4.6 Article

Complex Berry phase and imperfect non-Hermitian phase transitions

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW B
卷 107, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.107.085122

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In many classical and quantum systems with a non-Hermitian Hamiltonian, a spectral phase transition can occur when a non-Hermitian parameter exceeds a critical value, leading to a transition from a completely real-energy spectrum to a complex spectrum. The phenomenon is particularly evident in systems with parity-time (PT) symmetry, where the energy spectrum is real in the unbroken PT phase and becomes complex in the broken PT phase. However, when the system is cyclically and slowly cycled, the phase transition can become imperfect due to the complex Berry phase associated with the adiabatic evolution of the system.
In many classical and quantum systems described by an effective non-Hermitian Hamiltonian, spectral phase transitions, from an entirely real-energy spectrum to a complex spectrum, can be observed as a non-Hermitian parameter in the system is increased above a critical value. A paradigmatic example is provided by systems possessing parity-time (PT) symmetry, where the energy spectrum remains entirely real in the unbroken PT phase while a transition to complex energies is observed in the broken PT phase. Such spectral phase transitions are universally sharp. However, when the system is slowly and periodically cycled, the phase transition can become smooth, i.e., imperfect, owing to the complex Berry phase associated to the cyclic adiabatic evolution of the system. This remarkable phenomenon is illustrated by considering the spectral phase transition of the Wannier-Stark ladders in a PT-symmetric class of two-band non-Hermitian lattices subjected to an external dc field, revealing that a nonvanishing imaginary part of the Zak phase-the Berry phase picked up by a Bloch eigenstate evolving across the entire Brillouin zone-is responsible for imperfect spectral phase transitions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据