Spontaneous symmetry breaking is a mode of realization of symmetry breaking in a physical system, where the underlying laws are invariant under a symmetry transformation, but the system as a whole changes under such transformations, in contrast to explicit symmetry breaking. It is a spontaneous process by which a system in a symmetrical state ends up in an asymmetrical state. It thus describes systems where the equations of motion or the Lagrangian obey certain symmetries, but the lowest energy solutions do not exhibit that symmetry.
Consider the bottom of an empty wine bottle, a symmetrical upward dome with a gutter for sediment. If a ball is placed at the peak of the dome, the situation is symmetrical with respect to rotating the wine bottle. But the ball may spontaneously break this symmetry and roll into the gutter, a point of lowest energy. The bottle and the ball retain their symmetry, but the system does not.
Most simple phases of matter and phase-transitions, like crystals, magnets, and conventional superconductors can be simply understood from the viewpoint of spontaneous symmetry breaking. Notable exceptions include topological phases of matter like the fractional quantum Hall effect.
Read more about Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking: Generalisation and Technical Usage, A Pedagogical Example: The Mexican Hat Potential, Other Examples, Nobel Prize
Famous quotes containing the words spontaneous, symmetry and/or breaking:
“My vocabulary dwells deep in my mind and needs paper to wriggle out into the physical zone. Spontaneous eloquence seems to me a miracle. I have rewritten—often several times—every word I have ever published. My pencils outlast their erasers.”
—Vladimir Nabokov (1899–1977)
“What makes a regiment of soldiers a more noble object of view than the same mass of mob? Their arms, their dresses, their banners, and the art and artificial symmetry of their position and movements.”
—George Gordon Noel Byron (1788–1824)
“To have the fear of God before our eyes, and, in our mutual dealings with each other, to govern our actions by the eternal measures of right and wrong:MThe first of these will comprehend the duties of religion;Mthe second, those of morality, which are so inseparably connected together, that you cannot divide these two tables ... without breaking and mutually destroying them both.”
—Laurence Sterne (1713–1768)