About basis of the honeycomb lattice


by KFC
Tags: basis, honeycomb, lattice
KFC
KFC is offline
#1
Apr28-12, 08:25 PM
P: 369
Hi there, I am reading the book "Condensed Matter Physics" second edition by Michael P. Marder. It stated in page 9 that one basis of the the honeycomb lattice is

[tex]
\vec{v}_1 = a [0 \ 1/(2\sqrt{3})], \qquad
\vec{v}_2 = a [0 \ -1/(2\sqrt{3})]
[/tex]

which is based on figure 1.5(B) in page 10. But in that case when two (vertical) atoms are bind together, so should this basis be

[tex]
\vec{v}_1 = a [0 \ \sqrt{3}/2], \qquad
\vec{v}_2 = a [0 \ -\sqrt{3}/2]
[/tex]

By the way, why the primitive vectors are given as that in 1.6a and 1.6b

[tex]
\vec{v}_1 = (1/6 \ 1/6) , \qquad \vec{v}_2 = (-1/6 \ -1/6)
[/tex]

it said [tex](\vec{a}_1 + \vec{a}_2)/6 = \vec{v}_1[/tex]

But
[tex]
\vec{a}_1 = a(1 \ 0), \qquad \vec{a}_2 = a (1/2 \ \sqrt{3}/2)
[/tex]

why [tex](\vec{a}_1 + \vec{a}_2)/6 = \vec{v}_1[/tex]?
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Researchers develop scalable methods for manufacturing metamaterials
Researchers find tin selenide shows promise for efficiently converting waste heat into electrical energy
After 13 years, progress in pitch-drop experiment (w/ video)
sam_bell
sam_bell is offline
#2
Apr30-12, 04:12 AM
P: 67
This is confusing. How can v1, v2 be a basis when v1 = -v2?? You should scan the page and put it up (double-check the Forum rules first .. i'm not an expert). Few people are so eager to help that they would go to the library and check out the book. You have to make the helpers' life easy.
KFC
KFC is offline
#3
Apr30-12, 12:18 PM
P: 369
Quote Quote by sam_bell View Post
This is confusing. How can v1, v2 be a basis when v1 = -v2?? You should scan the page and put it up (double-check the Forum rules first .. i'm not an expert). Few people are so eager to help that they would go to the library and check out the book. You have to make the helpers' life easy.
Sorry for the confusing ... and sorry also the book has been returned to the library and I don't have one now. But one thing I could explain here, in solid state physics, in some book 'basis' mean the combination of atoms only, nothing to do with the basis vector, so it is possible to have v1=-v2 in that case.

sam_bell
sam_bell is offline
#4
Apr30-12, 10:10 PM
P: 67

About basis of the honeycomb lattice


All three bases describe a honeycomb lattice, when combined with Bravais vectors a1, a2. The second set (v1 = a[0, sqrt(3)/2] and v2 = a[0, -sqrt(3)/2]) is translated by a[1/2,0] relative to the first. The third set (v1 = a1/6 + a2/6 and v2 = -a1/6 -a2/6) is rotated by 60 degrees relative to the first.
KFC
KFC is offline
#5
Apr30-12, 10:57 PM
P: 369
Quote Quote by sam_bell View Post
All three bases describe a honeycomb lattice, when combined with Bravais vectors a1, a2. The second set (v1 = a[0, sqrt(3)/2] and v2 = a[0, -sqrt(3)/2]) is translated by a[1/2,0] relative to the first. The third set (v1 = a1/6 + a2/6 and v2 = -a1/6 -a2/6) is rotated by 60 degrees relative to the first.
Thanks for your reply. I get the point now. So, there is a mistake to write [tex]\vec{v}_1 = a [0 \ 1/(2\sqrt{3})], \qquad
\vec{v}_2 = a [0 \ -1/(2\sqrt{3})][/tex] in the book, right?
sam_bell
sam_bell is offline
#6
Apr30-12, 11:07 PM
P: 67
Quote Quote by KFC View Post
Thanks for your reply. I get the point now. So, there is a mistake to write [tex]\vec{v}_1 = a [0 \ 1/(2\sqrt{3})], \qquad
\vec{v}_2 = a [0 \ -1/(2\sqrt{3})][/tex] in the book, right?
Err, no. That's what I was referring to as the "1st" set.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Graphene: numerical diagonalization of honeycomb-lattice tight-binding Atomic, Solid State, Comp. Physics 0
Finding an orthonormal basis of a Hilbert space relative to a lattice of subspaces Linear & Abstract Algebra 2
Modeling of sandwich (honeycomb) composites in Ansys workbench or APDL if you like Mechanical Engineering 2
One-dimensional monatomic chain; square lattice; hcp close packed 2D lattice Advanced Physics Homework 0
Honeycomb Resistor Problem Introductory Physics Homework 10