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
4,853 answers , 20,624 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
501 active unimported users
More ...

Nobel physics prize 2016 INFO's citations and Symmetry-Protected Topological state development

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
102 views

This question concerns the development of Symmetry-Protected Topological states (as an extension of Topological Insulator), the interesting topic has been cited in Nobel physics prize 2016 advanced INFO.

My question focus on what would be a "more" complete picture on the early development of this subject is, in 2009-ish, to 2010, from the researcher in the condensed matter field? Other than the two citations added in the info? (It should be a well-defined question based on the chronological-ordered literature. So there should be some certain answer, more than just some opinion-based discussions.)

Since Nobel physics prize 2016 advanced INFO had modified its citations (see the story below), some uncareful mistakes or ambiguities must be made by some Nobel committee members.

In the earlier 1st version of Nobel physics prize 2016 advanced INFO (posted in the early Oct 4th), in Section 5, in page 18 it stated that [image copy below Version 1] For the Haldane phase this was investigated in 2010 by Pollmann et al., who showed that as long as certain symmetry properties are respected by the perturbations, the phase remains intact and exhibits a characteristic entanglement property. And one Ref is cited for its contribution: Frank Pollmann, Ari M Turner, Erez Berg, and Masaki Oshikawa. Entanglement spectrum of a topological phase in one dimension. Physical Review B, 81(6):064439, 2010

-

Later on, a few weeks later, several revisions had found in the new Version N of Nobel physics prize 2016 advanced INFO. The statement is modified to [image copy below Version N]: To define a distinct phase of matter, it is important that the characteristic properties are not destroyed by small perturbations. For the Haldane phase this was investigated in 2009 by Gu and Wen [54] who showed that as long as certain symmetry properties are respected by the perturbations, the phase re- mains intact, and in 2010 the entanglement properties of the state was studied in detail by Pollmann et al. [45]. And add a citation: Zheng-Cheng Gu and Xiao-Gang Wen. Tensor-entanglment-filtering renormalization approach and symmetry-protected topological order. Physical Review B, 80:155131, 1990. But notice that the year is wrong, it should be 2009 not 1990.

-

Version 1 (photo copy):

enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

Version N (current version, photo copy):

enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2016-11-05 08:24 (UTC), posted by SE-user Idear
asked Nov 4, 2016 in Theoretical Physics by wonderich (1,400 points) [ no revision ]
I think @Idear asked a relevant question as to whether anybody on this site has any factual information of what really happened in 2009 to 2010 reference the findings cited by the Nobel committee. He made it clear he is not asking opinions. Opinions could be downvoted

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2016-11-05 08:24 (UTC), posted by SE-user Bob Bee

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$\hbar$ysicsO$\varnothing$erflow
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
...