Thomas-Fermi approximation and the dielectric function

industrygiant
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
1)What exactly is meant by the 'static limit' where the frequency is taken to zero, but the wavenumber is finite? I am getting confused because if the frequency is zero, then surely the probing electrons/photons/whatever have no wavelength, so how can the wavenumber be finite and non-zero?

2) Regarding the Thomas-Fermi approximation, in my textbook (Kittel) it says that it is valid for electron wavenumbers much smaller than the fermi wavevector - so larger wavelengths than the fermi wavelength. If I am looking at impurity scattering in a metal, then surely you cannot apply the TF approximation since the electrons will all be at the Fermi level and so the wavenumber of the scattered electrons will equal that of the fermi wavevector. However I have seen the TF used for graphene particularly, so how is that a valid assumption?

Cheers.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider the potential of a static charge (a Coulomb potential in vacuum). Although it is static, the Fourier transform of the spatial distibution will contain all values of k.
The distinctive point with respect to photons is that you need a source for a Coulomb potential while photons are source free solutions of the Maxwell equations. The latter are only possible for special relations (dispersion) of k on omega.

As regards to question 2 I suppose (although I am not sure) that it is sufficient in scattering that the change in wavenumber is much smaller than the Fermi wavenumber.
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...
Back
Top