Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 minor 67 references

Charged monopoles in dipolar 3D U(1) spin liquids make a DC insulator that still shows a sharp low-frequency plasma resonance.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-13 06:24 UTC pith:FTJHHHFK

load-bearing objection Clean theoretical prediction of a temperature-tunable AC plasma resonance from charged monopoles in dipolar U(1) QSLs; the formal Ioffe–Larkin result is solid, observability hinges on the unknown size of em.

arxiv 2607.08826 v1 pith:FTJHHHFK submitted 2026-07-09 cond-mat.str-el

The monopole plasma resonance: a smoking gun of 3D U(1) quantum spin liquids

Anish Koley , Saranyo Moitra , Inti Sodemann Villadiego This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords U(1) quantum spin liquidquantum spin icemagnetic monopolesplasma resonanceIoffe-Larkin ruleCe2Zr2O7dipolar-octupolar
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper argues that certain three-dimensional U(1) quantum spin liquids, especially dipolar quantum spin ice, host magnetic monopoles that carry a real electric charge in their cores. Those monopoles form a dilute plasma at low temperature. Because they remain tightly coupled to the emergent gauge field, the material stays electrically insulating at zero frequency; the resistivities of the monopole fluid and the insulating vacuum simply add. At a small but finite frequency set by the thermal monopole density, however, the conductivity develops a metallic-like plasma peak whose height and location move with temperature. That resonance is proposed as a distinctive experimental fingerprint. The authors work out the optimal temperature and drive-frequency window for the candidate material Ce2Zr2O7 and estimate that the peak can exceed the material's room-temperature conductivity even if the monopole charge is only a tiny fraction of the electron charge.

Core claim

In dipolar 3D U(1) quantum spin liquids the physical conductivity obeys an Ioffe–Larkin composition of monopole and vacuum resistivities, remaining insulating for DC transport while exhibiting a sharp plasma resonance at ℏωp ≃ 2π √(Wm μ^{-1}) √(a³ nm(T)) whenever the monopole momentum relaxation rate lies below that frequency.

What carries the argument

Ioffe–Larkin composition rule 1/σ(ω) = 1/((gbE/a)² σm(ω)) + 1/(−iω (μ/a)(gbE/a)²), which converts the Drude conductivity of the charged monopole plasma into a resonance superimposed on an insulating background.

Load-bearing premise

The size of the physical electric charge bound to each monopole is unknown; if it is many orders of magnitude smaller than the electron charge, the resonance peak becomes too weak to detect.

What would settle it

Microwave conductivity of Ce2Zr2O7 measured while sweeping temperature at fixed drive frequencies of a few hundred MHz to a few GHz: a peak whose center frequency falls with cooling and whose height maximizes near 40 percent of the monopole gap would confirm the resonance; its complete absence in that window would rule out a detectable monopole plasma of the predicted strength.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript argues that in dipolar 3D U(1) quantum spin liquids the emergent magnetic field transforms like a physical electric polarization, so magnetic monopoles carry a physical electric charge and form a thermally activated plasma. Starting from Wilson’s compact U(1) gauge theory on the cubic lattice plus symmetry-allowed couplings to physical E and B, the authors derive modified Maxwell equations, the force on a monopole, a Drude monopole conductivity, and an Ioffe–Larkin composition of resistivities (Eq. 12). The resulting physical conductivity is insulating at DC yet exhibits a sharp plasma resonance at a low frequency set by the monopole density (Eqs. 1, 15). A symmetry analysis distinguishes dipolar from octupolar quantum spin ice, and concrete estimates are given for Ce2Zr2O7.

Significance. If correct, the work supplies a concrete, falsifiable electrical fingerprint of dipolar 3D U(1) spin liquids that is distinct from both ordinary metals and ordinary insulators: a temperature-tunable resonance at MHz–GHz scales far below the electronic gap. The derivation is fully spelled out (Appendices S-I–S-VII), the Ioffe–Larkin structure is obtained without parton constructions, and the D-versus-O distinction is a clean experimental discriminator. The estimates for Ce2Zr2O7, while optimistic about the unknown monopole charge, give experimentalists a clear temperature and frequency window to search.

minor comments (4)
  1. The microscopic size of the monopole charge em = 2π gbE/a is left as a free parameter; a short additional paragraph collecting any existing microscopic estimates (or upper bounds) from the QSI literature would help experimental readers gauge the absolute scale of σmax.
  2. Fig. 2 and the accompanying discussion assume Wm = 0.5 Wϕ; a brief sensitivity plot or sentence for the opposite hierarchy (Wm ≳ Wϕ) would make the “onset versus resonance” regimes of Appendix S-VIII more immediately visible in the main text.
  3. Notation for the dual divergence and the compactification of bp is introduced carefully in the appendices but appears abruptly in the main text; a one-sentence pointer to the definitions would improve readability.
  4. A few typographical inconsistencies remain (e.g., “bandwdith”, “absolutely robust gaplessnessbeyond”).

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

No significant circularity: plasma resonance and Ioffe-Larkin conductivity follow from lattice Maxwell + Drude/Thomson kinetics without reducing to fitted inputs or self-definitional steps.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Introduction / Coupling section, citation of [24] and own prior works [11,20-23]]
    "Laumann and Moessner [24] pointed out that in some 3D U(1) QSLs the emergent magnetic field has the same symmetries as a physical electric polarization, and, as a consequence, the monopole acts as a source of electric polarization with a finite electric charge bound to its core. This interesting conclusion from Ref.[24] is the key starting point of our work."

    The charged-monopole premise is taken from Laumann-Moessner (external) and elaborated with the authors' own earlier coupling papers. This is background, not a self-definition of the plasma frequency or conductivity; the subsequent Maxwell-Drude derivation stands independently. Score contribution is therefore only minor (self-citation present but not load-bearing for the target formulas).

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Modified Maxwell equations (S-I, Eqs. 5-8) follow from the Wilson Lagrangian plus the phenomenological couplings of Eq. 4; the monopole force (Eq. 10, S-II) is obtained by rewriting the same couplings as a potential; the physical current (Eq. 9) is the variation of the action; monopole conductivity is the standard Drude form (Eq. 11); composition into physical σ(ω) is algebraic rearrangement yielding the Ioffe-Larkin rule (Eq. 12); Γ is computed from Thomson scattering (S-V) plus Boltzmann kinetics (S-VI). The plasma frequency (Eq. 1) and resonant lineshape (Eq. 15) are therefore direct consequences of these steps, not renamings or fits. Symmetry distinction D vs O (Table I, S-VII) rests on transformation rules of the XYZ model from Huang et al. [36] plus elementary continuum/lattice arguments; it does not import a uniqueness theorem from the present authors. Self-citations (e.g. Villadiego [11,20-23]) supply background on gauge-matter couplings but are not load-bearing for the resonance formula itself. Estimates for Ce2Zr2O7 use external neutron data [35] and order-of-magnitude scale assumptions; they are not circular predictions. Minor self-citation of prior coupling ideas does not force the central claim.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 1 invented entities

The claim rests on standard compact U(1) lattice gauge theory plus one symmetry-allowed linear coupling of emergent magnetic flux to physical E, a Drude response for thermally activated monopoles, and Thomson scattering off emergent photons for Γ. The only free phenomenological scale that controls observability (not existence) of the peak is the unknown monopole charge em = 2π gbE/a; energy-scale ratios are set by hand for estimates but cancel from the formal structure of σ(ω).

free parameters (3)
  • gbE (or em = 2π gbE/a)
    Phenomenological coupling that sets the physical electric charge of the monopole; not computed microscopically and only bounded by optimistic comparison to room-temperature resistivity of Ce2Zr2O7.
  • relative energy scales Δm, Wm, μ^{-1}, Wϕ
    For numerical estimates the paper assumes these scales are comparable (or Wm = 0.5 Wϕ) using the measured photon bandwidth ~0.005 meV; the formal resonance formula does not require equality, but visibility plots do.
  • geB
    Second phenomenological coupling of emergent electric field to physical B; appears in Maxwell equations but drops out of the longitudinal plasma-resonance conductivity of interest.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Wilson compact U(1) gauge theory on the cubic lattice (or its QSI dual) correctly captures the low-energy deconfined phase of dipolar quantum spin ice.
    Standard starting point for 3D U(1) QSLs; invoked from the Lagrangian L0 onward.
  • domain assumption The only symmetry-allowed linear couplings of emergent fields to physical EM fields are LeB + LbE with constants geB, gbE.
    Taken from Laumann–Moessner symmetry analysis and re-derived for dipolar vs octupolar cases in Appendix S-VII.
  • domain assumption At kBT ≪ Δm monopoles form a dilute compensated plasma whose current responds in Drude form with a single momentum relaxation rate Γ.
    Used to write σm(ω) in Eq. (11); justified by thermal activation and test-particle treatment in S-III.
  • domain assumption Low-T monopole momentum relaxation is dominated by Thomson scattering off thermal emergent photons, giving Γ ∝ T^4.
    Derived in Appendices S-V–S-VI; alternative scattering channels (impurities, phonons) are not included.
  • standard math Mirror Mxȳ forbids g·E coupling in octupolar QSI and allows it in dipolar QSI.
    Group-representation argument in Table I and Appendix S-VII; standard crystallographic symmetry.
invented entities (1)
  • monopole plasma resonance (as an electrical conductivity peak) no independent evidence
    purpose: Predicted observable fingerprint of charged monopoles in dipolar 3D U(1) QSLs.
    Not a new particle; a derived collective mode of the already-postulated charged monopole fluid. Independent evidence would be a measured RF conductivity peak that tracks nm(T).

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 27328 in / 3182 out tokens · 30130 ms · 2026-07-13T06:24:26.704639+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Certain 3D $U(1)$ spin liquids, such as those arising in dipolar quantum spin ice, have an emergent monopole which is the source of an emergent magnetic field that transforms under symmetries like an electric polarization. As a consequence, these monopoles carry a physical electric charge in their cores and form a plasma at low temperatures. Due to the monopole coupling to emergent gauge fields, the full system behaves as an electrical insulator for DC transport, but can display a sharp plasma resonance analogous to a metal at very low frequencies. This can serve as a clear fingerprint to detect these states in materials. We discuss the optimal conditions to observe this phenomenon in the 3D $U(1)$ spin-liquid candidate Ce$_2$Zr$_2$O$_7$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.08826 by Anish Koley, Inti Sodemann Villadiego, Saranyo Moitra.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 6 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Wen, Physical Review Letters88, 011602 (2001)

    X.-G. Wen, Physical Review Letters88, 011602 (2001)

    2001

  2. [2]

    Hermele, M

    M. Hermele, M. P. A. Fisher, and L. Balents, Physical Review B69, 064404 (2004)

    2004

  3. [3]

    M. J. P. Gingras and P. A. McClarty, Reports on Progress in Physics77, 056501 (2014), arXiv:1311.1817 [cond- mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  4. [4]

    O. I. Motrunich and T. Senthil, Physical Review Letters 89, 277004 (2002)

    2002

  5. [5]

    Senthil and O

    T. Senthil and O. Motrunich, Physical Review B66, 205104 (2002)

    2002

  6. [6]

    Wen, Physical Review B68, 115413 (2003)

    X.-G. Wen, Physical Review B68, 115413 (2003)

    2003

  7. [7]

    Banerjee, S

    A. Banerjee, S. V. Isakov, K. Damle, and Y. B. Kim, Physical Review Letters100, 047208 (2008)

    2008

  8. [8]

    only couples a finite number of neighboring spins) and it is not too strong so as to induce a phase transition into another state of matter

    Provided that it is local (e.g. only couples a finite number of neighboring spins) and it is not too strong so as to induce a phase transition into another state of matter

  9. [9]

    not the magnetic monopoles)

    We are using the terminology of Ref.[2], where the spin- ice rule violations would be viewed the emergent electric charges (i.e. not the magnetic monopoles). The magnetic monopoles have also been referred to as visons [3]

  10. [10]

    Namely their energy cost approaches a constant in the limit of long strings

  11. [11]

    I. S. Villadiego, Physical Review B104, 195149 (2021)

    2021

  12. [12]

    L. B. Ioffe and A. I. Larkin, Physical Review B39, 8988 (1989)

    1989

  13. [13]

    O. I. Motrunich, Physical Review B73, 155115 (2006)

    2006

  14. [14]

    Ng and P

    T.-K. Ng and P. A. Lee, Physical Review Letters99, 156402 (2007)

    2007

  15. [15]

    L. N. Bulaevskii, C. D. Batista, M. Mostovoy, and D. Khomskii, Physical Review B78, 024402 (2008), arXiv:0709.0575 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  16. [16]

    D. I. Khomskii, Nature Communications3, 904 (2012), arXiv:1206.0402 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  17. [17]

    A. C. Potter, T. Senthil, and P. A. Lee, Physical Review B87, 245106 (2013)

    2013

  18. [18]

    Lantagne-Hurtubise, S

    E. Lantagne-Hurtubise, S. Bhattacharjee, and R. Moess- ner, Physical Review B96, 125145 (2017)

    2017

  19. [19]

    J. Fu, J. G. Rau, M. J. P. Gingras, and N. B. Perkins, Physical Review B96, 035136 (2017), arXiv:1703.03836 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    Sodemann, D

    I. Sodemann, D. Chowdhury, and T. Senthil, Physical Review B97, 045152 (2018)

    2018

  21. [21]

    Rao and I

    P. Rao and I. Sodemann, Physical Review B100, 155150 (2019)

    2019

  22. [22]

    J. Y. Khoo, F. Pientka, and I. Sodemann Villadiego, New Journal of Physics24, 129501 (2022)

    2022

  23. [23]

    J. Y. Khoo, F. Pientka, P. A. Lee, and I. S. Villadiego, Physical Review B106, 115108 (2022)

    2022

  24. [24]

    C. R. Laumann and R. Moessner, Physical Review B108, L220402 (2023)

    2023

  25. [25]

    S. Wu, L. M. Schoop, I. Sodemann, R. Moessner, R. J. Cava, and N. P. Ong, Nature635, 301 (2024), arXiv:2411.09496 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    Namely the energy scale obtained from the coefficient in front of the Maxwell-like term associated with the low energy cost for emergent magnetic fields, which in QSI is controlled by the ring exchange energy scale [2] and is also typically comparable to the monopole gap∆m

  27. [27]

    Gaudet, E

    J. Gaudet, E. Smith, J. Dudemaine, J. Beare, C. Buhari- walla, N. Butch, M. Stone, A. Kolesnikov, G. Xu, D. Yahne, K. Ross, C. Marjerrison, J. Garrett, G. Luke, A. Bianchi, and B. Gaulin, Physical Review Letters122, 187201 (2019)

    2019

  28. [28]

    B. Gao, T. Chen, D. W. Tam, C.-L. Huang, K. Sasmal, D. T. Adroja, F. Ye, H. Cao, G. Sala, M. B. Stone, C. Baines, J. A. T. Verezhak, H. Hu, J.-H. Chung, X. Xu, S.-W. Cheong, M. Nallaiyan, S. Spagna, M. B. Maple, A. H. Nevidomskyy, E. Morosan, G. Chen, and P. Dai, Nature Physics15, 1052 (2019)

    2019

  29. [29]

    Baidya, M

    T. Baidya, M. S. Hegde, and J. Gopalakrishnan, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B111, 5149 (2007)

    2007

  30. [30]

    Sibille, N

    R. Sibille, N. Gauthier, E. Lhotel, V. Porée, V. Pom- jakushin, R. A. Ewings, T. G. Perring, J. Ollivier, A. Wildes, C. Ritter, T. C. Hansen, D. A. Keen, G. J. Nilsen, L. Keller, S. Petit, and T. Fennell, Nature Physics 16, 546 (2020), arXiv:1912.00928 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  31. [31]

    Smith, O

    E. Smith, O. Benton, D. Yahne, B. Placke, R. Schäfer, J. Gaudet, J. Dudemaine, A. Fitterman, J. Beare, A. Wildes, S. Bhattacharya, T. DeLazzer, C. Buhariwalla, N. Butch, R. Movshovich, J. Garrett, C. Marjerrison, J. Clancy, E. Kermarrec, G. Luke, A. Bianchi, K. Ross, and B. Gaulin, Physical Review X12, 021015 (2022)

    2022

  32. [32]

    Porée, E

    V. Porée, E. Lhotel, S. Petit, A. Krajewska, P. Puphal, A. H. Clark, V. Pomjakushin, H. C. Walker, N. Gauthier, D. J. Gawryluk, and R. Sibille, Physical Review Materials 6, 044406 (2022)

    2022

  33. [33]

    D. R. Yahne, B. Placke, R. Schäfer, O. Benton, R. Moess- ner, M. Powell, J. W. Kolis, C. M. Pasco, A. F. May, M. D. Frontzek, E. M. Smith, B. D. Gaulin, S. Calder, and K. A. Ross, Physical Review X14, 011005 (2024)

    2024

  34. [34]

    E. M. Smith, J. Dudemaine, B. Placke, R. Schäfer, D. R. Yahne, T. DeLazzer, A. Fitterman, J. Beare, J. Gaudet, C. R. C. Buhariwalla, A. Podlesnyak, G. Xu, J. P. Clancy, R. Movshovich, G. M. Luke, K. A. Ross, R. Moessner, O. Benton, A. D. Bianchi, and B. D. Gaulin, Physical Review B108, 054438 (2023)

    2023

  35. [35]

    B. Gao, F. Desrochers, D. W. Tam, D. M. Kirschbaum, P. Steffens, A. Hiess, D. H. Nguyen, Y. Su, S.-W. Cheong, S. Paschen, Y. B. Kim, and P. Dai, Nature Physics21, 1203 (2025)

    2025

  36. [36]

    Huang, G

    Y.-P. Huang, G. Chen, and M. Hermele, Physical Review Letters112, 167203 (2014)

    2014

  37. [37]

    Li and G

    Y.-D. Li and G. Chen, Physical Review B95, 041106 (2017)

    2017

  38. [38]

    Benton, Physical Review B102, 104408 (2020)

    O. Benton, Physical Review B102, 104408 (2020)

    2020

  39. [39]

    Bhardwaj, S

    A. Bhardwaj, S. Zhang, H. Yan, R. Moessner, A. H. Nev- idomskyy, and H. J. Changlani, npj Quantum Materials 7, 51 (2022)

    2022

  40. [40]

    Desrochers, L

    F. Desrochers, L. E. Chern, and Y. B. Kim, Physical Review B107, 064404 (2023)

    2023

  41. [41]

    Desrochers and Y

    F. Desrochers and Y. B. Kim, Physical Review Letters 132, 066502 (2024)

    2024

  42. [42]

    Hosoi, E

    M. Hosoi, E. Z. Zhang, A. S. Patri, and Y. B. Kim, Physical Review Letters129, 097202 (2022)

    2022

  43. [43]

    This is reasonable in the strong Ising limit of the QSI, where all these scales are controlled by the ring exchange [2]

  44. [44]

    M. Uno, A. Kosuga, M. Okui, K. Horisaka, H. Muta, K. Kurosaki, and S. Yamanaka, Journal of Alloys and Compounds420, 291 (2006)

    2006

  45. [45]

    K. G. Wilson, Phys. Rev. D10, 2445 (1974)

    1974

  46. [46]

    Kogut and L

    J. Kogut and L. Susskind, Phys. Rev. D11, 395 (1975). 6

    1975

  47. [47]

    J. B. Kogut, Rev. Mod. Phys.51, 659 (1979)

    1979

  48. [48]

    [2, 3, 62– 65]

    For microscopic calculations of quasiparticle properties of pyrochlore 3DU(1)QSLs arising in QSI, see e.g. [2, 3, 62– 65]

  49. [49]

    The lattice curl is defined ascurlp(al) ≡ ∑ l∈pσp lal where σp l takes values ±1along the links that bound the pla- quette; see Appendix S-I for precise definitions of lattice differential operators (grad,curl,div)

  50. [50]

    Forκ≪1it is in the deconfined Maxwell phase (quantum spin-liquid), and transitions into the confined phase (trivial paramagnet) forκ>κcrit ∼1

    The theory has a single dimensionless parameterκ= ℏ−2ϵ/µ. Forκ≪1it is in the deconfined Maxwell phase (quantum spin-liquid), and transitions into the confined phase (trivial paramagnet) forκ>κcrit ∼1

  51. [51]

    See Appendix S-I for sign convention

    The discrete divergence on a vertex v is divv(el) =∑ l∈vσv lel, whereσv l takes values±1. See Appendix S-I for sign convention

  52. [52]

    See Appendix S-I for sign convention

    The discrete divergence at a dual cube center c is divc(gp) = ∑ p∈cσc pgp, where σp c takes values ±1. See Appendix S-I for sign convention

  53. [53]

    Namely they are not viewed as dynamical fields

  54. [54]

    It is straightforward to generalize our analysis to the case in which several species of monopoles with different charges are thermally activated

  55. [55]

    Within linear response, all physical quantities, e.g.Jm and g, are spatially uniform and oscillate with the same frequency of the external perturbationE

  56. [56]

    Thusnm(T)stands here for the net positive density of both positive and negative monopoles

    Monopolesofoppositechargeswillhaveoppositevelocities and their currents add up. Thusnm(T)stands here for the net positive density of both positive and negative monopoles

  57. [57]

    It is interesting to note that we have arrived at this rule by a direct analysis of the dynamics of gauge fields and monopoles without resorting to parton constructions, which are more commonly used to derive it

  58. [58]

    J. Oxenius, Momentum exchange between matter and radiation, inKinetic Theory of Particles and Photons: Theoretical Foundations of Non-LTE Plasma Spectroscopy (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1986) pp. 240–273

    1986

  59. [59]

    by time-reversal or inversion symmetries

    Notice that emergent electric associated with spin-ice violation charges are always neutral, e.g. by time-reversal or inversion symmetries

  60. [60]

    Ref.[35], since at their lowest temperatures the specific heat is dominated by emergent photons

    This is already achieved for Ce2Zr2O7 in e.g. Ref.[35], since at their lowest temperatures the specific heat is dominated by emergent photons. In optical experiments it will be important to monitor that there is no light induced heating that could substantially raise the temperature of spins

  61. [61]

    The conductivity peaks atT∗≈ 25mK, and the maximum value at the peak becomesσmax ≈ 0.005e2 m/(ah), which is somewhat smaller, but still sizable

    If instead we assume thatallthe monopole energy scales are comparable to the photon bandwidth, the conductivity changes with temperature in an almost similar fashion at different driving frequencies (see Appendix S-VIII). The conductivity peaks atT∗≈ 25mK, and the maximum value at the peak becomesσmax ≈ 0.005e2 m/(ah), which is somewhat smaller, but still sizable

  62. [62]

    Savary and L

    L. Savary and L. Balents, Physical Review Letters108, 037202 (2012)

    2012

  63. [63]

    Shannon, O

    N. Shannon, O. Sikora, F. Pollmann, K. Penc, and P. Fulde, Physical Review Letters108, 067204 (2012)

    2012

  64. [64]

    Benton, O

    O. Benton, O. Sikora, and N. Shannon, Physical Review B86, 075154 (2012)

    2012

  65. [65]

    S. Lee, S. Onoda, and L. Balents, Phys. Rev. B86, 104412 (2012). 7 — SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL — THE MONOPOLE PLASMA RESONANCE: A SMOKING GUN OF 3DU(1)QUANTUM SPIN LIQUIDS S-I. DERIVATION OF MODIFIED MAXWELL’S EQUATIONS Before we start with our Lagrangian to derive the modified Maxwell’s equation, we first define the lattice derivatives as follows. div• vQ= ∑...

    2012

  66. [66]

    In the geometry of Fig.S2,E⊥ out =E 0 andE∥ 0 = 0

    Furthermore, considering the electric flux ∮ E·dSthrough a Gaussian pill box across the surface, we establish that the normal component is discontinuous, i.e., E⊥ out−E⊥ in = 1 ϵ0 ρ2D,(S24) whereρ2D is the surface charge density of the material. In the geometry of Fig.S2,E⊥ out =E 0 andE∥ 0 = 0. 11 FIG. S2. Slab of 3DU(1)QSL material in an external electr...

  67. [67]

    polar-vectors

    After inserting the expression of Planck distribution from theI o(ν0)we write the remaining integral ofν0 in terms a new variableζ=hν0/kBTas, ⟨∆v ∆t ⟩ =−vQ4 m m3c8 (a µ )2 23 32 (kBT) 4 h3 ∫ Wϕ kBT 0 ζ4eζ (eζ−1)2dζ,(S61) where we have definedWϕ:= ℏc/a as the bandwidth of the photons. From the definition⟨∆v/∆t⟩=−Γv, the dissipation rate is then Γ(T) = 24π ...