Abstract
The relation between thermodynamic phase transitions in classical systems and topological changes in their configuration space is discussed for two physical models and contains the first exact analytic computation of a topologic invariant (the Euler characteristic) of certain submanifolds in the configuration space of two physical models. The models are the mean-field XY model and the one-dimensional XY model with nearest-neighbor interactions. The former model undergoes a second-order phase transition at a finite critical temperature while the latter has no phase transitions. The computation of this topologic invariant is performed within the framework of Morse theory. In both models topology changes in configuration space are present as the potential energy is varied; however, in the mean-field model there is a particularly “strong” topology change, corresponding to a big jump in the Euler characteristic, connected with the phase transition, which is absent in the one-dimensional model with no phase transition. The comparison between the two models has two major consequences: (i) it lends new and strong support to a recently proposed topological approach to the study of phase transitions; (ii) it allows us to conjecture which particular topology changes could entail a phase transition in general. We also discuss a simplified illustrative model of the topology changes connected to phase transitions using of two-dimensional surfaces, and a possible direct connection between topological invariants and thermodynamic quantities.
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference
C. N. Yang and T. D. Lee, Phys. Rev. 87:404(1952).
T. D. Lee and C. N. Yang, Phys. Rev. 87:410(1952).
D. Ruelle, Statistical Mechanics: Rigorous Results (World Scientific, Singapore, 1999).
See, e.g., H. O. Georgii, Gibbs Measures and Phase Transitions (de Gruyter, New York, 1988).
D. H. E. Gross, Microcanonical Thermodynamics, Phase Transitions in Small Systems (World Scientific, Singapore, 2001).
L. Caiani, L. Casetti, C. Clementi, and M. Pettini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79:4361(1997).
R. Franzosi, L. Casetti, L. Spinelli, and M. Pettini, Phys. Rev. E 60:R5009(1999).
L. Casetti, E. G. D. Cohen, and M. Pettini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82:4160(1999).
R. Franzosi, M. Pettini, and L. Spinelli, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84:2774(2000).
L. Casetti, M. Pettini, and E. G. D. Cohen, Phys. Rep. 337:237(2000).
M. Cerruti-Sola, C. Clementi, and M. Pettini, Phys. Rev. E 61:5171(2000).
M. Nakahara, Geometry, Topology and Physics (Adam Hilger, Bristol, 1991).
J. Milnor, Morse Theory (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1951).
R. S. Palais and C. Terng, Critical Point Theory and Submanifold Geometry (Springer, NY, 1988).
R. Franzosi, M. Pettini, and L. Spinelli, cond-mat/0104110, and in preparation.
L. Casetti, E. G. D. Cohen, and M. Pettini, Phys. Rev. E 65:036112(2002).
M. Antoni and S. Ruffo, Phys. Rev. E 52:2361(1995).
J. H. Wilkinson, The Algebraic Eigenvalue Problem (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1965).
P. G. Debenedetti and F. H. Stillinger, Nature 410:259(2001).
L. Angelani et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85:5356(2000)
A. Cavagna, I. Giardina, and G. Parisi, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 34:5317(2001)
T. S. Grigera, A. Cavagna, I. Giardina, and G. Parisi,Phys. Rev. Lett. 88:055502(2002)
R. M. C. de Almeida, N. Lemke, and I. A. Campbell, cond-mat/0003351.
B. A. Dubrovin, A. T. Fomenko, and S. P. Novikov, Modern Geometry-Methods and Applications (Parts I, II, and III, Springer, NY, 1985).
G. H. Golub and C. F. Van Loan, Matrix Computations (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1996).
M. Spivak, Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry (Publish or Perish, Berkeley, 1979).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Casetti, L., Pettini, M. & Cohen, E.G.D. Phase Transitions and Topology Changes in Configuration Space. Journal of Statistical Physics 111, 1091–1123 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023044014341
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023044014341