Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,862 answers , 20,637 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
502 active unimported users
More ...

Why do people say "Bosons are either gapped or condensated, except physical principle protected cases (Goldstone boson, photon)."?

+ 4 like - 0 dislike
99 views

Bosons are either gapped or condensated, except physical principle protected cases (Goldstone boson, photon, etc.). I read this in a paper (version1 of http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.3728v1, 1st page 1st column) and in other lecture slides (page 6 of http://discor2013.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/lee.pdf). This slide appears to talk about some mean field result of spin liquid state.

This statement is not really pertinent to the mainstream of that paper. But it sounds rather intriguing and necessary to be further clarified. So could anyone make it clearer? Thanks!

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-22 05:04 (UCT), posted by SE-user huotuichang
asked Jul 31, 2014 in Theoretical Physics by sfman (270 points) [ no revision ]
Could you please provide a reference?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-22 05:04 (UCT), posted by SE-user Frederic Brünner
Reference updated.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-22 05:04 (UCT), posted by SE-user huotuichang

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsOverfl$\varnothing$w
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...