Register to reply 
I'm confusedby Petar Mali
Tags: confused 
Share this thread: 
#1
Jan2511, 01:01 PM

P: 290

If I have cubic structure where plane is define by vector [tex]\rho[/tex] and in [tex]z[/tex] direction I have planes [tex]...m2,m1,m,m+1,m+2...[/tex]
and if I have for example [tex]\sum_{m,\vec{\rho}}\hat{B}_{m,\vec{\rho}}\hat{B}_{m+1,\vec{\rho}}[/tex] how to go with that in Kspace? If I had [tex]\sum_{m,\vec{\rho}}\hat{B}_{m,\vec{\rho}}\hat{B}_{m,\vec{\rho}}[/tex] I will say [tex](m,\vec{\rho})=\vec{n}[/tex] and then I will have [tex]\sum_{\vec{n}}\hat{B}_{\vec{n}}\hat{B}_{\vec{n}}=\sum_{\vec{n}}\frac{1} {\sqrt{N}}\sum_{\vec{k}}\hat{B}_{\vec{k}}e^{i\vec{k}\cdot\vec{n}}\frac{ 1}{\sqrt{N}}\sum_{\vec{q}}\hat{B}_{\vec{q}}e^{i\vec{q}\cdot\vec{n}}[/tex] [tex]=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{\vec{k},\vec{q}}\hat{B}_{\vec{k}}\hat{B}_{\vec{q}}N\d elta_{\vec{k},\vec{q}}=\sum_{\vec{k}}\hat{B}_{\vec{k}}\hat{B}_{\vec{k}}[/tex] But what to do in case with m+1. Thanks for your answer! 


#2
Jan2611, 11:08 PM

P: 63

I am not familiar with these equations, but I try to give some opinions for discussion.
The problem is that there will be an unexpected term, i.e. exp(i*q), if the B(m)B(m+1) are transformed in Kspace. As I learned, B(m)B(m+1) denotes the transition process between state m and state m+1. The complete formula is usually written in the sum of V(m,m+1)B(m)B(m+1), where V(m,m+1) is the transition matrix element. When the formula is transformed in Kspace, V(m,m+1) are also transformed as V(m,k,m+1,q), or written in V(k,q) for the shortness. And what i am thinking is that the unexpected term exp(i*q) will be absorbed in V(k,q). That means you can do the transformation in the case of (m,m+1) just like what you did in the case of (m,m). The difference for the m and m+1 only appears in the transition matrix elements. 


#3
Jan2711, 01:17 AM

P: 416

Yes, as shawl mentions you get an extra factor of exp(i*q). With the right symmetry in your lattice you will be able to combine the exponentials to end up with something like [tex]\sum_q f(q) B_q B_{q}[/tex] where f(q) is some real function, probably composed of cosines. This is exactly the sort of thing you get in tight binding, except there you have a creation and annihilation operator on different sites.



Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Internal forces on a system of particles  General Physics  7  
Little confused by this?  Calculus & Beyond Homework  2  
Little confused  Calculus & Beyond Homework  2  
A little confused  Atomic, Solid State, Comp. Physics  14  
3x + 1  x  1 = 2  General Math  12 