Random magnetic field and quasiparticle transport in the mixed state of high-Tc cuprates

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 86, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 316-319

  Ye, Jinwu ^a  

^a University of Houston   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE SCATTERING; HAMILTONIANS; HIGH TEMPERATURE SUPERCONDUCTORS; MAGNETIC FIELD EFFECTS; QUANTUM THEORY; THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY; TRANSPORT PROPERTIES;

HIGH TEMPERATURE CUPRATES; QUASIPARTICLE TRANSPORT; RANDOM MAGNETIC FIELD; SINGULAR GAUGE TRANSFORMATION;

OXIDE SUPERCONDUCTORS;

EID: 0035127682     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.316     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. K. Krishana et al., Science 277, 83 (1997); H. Aubin et al., Science 280, 9a (1998); Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 624 (1999).
2. K. Krishana et al., Science 277, 83 (1997); H. Aubin et al., Science 280, 9a (1998); Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 624 (1999).
3. K. Krishana et al., Science 277, 83 (1997); H. Aubin et al., Science 280, 9a (1998); Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 624 (1999).
4. K. Krishana et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 5108 (1999).
5. N. P. Ong (private communication).
6. G. E. Volovik, Sov. Phys. JETP 58, 469 (1993).
7. C. Kubert and P. J. Hirschfeld, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4963 (1998); M. Franz, ibid. 82, 1760 (1999).
8. C. Kubert and P. J. Hirschfeld, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4963 (1998); M. Franz, ibid. 82, 1760 (1999).
9. Y. Wang and A. H. MacDonald, Phys. Rev. B 52, R3876 (1995).
10. S. H. Simon and P. A. Lee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1548 (1997).
11. P. W. Anderson, cond-mat/9812063.
12. M. Franz and Z. Tesanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 554 (2000).
13. Luca Marinelli, B. I. Halperin, and S. H. Simon, Phys. Rev. B 62, 3488 (2000).
14. In the first version of this paper, the external gauge field A(Combining right arrow above) was used to fix the gauge invariance of the Δ̂ operator. I thank FT tor pointing out the mistake to me [18]. The lack of gauge invariance in the Δ̂ operator in Refs. [7,9] was also independently realized and discussed by N. Read. See also O. Vafek et al., cond-mat/0007296.
15. Jinwu Ye and S. Sachdev, Phys. Rev. B 44, 10 173 (1991).
16. To some extent, the spinon here is similar to the composite fermion introduced in FQHE by B. I. Halperin, P. A. Lee, and N. Read, Phys. Rev. B 47, 7312 (1993).
17. α = - 1/2∇α) with ∇ × ∇φ = 2πẑδ(r(Combining right arrow above)). Equation (6) describes the quasiparticle scattering from α = 1/2 flux quantum, in addition to the superfluid shift (Volovik effect). The strong quasiparticle scattering (close to the unitary limit) from a single magnetic string with general α flux quantum was discussed in the pioneering paper by Y. Aharonov and D. Bohm, Phys. Rev. 115, 485 (1959); for a review, see, see S. Olariu and I. I. Popescu, Rev. Mod. Phys. 57, 339 (1985).
18. α = - 1/2∇α) with ∇ × ∇φ = 2πẑδ(r(Combining right arrow above)). Equation (6) describes the quasiparticle scattering from α = 1/2 flux quantum, in addition to the superfluid shift (Volovik effect). The strong quasiparticle scattering (close to the unitary limit) from a single magnetic string with general α flux quantum was discussed in the pioneering paper by Y. Aharonov and D. Bohm, Phys. Rev. 115, 485 (1959); for a review, see, see S. Olariu and I. I. Popescu, Rev. Mod. Phys. 57, 339 (1985).
19. A. W. W. Ludwig et al., Phys. Rev. B 48, 13 749 (1993); A. A. Nersesyan, A. M. Tsvelik, and F. Wenger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2628 (1994); Nucl. Phys. B438, 561 (1995); Jinwu Ye, Phys. Rev. B 60, 8290 (1999). Note this PH symmetry is within a single node which is different from the PH symmetry coming from spin SU(2) symmetry which relates the two opposite nodes i and ī.
20. A. W. W. Ludwig et al., Phys. Rev. B 48, 13 749 (1993); A. A. Nersesyan, A. M. Tsvelik, and F. Wenger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2628 (1994); Nucl. Phys. B438, 561 (1995); Jinwu Ye, Phys. Rev. B 60, 8290 (1999). Note this PH symmetry is within a single node which is different from the PH symmetry coming from spin SU(2) symmetry which relates the two opposite nodes i and ī.
21. A. W. W. Ludwig et al., Phys. Rev. B 48, 13 749 (1993); A. A. Nersesyan, A. M. Tsvelik, and F. Wenger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2628 (1994); Nucl. Phys. B438, 561 (1995); Jinwu Ye, Phys. Rev. B 60, 8290 (1999). Note this PH symmetry is within a single node which is different from the PH symmetry coming from spin SU(2) symmetry which relates the two opposite nodes i and ī.
22. A. W. W. Ludwig et al., Phys. Rev. B 48, 13 749 (1993); A. A. Nersesyan, A. M. Tsvelik, and F. Wenger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2628 (1994); Nucl. Phys. B438, 561 (1995); Jinwu Ye, Phys. Rev. B 60, 8290 (1999). Note this PH symmetry is within a single node which is different from the PH symmetry coming from spin SU(2) symmetry which relates the two opposite nodes i and ī.
23. C. Pepin and P. A. Lee, cond-mat/0002227.
24. In fact, this is only true when we neglect the finite core size ∼ ξ of the vortex.
25. α}, and therefore can be dropped out anyway.
26. A. C. Durst and P. A. Lee, Phys. Rev. B 62, 1270 (2000).
27. T. Senthil, M. P. A. Fisher, L. Balents, and C. Nayak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 4704 (1998).
28. c2/H, instead of the penetration length λ.
29. A. K. Geim, S. J. Bending, and I. V. Grigorieva, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2252 (1992).
30. Jinwu Ye (unpublished).
31. The randomly placed vortices in the context of paired FQHE were independently discussed by N. Read and D. Green, Phys. Rev. B 61, 10 267 (2000).