You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The computation of the potential energy is based on Matsubara formalism, moving from Fetter-Walecka eq. 23.14 and transforming to imaginary frequency with the assumption of a local self-energy: $\Sigma(k,iω) = \Sigma({A,B},iω)$. This would simply give:
but we also need a semi-analytic tail correction for that we cannot compute enough matsubara points to get an accurate summation.
The customary way is to assume the product $\Sigma(iω)G(iω)$ to have a $\frac{U^2}{4w^2}$ tail, but this won't work here being the self-energy just a constant. So instead we tried with
- remove everything about Dyson's equation approach to the self-energy.
> the equation holds for G(k,iω) and ∑(k,iω), not for the local ones,
since it does not commute with the sum over k (is not linear). See
also last comment on related issue #3.
- try to fix the potential energy calculation by implementing the tail
for the GF only. It does not work (so we open issue #4).
The computation of the potential energy is based on Matsubara formalism, moving from Fetter-Walecka eq. 23.14 and transforming to imaginary frequency with the assumption of a local self-energy:$\Sigma(k,iω) = \Sigma({A,B},iω)$ . This would simply give:
but we also need a semi-analytic tail correction for that we cannot compute enough matsubara points to get an accurate summation.
The customary way is to assume the product$\Sigma(iω)G(iω)$ to have a $\frac{U^2}{4w^2}$ tail, but this won't work here being the self-energy just a constant. So instead we tried with
which unfortunately does not work. I believe this is the right idea, but some detail might be off. To be checked when I have time.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: