4.7 Review

From high temperature superconductivity to quantum spin liquid: progress in strong correlation physics

期刊

REPORTS ON PROGRESS IN PHYSICS
卷 71, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0034-4885/71/1/012501

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review gives a rather general discussion of high temperature superconductors as an example of a strongly correlated material. The argument is made that in view of the many examples of unconventional superconductors discovered in the past twenty years, we should no longer be surprised that superconductivity emerges as a highly competitive ground state in systems where Coulomb repulsion plays a dominant role. The physics of the cuprates is discussed, emphasizing the unusual pseudogap phase in the underdoped region. It is argued that the resonating valence bond picture, as formulated using gauge theory with fermionic and bosonic matter fields, gives an adequate physical understanding, even though many details are beyond the powers of current calculational tools. The recent discovery of quantum oscillations in a high magnetic field is discussed in this context. Meanwhile, the problem of the quantum spin liquid (a spin system with antiferromagnetic coupling which refuses to order even at zero temperature) is a somewhat simpler version of the high T-c problem where significant progress has been made recently. It is understood that the existence of matter fields can lead to deconfinement of the U(1) gauge theory in 2 + 1 dimensions, and novel new particles (called fractionalized particles), such as fermionic spinons which carry spin 1/2 and no charge, and gapless gauge bosons can emerge to create a new critical state at low energies. We even have a couple of real materials where such a scenario may be realized experimentally. The paper ends with answers to questions such as: What limits Tc if pairing is driven by an electronic energy scale? Why is the high Tc problem hard? Why is there no consensus? And why is the high T-c problem important?.

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

4.7
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