In Foresti & Ricca (Reference Foresti and Ricca2020) (hereafter referred to as FR20) we derived a modified form of the Gross–Pitaevskii equation for a defect subject to twist. A mistake was introduced by the wrong use of the operator
$\widetilde {\boldsymbol {\nabla }}=\boldsymbol {\nabla }-\mathrm {i}\boldsymbol {\nabla }\theta _{tw}$. By repeating the same calculations we can see that the mGPE (2.6) must be replaced by the following equation:
\begin{align} \partial_t\psi_1 &= \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \nabla^{2}\psi_1 + \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2}\left(1-|\psi_{tw}|^{2}-|\boldsymbol{\nabla} \theta_{tw}|^{2}\right)\psi_1+\mathrm{i}(\partial_t\theta_{tw})\psi_1 \nonumber\\ &\quad + \frac{1}{2}\nabla^{2}\theta_{tw}\psi_1 + \boldsymbol{\nabla}\theta_{tw}\boldsymbol{\cdot}\boldsymbol{\nabla}\psi_1. \end{align}Note the extra terms that come from the broken symmetry of the theory under superposition of a local phase.
The Hamiltonian (3.1) then becomes
where
${{\boldsymbol {p}}} = -\mathrm {i}\boldsymbol{\nabla}$ is the momentum operator, and
is the twist potential. It can be directly verified that the above Hamiltonian is also non-Hermitian.
The energy expectation value
$E_{tw}$ is given by the contribution of the unperturbed state
$\psi _0$ and twist. Since the twist contribution is linear in
$\psi _1$, it can be obtained from the expectation value of
$V_{tw}$ and the kinetic part that depends on
$\theta _{tw}$; thus, (3.5) must be replaced by
\begin{align} E_{tw} &= \int \left[\left(\frac{1}{2} |\boldsymbol{\nabla}\theta_{tw}|^{2} -\partial_t\theta_{tw} + \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \nabla^{2}\theta_{tw}\right)|\psi_{1}|^{2}+ \mathrm{i}\boldsymbol{\nabla}\theta_{tw}\boldsymbol{\cdot}\boldsymbol{\nabla}\psi_{1} \right. \nonumber\\ &\quad +\frac{1}{2}\left. |\boldsymbol{\nabla}\psi_{1}|^{2} -\frac{1}{2} |\psi_{1}|^{2} + \frac{1}{4}|\psi_{1}|^{4}\right] {{\rm d}}V. \end{align}
Upon application of the Madelung transform
$\psi _{1} = \sqrt \rho \exp (\mathrm {i} \chi _{1})$, taking
$\boldsymbol {\nabla }\theta _{tw}\boldsymbol {\cdot }\boldsymbol {\nabla }\rho = 0$ in the neighborhood of the defect, we have
\begin{align} E_{tw} &= \int \left[\left(\frac{1}{2} |\boldsymbol{\nabla}\theta_{tw}|^{2} -\partial_t\theta_{tw}- \boldsymbol{\nabla}\theta_{tw}\boldsymbol{\cdot}\boldsymbol{\nabla}\chi_{1} + \frac{1}{2} |\boldsymbol{\nabla}\psi_{1}|^{2} -\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4}|\psi_{1}|^{2}\right) \right. \nonumber\\ &\quad + \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \left. \nabla^{2}\theta_{tw}\right]|\psi_{1}|^{2} \,{{\rm d}}V. \end{align}As in FR20, the imaginary term above makes the Hamiltonian non-Hermitian, and the twisted state remains unstable. Following what is done in FR20 (§ 3), by the same procedure we obtain the correct dispersion relation
The instability criterion of § 3 remains unaltered.
Since injection of negative twist is given by a rotation of the twist phase opposite to the vortex orientation, if we replace
$\theta _{tw}\rightarrow -\theta _{tw}$ we evidently have instability when
$\nabla ^{2}\theta _{tw} < 0$ as
$t \rightarrow \infty$.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to A. Roitberg, who pointed out an error in the derivation of (2.6) of FR20.
Declaration of interests
The authors report no conflict of interest.