7.

2 Magnetic Order 347

7.2.1 Digression: Symmetry Breaking

Finding magnetic sites with (Sj) # 0 means that we have to do with a
symmetry-breaking ground state of the Hubbard Hamiltonian. This should
be understood as follows:
For finite quantum-mechanical systems, it is expected that the ground
state, as well a,a finite-T equilibrium states, show the full symmetry of the
Hamiltonian. Consequently, for a spin-rotationally invariant Hamiltonian, such
as the Hubbard model, expectation values like (7.1) should vanish. In finite
systems, we cannot really speak about magnetic (or any other kind of) order4.
This may sound as if the understanding of spontaneous ordering were denied
t o us because strictly speaking, all systems are finite. However, macroscopic
systems are so large that it can be argued that their behaviour is essentially
the same 89 it would be for an infinitely large system. Technically speaking,
one must take the thermodynamic limit: say, for a system with a given density,
we let the particle number N -+ 00, and the volume V -+ 00, with N / V kept
fixed. For lattice models, as in our present discussion, the filling has to be
kept fixed: we let N -+ 00, and the number of lattice sites L -+ 00, with
n = N/L fixed. The important consequence of this step is that we gain a
principal understanding of ordering transitions: in the thermodynamic limit,
symmetry breaking becomes possible. The way it comes about is this: For a
finite system, the free energy is an analytic function of the temperature T for
all finite T,so the behaviour of the system must be perfectly continuous, there
can be no phase transition. In contrast, in the thermodynamic limit the free
energy can show non-analytic behaviour at some finite transition temperature
Tt,. This has the effect that the behaviour at T < T,, cannot be understood
by smooth continuation from T > Ttr; the ordered state necessitates a new
method of description. Approximate theories (such as the mean field theories
we are going to discuss) are usually not sensitive to the difference between finite
and infinite systems, and may predict magnetic long-range order even for small
systems5. We understand that such a result must be spurious, and that the

4Moreprecisely: the ground.state belongs to one of the irreducible representations

of the symmetry group of the Hamiltonian. If the ground state is non-degenerate, we
expect this to be the identity representation, so the ground state is fully symmetrical;
this is the case relevant for systems with a tendency to antiferromagnetic ordering.
Systems inclined to become ferromagnetic can have a high-spin ground state, i.e.,
several degenerate ground states which can be rotated into each other. Then you
might say that any of the individual ground states breaks spin-rotational invariance
even for a finite system; recall the case of the 0 2 molecule. However, the thermal
equilibrium state of the system (includingT + 0 where we average over all degenerate
ground states) remains fully symmetrical.
'We will see an example of this in Problem 7.6 (see p. 385 and p. 413).