This rotation leaves invariant, thanks to emergent SU(2)R x SU(2)L symmetry

x

z

γ−γ

yh-D D

odd under inversion

Saturday, February 12, 2011

•Magnetic field can now be absorbed

•Transverse to total field t components Mx,y oscillate with x

So that

•The final (momentum-conserving) Hamiltonian

Cooper term

Spin chain with DM cont’d

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Y

YC

γ=π/2

γ=π/4

γ=0

BKT phase diagram: always in strong coupling phase for h perp. D

(h=0)

(D=0)

• SDW for arbitrary ratio of D/h = S.O. coupling/Zeeman

LL (massless)

Massive

Moroz et al. PRB 62, 16900 (2000);Gritsev et al. PRL 94, 137207 (2005).

Saturday, February 12, 2011

(D+hsin[β])JxR +hJz

R

(−D+hsin[β])JxL +hJz

L

Arbitrary angle between SO axis and magnetic field

x

zh

-D Dh cos(β)

h sin(β)

Field experienced by right-moving electrons

Field experienced by left-moving electrons

∂xϕσ and ∂xθσ

Chiral rotation angles for right/left currents are different:linear shifts in both are required.

Cooper process does not conserve momentum anymore.Backscattering is reduced to purely marginal term:Hbs→−gcos[γR− γL] M

z

RM

z

L

β

★ End result: critical Luttinger state with slightly renormalized exponents

Detailed phase diagram via numerical solution of coupled RG equations:Garate and Affleck, PRB 81, 144419 (2010)

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Iesr(ω) ∝ E2r ω χ��

xx(q = 0,ω)

χ��xx(q = 0,ω) ∝ δ(ω−gµBH)

Implications for ESR experimentsMeasures absorption of linearly polarized, and perpendicular to external magnetic field, radiation

SU(2) symmetric system of spins:Oshikawa, Affleck PRB 65, 134410 (2002)

Spin chain with uniform DM (quantum wire with SO interaction):right and left movers absorb at different frequencies !χ��

xx(q = 0,ω) ∝ δ�

ω−�

(D−hsinβ)2 +(hcosβ)2�

+δ�

ω−�

(D+hsinβ)2 +(hcosβ)2�

ideal Heisenberg chainChain with uniform DM

shift due to momentum boost ~ D/J

carbon nanotubes:A. De Martino et al, PRL (2002);generation of DC currentsin quantum wires:Ar. Abanov et al, arxiv 1008.1225

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Conclusions• Interplay of magnetic field, spin-orbit and interactions: novel and interesting many-body physics

• SDW driven by electron pair tunneling between Zeeman-split subbands

Possible due to SU(2) breaking by the spin-orbit interaction

• Spin-density wave instability affects (charge) conductance

• Spin chains with uniform DM interaction

✓ Chiral rotations of right- and left- spin currents

❖ ESR experiments as a chiral probe of 1d excitations

★ Consequences for Majorana fermions?!

Saturday, February 12, 2011

ESR study of Cs2CuCl4Schrama et al, Physica B 256-258, 637 (1998)

Single peak at T = 4.2 Kevolves into two peaks atT < 1.1 K

This spin-1/2 quasi-1d materialis known to possess uniformDM couplings, OS, Katsura, Balents PRB 82, 014421 (2010)

Experiments in Institute for Physical Problems, Moscow:K. Povarov, A.I. Smirnov et al(unpublished) confirm orientationdependent ESR doublets

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Can we really get there?

• So far: assumed fully developed SDW state• With impurities present, what happens first:

SDW instability or strong-impurity limit - detailed RG required.

Naively: impurity is washed away if V0 < ΔSDW

1/Ks

Magnetic field

Affleck, Oshikawa PRB 60, 1038 (1999)

Weak field: Ks=1+1/[2 ln(EF/gµB)]

Strong field: Ks = 2

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Tilted magnetic field: pair momentum is NOT conserved

• SDW stable when SO axis and magnetic field are orthogonal.Narrow (but finite) angular stability.

h

D

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Monolayer Graphene on Ni (111)Dedkov et al. PRL 2008

Saturday, February 12, 2011