1: \documentclass[pra,aps,showpacs,twocolumn,unsortedaddress,superscriptaddress,showpacs]{revtex4}

2: \usepackage{graphics,bm}

3: \usepackage{amssymb,amsmath}

4: \usepackage{epsfig}

5: \usepackage{epsf}

6: \usepackage[usenames]{color}

7: 

8: %%%%%%%%%% definitions %%%%%%%%%%

9: \def\bx{{\bf x}}

10: \def\bk{{\bf k}}

11: \def\half{\frac{1}{2}}

12: \def\args{(\bx,t)}

13: 

14: \def\Btau{\boldsymbol{\tau}}

15: \def\Bn {{\bf n}}

16: \def\Bk {{\bf k}}

17: \def\BS {{\bf S}}

18: 

19: \def\re#1{(\ref{eq:#1})} % equation reference

20: % delimiters:

21:    \def\lb{\lbrace}          \def\rb{\rbrace}

22:    \def\llb{\left\lbrace}    \def\rrb{\right\rbrace}

23:    \def\lan{\langle}         \def\ran{\rangle}

24:    \def\({\left(}            \def\){\right)}

25:    \def\[{\left[}            \def\]{\right]}

26: 

27: \def\marginnote#1{$\bigstar$\marginpar{\rlap{$\bigstar$}\scriptsize \vbox to 0pt {#1}}}

28: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

29: 

30: 

31: \begin{document}

32: 

33: \preprint{ITP-UU-07/67}

34: 

35: \title{Achieving the N\'eel state in an optical lattice}

36: 

37: \author{Arnaud Koetsier}

38: \email{koetsier@phys.uu.nl}

39: 

40: \affiliation{Institute for Theoretical Physics, Utrecht University, Leuvenlaan

41: 4, 3584 CE Utrecht, The Netherlands}

42: 

43: \author{R.~A. Duine}

44: 

45: \affiliation{Institute for Theoretical Physics, Utrecht

46: University, Leuvenlaan 4, 3584 CE Utrecht, The Netherlands}

47: 

48: \author{Immanuel Bloch}

49: 

50: \affiliation{Institut f\"ur Physik, Johannes

51: Gutenberg-Universit\"at, 55099 Mainz, Germany}

52: 

53: \author{H.~T.~C. Stoof}

54: 

55: \affiliation{Institute for Theoretical Physics, Utrecht University, Leuvenlaan

56: 4, 3584 CE Utrecht, The Netherlands}

57: 

58: \date{\today}

59: 

60: \begin{abstract}

61: We theoretically study the possibility of reaching the antiferromagnetic phase

62: of the Hubbard model by starting from a normal gas of trapped fermionic atoms

63: and adiabatically ramping up an optical lattice. Requirements on the initial

64: temperature and the number of atoms are determined for a three dimensional

65: square lattice by evaluating the N\'eel state entropy, taking into account

66: fluctuations around the mean-field solution. We find that these fluctuations

67: place important limitations on adiabatically reaching the N\'eel state.

68: \end{abstract}

69: 

70: \pacs{67.85.-d, 37.10.Jk, 37.10.De, 03.75.-b}

71: % 67.85.-d Ultracold gases, trapped gases

72: % 37.10.Jk Atoms in optical lattices

73: % 37.10.De Atom cooling methods

74: % 03.75.-b Matter waves in quantum mechanics

75: 

76: \maketitle

77: 

78: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

79: \section{Introduction.}

80: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

81: An optical lattice is a regular periodic potential for neutral cold atoms

82: \cite{jessen1996} which enables the controlled experimental exploration of

83: paradigmatic ideas and models from condensed-matter physics. This is because

84: cold atomic gases generally allow for a great deal of experimental tunability.

85: For example, Feshbach scattering resonances allow for the interaction strength

86: to be experimentally varied over a considerable range

87: \cite{stwalley1976,tiesinga1993}. Other quantities that may be altered include

88: temperature, density, and strength and shape of the trapping potential. In

89: particular, an optical-lattice potential plays the role of the ion-lattice

90: potential encountered in electronic solid-state physics. The energy bands

91: resulting from this periodic potential lead to a quenching of the kinetic

92: energy of the atoms with respect to their interaction energy, enabling the

93: exploration of strongly-correlated phases that play a significant role in

94: condensed-matter physics.

95: 

96: An important model that can be studied experimentally with cold atoms is the

97: single-band Hubbard model, which consists of interacting fermions in the

98: tight-binding approximation. The Hubbard Hamiltonian is realized by cold atoms

99: in an optical lattice when the potential is strong enough so that only the

100: lowest-energy band is populated \cite{jaksch1998}. For bosonic atoms one then

101: commonly refers to this model as the Bose-Hubbard model. The theoretically

102: predicted Mott-insulator-to-superfluid phase transition \cite{fischer1989} for

103: this model has indeed been observed experimentally \cite{greiner2002}.

104: 

105: The fermionic Hubbard model, referred to simply as the Hubbard model, is

106: important in the context of high-temperature superconductivity

107: \cite{bednorz1986,Hofstetter2002} and has also been realized with cold atoms

108: \cite{kohl2004}. At half filling, corresponding to one particle per lattice

109: site, the ground state of this model is antiferromagnetic, i.e., a

110: N\'eel-ordered state, for strong enough on-site interactions. As the filling

111: factor is reduced by doping, the system is conjectured to undergo a quantum

112: phase transition to a $d$-wave superconducting state \cite{LeeNagaosaWen2006}.

113: A theoretical proof of the existence of $d$-wave superconductivity in the

114: Hubbard model is still lacking and would be a major step towards understanding

115: the superconducting state of the cuprates. With the recent experimental

116: advances in the field of ultracold atoms, an experimental exploration of this

117: issue is within reach.

118: 

119: In view of this motivation, a significant problem is determining how the N\'eel

120: state of the Hubbard model can be reached experimentally. In this paper, we

121: study theoretically the process of adiabatically turning on the optical lattice

122: \cite{GeorgesHassan2005,blakie2007}, with the goal of determining the

123: conditions required for an initially trapped balanced two-component Fermi gas

124: with repulsive interactions to reach the N\'eel state in the lattice.

125: Experimentally, the presence of antiferromagnetic order in this cold-atom

126: experiment can be subsequently detected from shot-noise correlations in the

127: density distribution \cite{altman2004,rom2006}.

128: 

129: 

130: \begin{figure}[b]

131: \begin{center}

132: \includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig1}

133:  \bf \caption{ \rm (Color online). The entropy per particle in the harmonic trapping potential

134: only (dashed line), in a lattice of depth $V_0=6.5 E_{\rm R}$ ($E_{\rm R}$ is

135: the recoil energy) from single-site mean-field theory (solid curve) and with

136: fluctuations (dash-dotted curve), where $T_{\rm F}$ is the Fermi temperature in

137: the trap. The horizontal dotted lines illustrate cooling and heating into the

138: N\'{e}el state at constant entropy by starting in the harmonic trap and

139: adiabatically turning on the lattice.} \label{fig1}

140: \end{center}

141: \end{figure}

142: 

143: Our results are summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig1}. For initial temperatures lower

144: than $T_{\rm F}$, the Fermi temperature in the trap, the entropy per particle

145: in the trap depends linearly on temperature as is shown by the dashed line. The

146: optical lattice is then turned on adiabatically and to determine the final

147: temperature of the gas we need the entropy per atom in the lattice. For a

148: sufficiently smooth trapping potential such that the tunneling does not become

149: site-dependent, the only effect of the trap is to place a restriction on the

150: total number of particles which we discuss later and, other than this, we may

151: neglect the trap for calculations in the lattice. Since we consider balanced

152: gases here, we will at sufficiently low temperatures first enter the Mott phase

153: with one particle per site, and the subsequent evolution of the gas is then

154: described by the Heisenberg model for the spins alone. The result from the

155: usual mean-field theory is shown for a lattice depth of $6.5E_{\rm R}$ (where

156: $E_{\rm R}$ is the recoil energy) by the black curve, and is equal to $k_{\rm

157: B}\ln(2)$ everywhere above the critical temperature $T_c$. Since entropy is

158: conserved in adiabatic processes, the final temperature is simply the

159: temperature at which the final entropy in the lattice equals the initial

160: entropy in the trap. Two such processes are shown by the dotted lines for

161: different initial temperatures demonstrating that the gas is sometimes heated

162: and not cooled by the lattice. Nevertheless, mean-field theory leads to the

163: intuitive result that as long as the entropy per particle in the initial state

164: is less than $k_{\rm B} \ln(2)$, which is the maximum entropy of the Heisenberg

165: model, the N\'eel state is always reached by adiabatically turning on the

166: optical lattice.

167: 

168: The inclusion of fluctuations leads however to a more restrictive condition. To

169: probe the effect of fluctuations, we present an improved mean-field theory

170: which produces a temperature-dependent entropy above $T_c$, as seen from the

171: inset of Fig.~\ref{fig2}. Although this approach is exact at high temperatures,

172: it fails to account for spin waves present at low temperatures and for critical

173: phenomena near $T_c$. By further extending the improved mean-field theory to

174: reproduce the correct critical and low temperature behavior due to

175: fluctuations, we are able to determine the entropy in the lattice for all

176: temperatures (red curve in Fig.~\ref{fig1}). In particular, we find that

177: fluctuations lower the entropy of the atoms in the square lattice at $T_c$ as

178: \begin{equation}

179:   \label{eq:criticalS}

180:   S(T=T_c) \simeq Nk_{\rm B}\ln(2) - \frac{3N J^2}{32 k_{\rm B} T_c^2 (3\nu - 1)}~,

181: \end{equation}

182: where $\nu$ is the critical exponent of the correlation length $\xi$. For the

183: case of three dimensions, $\nu=0.63$ \cite{zinnjustinbook}. As a result, the

184: initial temperature required to reach the N\'eel state is more than 20\% lower

185: than that found from the usual mean-field theory, but fortunately remains

186: experimentally accessible. For example, with ${}^{40}$K atoms and a final

187: lattice depth of $8E_{\rm R}$ the N\'eel state is achieved when the final

188: temperature in the lattice is $0.012T_{\rm F}$, which can be obtained with an

189: initial temperature of $0.059T_{\rm F}$.

190: 

191: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

192: \section{Single-site mean-field theory.}

193: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

194: The Hamiltonian for the Hubbard model is given by

195: \begin{equation}

196: \label{eq:hubbardham}

197:   H = - t \sum_{\sigma} \sum_{\langle jj'\rangle}

198:                c_{j,\sigma}^\dagger c_{j',\sigma}

199:   + U \sum_j c_{j,\uparrow}^\dagger c_{j,\downarrow}^\dagger

200:              c_{j,\downarrow} c_{j,\uparrow}~,

201: \end{equation}

202: in terms of fermionic creation and annihilation operators, denoted by

203: $c^\dagger_{j,\sigma}$ and $c_{j,\sigma}$, respectively, where $\sigma$ labels

204: the two hyperfine spin states $|\unskip\mkern-7.5mu\uparrow \rangle$ or

205: $|\unskip\mkern-7.5mu\downarrow \rangle$ of the atoms. In the first term of

206: this expression, the sum over lattice sites labeled by indices $j$ and $j'$ is

207: over nearest neighbors only and proportional to the hopping amplitude given by

208: \begin{equation}

209:   t = \frac{4 E^{\mathrm{R}}}{\sqrt{\pi}}

210:     \(\frac{V_0}{E^{\mathrm{R}}}\)^\frac{3}{4}

211:     e^{-2\sqrt{V_0 / E^{\mathrm{R}}}}.

212: \end{equation}

213: Here, $V_0>0$ is the depth of the optical lattice potential defined by

214: \begin{equation}

215:   V({\bf x})=V_0[\cos^2(2\pi x/\lambda) + \cos^2(2\pi y/\lambda) + \cos^2(2\pi z/\lambda)],

216: %  V({\bf x})=V_0\sum_{\alpha} \cos^2\left(\frac{2\pi x_{\alpha}}{\lambda}\right),

217: \end{equation}

218: where $\lambda$ is the wavelength of the lattice lasers. The second term in the

219: Hamiltonian corresponds to an on-site interaction of the strength given in the

220: harmonic approximation by

221: \begin{equation}

222:   U=4\pi a\sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{\lambda^3}}\left(\frac{8 V_0^3}{m}\right)^\frac{1}{4},

223: \end{equation}

224: where $a$ is the $s$-wave scattering length which is equal to $174a_0$ for

225: ${}^{40}K$. It is well-known \cite{auerbachbook} that at half filling and in

226: the limit that $U \gg t$ the ground state of the Hubbard model is

227: antiferromagnetic and that, for $k_{\rm B}T \ll U$, its low-lying excitations

228: are described by the effective Heisenberg Hamiltonian

229: \begin{equation}

230: \label{eq:spinham}

231:   H = \frac{J}{2} \sum_{\langle jk\rangle}

232:                      \BS_j \cdot \BS_k~,

233: \end{equation}

234: with $\BS$ being one half times the vector of Pauli matrices. The exchange

235: constant $J=4t^2/U$ arises from the superexchange mechanism. That is, the

236: system can lower its energy by virtual nearest-neighbor hops only when there is

237: antiferromagnetic ordering.

238: 

239: Within the usual mean-field analysis of the effective Hamiltonian in

240: Eq.~\re{spinham}, the total entropy for $N$ atoms in the optical lattice is

241: given by

242: \begin{equation}

243: \label{eq:entropymf}

244:   S = -\frac{\partial F_{\rm L}(\lan\Bn\ran)}{\partial T}~,

245: \end{equation}

246: where $F_{\rm L}$ is the Landau free energy,

247: \begin{equation}

248: \label{eq:freeenergymftheory}

249:   F_{\rm L} ({\bf n}) =N\left\{ \frac{z J |{\bf n}|^2}{2}

250:                        - k_{\rm B} T \ln \left[2 \cosh \left(

251:   \frac{z J|{\bf n}|}{ k_{\rm B} T}\right)\right] \right\}~,

252: \end{equation}

253: in terms of the staggered, or N\'eel, order parameter ${\bf n} = (-)^j \langle

254: \BS_j \rangle$ for the phase transition to the antiferromagnetic state. In the

255: expression for the free energy, $z=6$ is the number of nearest neighbors for a

256: three-dimensional simple square lattice on which we focus here, $k_{\rm B} T$

257: is the thermal energy, and $\langle {\bf n} \rangle$ is the equilibrium value

258: of the order parameter determined from

259: \begin{equation}

260: \label{eq:expecvalueopmftheory}

261:   \left.\frac{\partial F_{\rm L} ({\bf n})}{\partial {\bf

262:   n}}\right|_{\Bn=\lan\Bn\ran}=0~.

263: \end{equation}

264: It is nonzero below a critical temperature $k_{\rm B} T_c = J z/4 = (3/2)J$.

265: After solving Eq.~\re{expecvalueopmftheory} the entropy is determined using

266: Eq.~\re{entropymf}. The results for $S$ and $\lan\Bn\ran$ obtained in this way

267: are plotted as solid black curves in Figs.~\ref{fig1} and \ref{fig2}.

268: 

269: The entropy $S_{\rm FG}$ of the initial normal state before ramping up the

270: optical lattice is the entropy of a trapped ideal Fermi gas. It is most

271: conveniently determined from the grand potential

272: \begin{equation}

273: \label{eq:grandpotidealfermigas}

274:   \Omega (\mu,T) = - k_{\rm B } T \int_0^\infty d\epsilon \rho

275:   (\epsilon) \ln \left[ 1+ e^{-(\epsilon - \mu)/k_{\rm B} T}\right]~,

276: \end{equation}

277: where $\mu$ is the chemical potential, and the effect of the harmonic trapping

278: potential with the effectively isotropic frequency

279: $\omega=(\omega_x\omega_y\omega_z)^{1/3}$ is incorporated via the density of

280: states $\rho (\epsilon) = \epsilon^2/(\hbar \omega)^3$ of the atoms. The

281: entropy at fixed total particle number $N(\mu) = -\partial \Omega/\partial \mu$

282: is then given by $ S_{\rm FG} = -\partial \Omega/\partial T|_{\mu (N)}$. At

283: temperatures much lower than the Fermi temperature in the trap, given by

284: $T_{\rm F} = (3N)^{1/3}\hbar\omega/k_{\rm B}$, we find in this manner that

285: \cite{Carr04} $S_{\rm FG} = Nk_{\rm B}  \pi^2 T/T_{\rm F}$.

286: %\begin{equation}

287: %\label{eq:entropyfermigasintrap}

288: %  S_{\rm FG} = Nk_{\rm B}  \pi^2 \frac{T}{T_{\rm F}}~.

289: %\end{equation}

290: Now, by equating the final and initial entropies we calculate the temperature

291: of the Heisenberg spin system that results after adiabatically turning on the

292: optical lattice, in terms of the initial temperature of the trapped Fermi gas.

293: 

294: From the expression for the free energy, Eq.~\re{freeenergymftheory} we

295: immediately see that $S = Nk_{\rm B}\ln(2)$ for all temperatures $T>T_c$, as

296: was shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}. Although this is the correct high-temperature

297: limit of the entropy, temperature dependence will lower the entropy at $T_c$

298: and therefore lower the initial temperature required to achieve the N\'eel

299: state. To obtain the temperature dependence above $T_c$, we must thus go beyond

300: single-site mean-field theory to include fluctuations. The simplest such model

301: described below incorporates the interaction of a given site with one of its

302: neighbors exactly and treats interactions with the rest of the neighbors within

303: mean-field theory.

304: 

305: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

306: \section{Two-site mean-field theory.}

307: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

308: The two-site Hamiltonian for neighboring sites labeled ``1'' and ``2'' is given

309: by

310: \begin{equation} \label{eq:2siteham}

311:   H =   J\BS_1\cdot\BS_2

312:        + J(z-1)|\Bn| (\BS_1^z - \BS_2^z)

313:        + J(z-1)|\Bn|^2~,

314: \end{equation}

315: where the last term is a correction to avoid double counting of mean-field

316: effects. Diagonalizing this Hamiltonian we obtain the free energy

317: \begin{equation}

318: \label{eq:freeenergy2sitetheory}

319:      \begin{aligned}[b]

320:  F_{\rm L} ({\bf n}) =&

321:      N\biggl\lb\half(z-1)J|\Bn|^2 - \frac{1}{2\beta}\ln \biggl[2 e^{-\beta J/4}

322:      \\&

323:      +2 e^{\beta J/4} \cosh \( \frac{\beta J}{2} \sqrt{1 + 4(z-1)^2|{\bf n}|^2}\)\biggr]\biggr\rb~,

324:      \end{aligned}

325: \end{equation}

326: and find the entropy from Eq.~\re{entropymf} with the condition

327: Eq.~\re{expecvalueopmftheory} as in the single-site model. The results are

328: plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig2}, where we see that fluctuations lower the critical

329: temperature and also bring about a 2\% depletion of the order parameter which

330: is now less than 0.5 near $T=0$.

331: 

332: \begin{figure}[h]

333: \begin{center}

334: \includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth,bb=21 200 542 588]{fig2}

335: \bf \caption{ \rm (Color online). The staggered magnetization $\lan\Bn\ran$ of

336: the single (solid curves) and two-site (dashed curves) mean-field theories, the

337: latter of which shows depletion at $T=0$ and a lowering in $T_c$. The entropy

338: of both theories is plotted in the inset. Above $T_c$ we see that the entropy

339: of the two-site theory is temperature dependent.} \label{fig2}

340: \end{center}

341: \end{figure}

342: 

343: The two-site result carries the exact $1/T^2$ dependence of the entropy of the

344: Heisenberg model at high temperatures. Near $T=0$, however, the entropy is

345: still exponentially suppressed reflecting the energy cost of flipping a spin.

346: This exponential suppression is an artefact of the mean-field approximation

347: that ignores the Goldstone modes which are present in the symmetry-broken

348: phase. Furthermore, critical behavior cannot be properly accounted for by a

349: one-, two- or higher-site model since, near the onset of N\'eel order, critical

350: fluctuations extend throughout the entire lattice so one would in principle

351: need to include all sites exactly. To overcome these shortcomings, we extend

352: our two-site model below to all temperatures.

353: 

354: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

355: \section{Fluctuations.}

356: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

357: The two-site mean-field theory produces the correct normal-state entropy

358: behavior in the high-temperature limit,

359: \begin{equation}

360:   S(T\gg T_c) = Nk_{\rm B} \[\ln(2) -\frac{3J^2}{64k_{\rm B}^2T^2}\]~.

361: \end{equation}

362: In the low-temperature regime, the entropy is determined from spin-wave

363: fluctuations prevalent near $T=0$ which give a black-body-like entropy,

364: \begin{equation}

365: \label{eq:magnonentropy}

366:   S(T\ll T_c)=Nk_{\rm B} \frac{4\pi^2}{45}\(\frac{k_{\rm B}T}{2\sqrt{3}J\lan\Bn\ran}\)^3~.

367: \end{equation}

368: 

369: The continuous interpolation between these two regimes has the additional

370: constraint that, near $T_c$, we should obtain the correct critical behavior of

371: the antiferromagnet, namely, the correct universal ratio of the amplitudes

372: above and below the phase transition $A^+/A^-$ and correct critical exponent

373: $d\nu - 1$ where

374: \begin{equation}

375:   S(T\simeq T_c) = S(T_c)\pm A^\pm|t|^{d\nu - 1},\quad t=(T-T_c)/T_c\rightarrow 0^\pm~.

376: \end{equation}

377: This follows from the fact that the singular part of the free energy density

378: behaves as $F^{\pm}/\xi^d$, where the correlation length diverges like

379: $\xi\sim|t|^{-\nu}$ as $t\rightarrow 0$. Explicit expressions for the entropy

380: embodying the correct behavior in the low-, high- and critical temperature

381: regimes are presented in the Appendix of this paper, and plotted as the red

382: curve in Fig.~\ref{fig1} for $d=3$ using $A^+/A^-\simeq0.54$ and $\nu=0.63$

383: \cite{zinnjustinbook}, and the N\'eel temperature of $T_c = 0.957 k_{\rm B}/J$

384: \cite{Staudt2000}. Their value at $T_c$ leads to the central result of this

385: paper, namely, Eq.~(\ref{eq:criticalS}) which specifies the initial entropy

386: required to reach the N\'eel state.

387: 

388: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

389: \section{Discussion and Conclusions.}

390: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

391: As briefly mentioned earlier, there is a limit on the total number of atoms in

392: the trap, beyond which at low temperatures it is energetically more favorable

393: to doubly occupy sites in the center of the trap, thereby destroying the

394: antiferromagnetic state, rather than singly occupying outlying sites where the

395: trap potential is larger than $U$. Thus, insisting that the system end up in

396: the Mott-insulator state with one particle per site entails the upper bound, $N

397: \leq N_{\rm max}=(4\pi/3)(8U/m\omega^2\lambda^2)^{3/2}$, where $m$ is the mass

398: of the atoms and $\lambda$ is the wavelength of the lattice lasers. For

399: ${}^{40}$K atoms in a lattice with a wavelength $\lambda=755$ nm and depth

400: $8E_{\rm R}$, and with a harmonic trap frequency $\omega/2\pi = 50$ Hz, $N_{\rm

401: max} \simeq 2\times 10^6$ which is well above the typical number of atoms in

402: experiments.

403: 

404: We have also attempted to determine the effect that fluctuations have on the

405: entropy in a more microscopic manner by studying gaussian fluctuations about

406: the mean-field $\lan\Bn\ran$ for the single-site mean-field theory in the

407: low-temperature regime. But such a random-phase approximation has severe

408: complications related to the fact that $\lan\Bn\ran$ enters in the magnon

409: dispersion as $\omega^{\rm M}_{\Bk}\propto \lan|\Bn|\ran|\Bk|$. Hence, as can

410: be already seen from Eq.~\re{magnonentropy}, the contribution of the magnons to

411: the entropy diverges when $\lan\Bn\ran\rightarrow 0$ near $T_c$. One way to

412: potentially resolve this issue is to start from the Hubbard Hamiltonian

413: Eq.~\re{hubbardham} directly but such an analysis is involved \cite{dupuis04}

414: and has yet to be carried out.

415: 

416: In the above, we have focused on the $d=3$ case. Whilst our results can easily

417: be extended to the $d=2$ case, a more pertinent way to reach the

418: two-dimensional antiferromagnet most relevant to high-temperature

419: superconductors, would be to adiabatically prepare a three-dimensional N\'eel

420: state, as explained in this paper, and then decrease the tunneling in one

421: direction by changing the intensity of one of the lattice lasers. In this way,

422: the three-dimensional system is changed into a stack of pancakes of atoms in

423: the two-dimensional N\'eel state. Furthermore, studying doped optical lattices

424: made by introducing a small imbalance in the initial state may shed some light

425: on the physics of high-temperature superconductors and would be an exciting

426: direction for future research.

427: 

428: 

429: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Acknowledgements %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

430: \begin{acknowledgments}

431: We would like to thank Gerard Barkema, Dries van Oosten and Randy Hulet for

432: helpful discussions. This work is supported by the Stichting voor Fundamenteel

433: Onderzoek der Materie (FOM), the Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschaplijk

434: Onderzoek (NWO), and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG).

435: \end{acknowledgments}

436: 

437: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

438: \appendix*

439: \section{Entropy Formulas}

440: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

441: For temperatures above $T_c$ we use

442:     \begin{equation*}

443:       \frac{S(T\geq T_c)}{Nk_{\rm B}} \simeq

444:           \alpha_1 \[\(\frac{T-T_c}{T}\)^{\kappa}-1+ \frac{\kappa T_c}{T}\]+\ln(2)~,%\mkern-30mu

445:     \end{equation*}

446: with $\alpha_1 = 3J^2/32\kappa(\kappa - 1)k_{\rm B}^2 T_c^2$ and $\kappa = 3\nu

447: - 1\simeq 0.89$ \cite{zinnjustinbook}. The first term embodies the correct

448: critical behavior whereas the remaining terms are present to recover the

449: correct high-temperature limit. Below $T_c$, however, we have

450:     \begin{equation*}

451:     \begin{aligned}[b]

452:       \frac{S(T\leq T_c)}{Nk_{\rm B}} =

453:       -\alpha_2 &\bigg[\(\frac{T_c - T}{T_c}\)^\kappa - 1 + \kappa \frac{T}{T_c}

454:       \\&- \frac{\kappa(\kappa - 1)}{2} \frac{T^2}{T_c^2}\bigg]

455:       + \beta_0 \frac{T^3}{T_c^3}

456:       + \beta_1 \frac{T^4}{T_c^4}~,%\mkern-30mu

457:       \end{aligned}

458:     \end{equation*}

459: where

460:     \begin{equation*}

461:     \begin{aligned}[t]

462:      \alpha_2 =& \begin{aligned}[t]

463:          \frac{6}{(\kappa-1)(\kappa-2)(\kappa-3)}&

464:          \bigg(\frac{4\pi^2 k_{\rm B}^3 T_c^3}{135\sqrt{3}J^3} \\ & - \alpha_1(\kappa-1) + \beta_1  - \ln(2)\bigg)~;%\mkern-30mu

465:          \end{aligned}\\

466:      \beta_0 =& \frac{\kappa}{(\kappa-3)}

467:          \bigg(\frac{4\pi^2 k_{\rm B}^3 T_c^3}{45\sqrt{3}\kappa J^3} + \alpha_1 (\kappa-1) - \beta_1  + \ln(2)\bigg)~;%\mkern-30mu

468:          \\

469:      \beta_1 =& \ln 2 - J^2\frac{6(A^+/A^- + 1) + \kappa(\kappa-5)}{64\kappa k_{\rm B}^2 T_c^2 A^+/A^-}

470:       - \frac{4\pi^2 k_{\rm B}^3 T_c^3}{135\sqrt{3}J^3}~.%\mkern-30mu

471:     \end{aligned}

472:     \end{equation*}

473: The first and last terms in $S(T\leq T_c)$ embody the critical phenomena and

474: allow for the continuous interpolation with $S(T\geq T_c)$ respectively,

475: whereas the remaining terms are included to retrieve the correct

476: low-temperature behavior.

477: 

478: 

479: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

480: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

481: \bibitem{jessen1996} P.~S. Jessen and I.~H. Deutsch,

482:                      Adv. At. Mol. Opt. Phys. {\bf 37}, 95 (1996).

483: \bibitem{stwalley1976} W.~C. Stwalley, \prl {\bf 37}, 1628 (1976).

484: \bibitem{tiesinga1993} E. Tiesinga, B.~J. Verhaar, and H.~T.~C. Stoof,

485:                        Phys. Rev. A {\bf 47}, 4114 (1993).

486: \bibitem{jaksch1998} D. Jaksch, C. Bruder, J. I. Cirac, C. W. Gardiner and

487:                      P. Zoller, \prl {\bf 81}, 3108 (1998).

488: %\bibitem{jaksch1998} D. Jaksch {\em et al.}, \prl {\bf 81}, 3108 (1998).

489: \bibitem{fischer1989} M.~P. A. Fisher, P.~B. Weichman, G. Grinstein, and D.~S. Fisher,

490:                       \prb {\bf 40}, 546 (1989).

491: \bibitem{greiner2002} M. Greiner, O. Mandel, T. Esslinger, T. W. H\"ansch,

492:                       and I. Bloch, Nature {\bf 415}, 39 (2002).

493: %\bibitem{greiner2002} M. Greiner {\em et al.}, Nature {\bf 415}, 39 (2002).

494: \bibitem{bednorz1986} J.~G. Bednorz and K.~A. M\"uller,

495:                       Z.~Phys. B {\bf 64}, 189 (1986).

496: \bibitem{Hofstetter2002} W. Hofstetter, J. I. Cirac, P. Zoller, E. Demler and M. D. Lukin,

497:                     \prl {\bf 89}, 220407 (2002).

498: %\bibitem{Hofstetter2002} W. Hofstetter {\em et al.},

499: %                    \prl {\bf 89}, 220407 (2002).

500: \bibitem{kohl2004} M. K\"ohl, H. Moritz, T. St\"oferle, K. G\"unter, and

501:                    T. Esslinger, \prl {\bf 94}, 080403 (2005).

502: %\bibitem{kohl2004} M. K\"ohl {\em et al.}, \prl {\bf 94}, 080403 (2005).

503: %\bibitem{dagotto1994} E. Dagotto, \rmp {\bf 66}, 763 (1994).

504: \bibitem{LeeNagaosaWen2006} P. A. Lee, N. Nagaosa, and X.-G. Wen, \rmp {\bf 78}, 17 (2006).

505: \bibitem{GeorgesHassan2005} F. Werner, O. Parcollet, A. Georges,

506:                    and S. R. Hassan, \prl {\bf 95}, 056401 (2005).

507: \bibitem{blakie2007}  P.~B. Blakie, A. Bezett, P. Buonsante,

508:                       Phys. Rev. A {\bf 75}, 063609 (2007).

509: \bibitem{altman2004} E. Altman, E. Demler and M.~D. Lukin,

510:                      Phys. Rev. A. {\bf 70}, 013603 (2004).

511: \bibitem{rom2006} T. Rom, Th. Best, D. van Oosten, U. Schneider, S. Foelling,

512:                   B. Paredes, and I. Bloch, Nature {\bf 444}, 733 (2006).

513: %\bibitem{rom2006} T. Rom {\em et al.}, Nature {\bf 444}, 733 (2006).

514: \bibitem{auerbachbook} See, for example, A. Auerbach,

515:                        {\it Interacting Electrons and Quantum Magnetism}

516:                        (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1994).

517: \bibitem{Carr04} L.~D. Carr, G.~V. Shlyapnikov, and Y. Castin,

518:                      Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 92,} 150404 (2004).

519: \bibitem{zinnjustinbook} J. Zinn-Justin,

520:                   {\it Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena}, 4th Edition (Oxford, 2002).

521: \bibitem{Staudt2000} R. Staudt, M. Dzierzawa, and A. Muramatsu,

522:                   Eur. Phys. J. B {\bf 17}, 411 (2000).

523: \bibitem{dupuis04}   K. Borejsza and N. Dupuis,

524:                       Phys. Rev. B {\bf 69}, 085119 (2004).

525: %\bibitem{Rus74} G.~S. Rushbrooke, G.~A. Baker, and P.~J. Wood, in {\em Phase

526: %    Transitions and Critical Phenomena}, edited by C. Domb and M.~S. Green,

527: %    Academic Press, New York, 1974, Vol. 3.

528: \end{thebibliography}

529: 

530: 

531: \end{document}

532: