5

When discussing electron-phonon interaction, the simplest leading electron self-energy usually has only the simplest phonon bubble diagram and excludes the 'tadpole' diagram below with a phonon propagator $D(q=0)$ connected to an electron loop. The argument is $D(q=0)$ should vanish somehow because

  1. the phonon field $\phi(x)$ is a spatial divergence, or

  2. $q=0$ phonon is just an overall translation.

enter image description here

This is what many textbooks say (e.g., page 82 top of Mahan's book (3rd ed.) and page 401 top of Fetter & Walecka's book). But it is not clear to me whether this is only true for acoustic phonons. How about optical phonons? These books seem to only vaguely refer to 'electron-phonon interaction' in terms of this issue.

xiaohuamao
  • 3,971

2 Answers2

1

TL;DR: The answer to OP's title question is Tadpoles does not necessarily vanish.

  1. Tadpoles $\langle\tilde{\phi}(k)\rangle_{J=0}$ can only be non-zero for crystal momenta $k\in\tilde{\Lambda}$ in the reciprocal lattice due to momentum conservation, cf. Ref. 1.

  2. Phonon tadpoles describe global translation/deformation/permanent strain of the lattice structure, e.g. thermal expansion. There can be both acoustic and optical phonon tadpoles, cf. e.g. Refs. 3-4. Optical phonon tadpoles are associated with that different parts of a unit-cell may deform differently.

  3. Ref. 2 argues that the phonon field $\phi = \vec{\nabla}\cdot \vec{d}$ is a spatial divergence, so that the tadpole has to vanish. It seems the conclusion is rather the opposite: A possible tadpole may break down the spatial divergence picture.

  4. Tadpoles can vanish automatically if the system has symmetry, e.g. $\mathbb{Z}_2$-symmetry $\phi\to-\phi$, or charge conjugation symmetry, cf. Furry's theorem.

  5. The vanishing of tadpoles is often imposed as a renormalization condition, cf. e.g. my Phys.SE answer here.

References:

  1. G.D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics, 2000; p. 82.

  2. A.L. Fetter & J.D. Walecka, Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems, 2003; p. 401-402.

  3. David Snoke, Solid State Physics: Essential Concepts, 2020; p. 471 exercise 8.10.1.

  4. L. Paulatto, I. Errea, M. Calandra & F. Mauri, arXiv:1411.5628; p. 1.

Qmechanic
  • 220,844
1

The argument here is physical rather than mathematical: phonons, by their physical nature, are deformation waves, and vector $q$ describes how deformation is distributed within the material. $q=0$ means that the deformation is spatially independent, i.e., that the deformation either does not exist or the material is shifted as a whole.

However, let me point out the following:

  • Given different possible nature of the deformation (acoustic vs. optical phonons, transverse versus longitudinal polarization) one should be cautious about interpreting $q=0$ as translation. It is better to assume that we are working from the beginning in the center-of-mass reference frame and so deformation is absent.
  • It is implied that $q$ lies in the first Brilouin zone. If not - as @Qmechanic has correcly pointed out, propagator is periodic in respect to the reciprocal lattice translations.
  • Same argument with the appropriate adjustments may work for many other types of collective excitations.
Roger V.
  • 68,984