Differences between the Tonks regimes in the continuum and on the lattice

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 70, Issue 4, 2004, Pages

  Cazalilla, M A ^a  

^a DONOSTIA INTERNATIONAL PHYSICS CENTER DIPC   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; CORRELATION METHODS; FERMIONS; FUNCTIONS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; PHASE DIAGRAMS; SPECTRUM ANALYSIS;

BOSONS; INTERACTION ENERGY; OPTICAL LATTICES; TONKS REGIMES;

CONTINUUM MECHANICS;

EID: 19744361828     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.70.041604     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. T. Stöferle et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 130403 (2004).
2. B. Paredes et al., Nature (London) 429, 277 (2004); see also the news and views article by M. J. Holland, Nature (London) 429, 251 (2004).
3. B. Paredes et al., Nature (London) 429, 277 (2004); see also the news and views article by M. J. Holland, Nature (London) 429, 251 (2004).
4. B. Laburthe-Tolra et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 130403 (2004).
5. M. Greiner et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 160405 (2001); H. Moritz et al., ibid. 91, 250402 (2003).
6. M. Greiner et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 160405 (2001); H. Moritz et al., ibid. 91, 250402 (2003).
7. A. F. Ho, M. A. Cazalilla, and T. Giamarchi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 130405 (2004).
8. L corresponds to the γ used in Ref. [2], Note that our conventions for U and J differ by factors of 1/2 from the convention used in [2], but they cancel out after taking the ratio.
9. E. Lieb and W. Liniger, Phys. Rev. 130, 1605 (1963); E. Lieb, ibid. 130, 1616 (1963).
10. E. Lieb and W. Liniger, Phys. Rev. 130, 1605 (1963); E. Lieb, ibid. 130, 1616 (1963).
11. V. Dunjko, V. Lorent, and M. Olshanii, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5413 (2001).
12. M. A. Cazalilla, Phys. Rev. A 63, 053606 (2003).
13. A. Lenard, J. Math. Phys. 5, 930 (1964).
14. M. A. Cazalilla, Europhys. Lett. 59, 793 (2002).
15. M. Rigol and A. Muramatsu, Phys. Rev. A 70, 031603(R) (2004).
16. M. A. Cazalilla, J. Phys. B 37, S1 (2004).
17. The Bose-Hubbard model is known to be nonintegrable. See T. C. Choy and F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Lett. 90A, 83 ( 1982).
18. K. Kheruntsyan et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 040403 (2003).
19. -1{ (see Ref. [9]).
20. 0 to be even, so that the gound state is nondegenerate.
21. T. Giamarchi, Quantum Physics in One Dimension (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003).
22. M. A. Cazalilla (unpublished).
23. P. Jordan and E. P. Wigner, Z. Phys. 47, 631 (1928); The transformation has been rediscovered many times, e.g., S. Rodriguez, Phys. Rev. 116, 1474 (1959).
24. P. Jordan and E. P. Wigner, Z. Phys. 47, 631 (1928); The transformation has been rediscovered many times, e.g., S. Rodriguez, Phys. Rev. 116, 1474 (1959).
25. M. Girardeau, J. Math. Phys. 1, 516 (1960).