| Literature DB >> 34923836 |
Monika Aidelsburger1,2, Luca Barbiero3,4, Alejandro Bermudez5, Titas Chanda6,7, Alexandre Dauphin3, Daniel González-Cuadra3, Przemysław R Grzybowski8, Simon Hands9,10, Fred Jendrzejewski11, Johannes Jünemann12, Gediminas Juzeliūnas13, Valentin Kasper3, Angelo Piga3,14, Shi-Ju Ran15, Matteo Rizzi16,17, Germán Sierra18, Luca Tagliacozzo19, Emanuele Tirrito20, Torsten V Zache21,22, Jakub Zakrzewski6, Erez Zohar23, Maciej Lewenstein3,24.
Abstract
The central idea of this review is to consider quantum field theory models relevant for particle physics and replace the fermionic matter in these models by a bosonic one. This is mostly motivated by the fact that bosons are more 'accessible' and easier to manipulate for experimentalists, but this 'substitution' also leads to new physics and novel phenomena. It allows us to gain new information about among other things confinement and the dynamics of the deconfinement transition. We will thus consider bosons in dynamical lattices corresponding to the bosonic Schwinger or [Formula: see text] Bose-Hubbard models. Another central idea of this review concerns atomic simulators of paradigmatic models of particle physics theory such as the Creutz-Hubbard ladder, or Gross-Neveu-Wilson and Wilson-Hubbard models. This article is not a general review of the rapidly growing field-it reviews activities related to quantum simulations for lattice field theories performed by the Quantum Optics Theory group at ICFO and their collaborators from 19 institutions all over the world. Finally, we will briefly describe our efforts to design experimentally friendly simulators of these and other models relevant for particle physics. This article is part of the theme issue 'Quantum technologies in particle physics'.Entities:
Keywords: lattice gauge theory; quantum simulations; ultracold quantum matter
Year: 2021 PMID: 34923836 PMCID: PMC8685612 DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2021.0064
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci ISSN: 1364-503X Impact factor: 4.226
Figure 1The bosonic Schwinger model and its time-evolution [37]: (a) schematic depiction of BSM, where lattice sites are populated by particles (red circles) and antiparticles (blue circles) and the bonds between neighbouring sites hold U(1) electric gauge fields. Left moving particles (antiparticles) raise (lower) the quantum state of the electric field in a corresponding bond, while the opposite holds for right moving bosons. (b) Sketch of the confining dynamics of BSM. The system is driven out of equilibrium by creating spatially separated particle–antiparticle pair connected by a string of electric field (a yellow wiggly line). The strong confinement of bosons bends the trajectory of both excitations. New dynamical charges are created during the evolution that partially screen the electric field. However, the electric field oscillates coherently and may form an anti-string (cyan wiggly line), creating a central core of strongly correlated bosons that is very different from an equilibrium state. This strange central region survives despite the fact that the boson density in the central region may be depleted through the radiation of lighter mesons that can propagate freely. (c) Dynamics of the electric field and the dynamical charge , and (d) the same for the total entanglement entropy measured across different bonds and its classical part . (Online version in colour.)
Figure 2Symmetry-breaking topological insulators [46]: (a) sketch of the BHM (3.3). Bosonic particles (red spheres) hop on a one-dimensional lattice interacting among then and with fields (arrows). The latter are located on lattice links and their configuration modifies the tunnelling strength. (b) The model describes a mixture of ultracold bosonic atoms in an optical lattice, where two hyperfine states of one deeply trapped species (green/blue spheres) simulates the field [45]. The correlated tunnelling term can be obtained as a second-order density-dependent tunnelling process of the other species [47]. (c) Qualitative phase diagram at half filling. For strong enough Hubbard interactions, the system undergoes a bosonic Peierls transition from a qSF to a BOW phase where the field orders anti-ferromagnetically [48]. The two degenerate symmetry-broken patterns (A and B) give rise to insulating states, one of which manifests non-trivial topological properties such as localized edge states with a fractional bosonic number. (d) The presence of dynamical fields and the interplay between symmetry breaking and topological symmetry protection gives rise to strongly correlated effects that are absent in an static lattice. In the figure, topological defects are shown between the different symmetry-broken field patterns, hosting fractional bosonic states that can move along the system’s bulk [46,49]. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 3Emergent symmetry protection and fractional pumping [53]. (a) For fractional densities other than half filling, the SSB of translational invariance can also break the protecting inversion symmetry . For and , the latter emerges again for sufficiently strong values of , giving rise to non-trivial topology () while maintaining a trimmerized pattern along the phase transition [53]. (b) Such a symmetry-constrained transition can be employed to devise a self-adjusted pumping protocol, where the system travels adiabatically along the trivial and topological (threefold) degenerate configurations. Each trivial–topological–trivial subcycle transport 1/3 of a boson [53]. In the figure, , with denotes the expectation value of the field within the repeating unit cell. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 4Creutz topological insulator: (a) the imbalanced Creutz ladder defined in equation (4.3) in the -flux limit. (b) Atoms in two hyperfine states , are trapped at the minima of an optical lattice. At low temperatures, the kinetic energy of the atoms can be described as a tunnelling of strength between the lowest energy levels , of neighbouring potential wells. Additionally, the s-wave scattering of the atoms leads to contact interactions of strength whenever two fermionic atoms with different internal states meet on the same potential well. (c) Phase diagram of the C–H model. It displays a topological insulator phase (TI), and two other non-topological phases, namely an orbital phase with long-range ferromagnetic Ising order (oFM), and an orbital paramagnetic phase (oPM). The blue circles label numerical results and the coloured phase boundaries are a guide to the eye. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 5Gross–Neveu model phase diagrams: (a) Phase diagram of Gross–Neveu model. The two green solid lines correspond to the critical lines found by large- techniques. Red circles represent the critical points of the Gross Neveu lattice model obtained with MPS. The semi-transparent green lines joining these points delimit the trivial band insulator, Aoki phase, and the symmetry-protected topological phase. We also include the exact critical point at , which is depicted by an orange star, and the strong-coupling critical lines that become exact in the limit of , depicted by dashed orange lines. MPS predictions match these exact results remarkably well. (b) Phase diagram of Gross–Neveu model. Contour plots of the Chern number (blue) and condensate (orange), predicting large- QAH phases, trivial band insulators (TBIs) and a ferromagnetic phase (FM). The black solid line is obtained by solving self-consistent equations (Gap), which can delimit the area of the FM, but give no further information about the TBI or QAH phases. The green solid lines (variational) represent the product-state prediction for the compass model, and the red dashed-dotted lines correspond to iPEPs. (Online version in colour.)