Understanding DFT & Graphene: Schrodinger vs Dirac

In summary, the conversation discusses the use of DFT techniques in studying metallic adatom adsorption on graphene and the debate over whether the Dirac or Schrodinger equation is more accurate in describing the electronic properties of graphene. The speakers also touch on the topic of relativistic effects in graphene and its potential applications in particle accelerator experiments. The conclusion is that while there is ongoing debate, it is generally agreed that the Schrodinger equation is sufficient for describing the electronic properties of graphene.
  • #1
knghrts17
11
0
Hello all,


I have read a few papers lately that have used DFT based techniques to investigate metallic adatom adsorption on top of graphene (see for instance PRB 77, 235430 2008). I was under the impression that electrons in graphene are described by the Dirac equation and not the Schrodinger equation. How then can the electronic properties be accurately described using DFT techniques based in the Shcrodinger equation.


Thanks in advance

-E
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
knghrts17 said:
I have read a few papers lately that have used DFT based techniques to investigate metallic adatom adsorption on top of graphene (see for instance PRB 77, 235430 2008). I was under the impression that electrons in graphene are described by the Dirac equation and not the Schrodinger equation. How then can the electronic properties be accurately described using DFT techniques based in the Shcrodinger equation.

Well, there are relativistic DFT models. But in general, no, it's not necessary to use the Dirac equation. The relativistic effects are quite small in a light element such as carbon. Smaller than the error of any DFT method.

The main technical issue with DFT (which I mentioned in a post just yesterday), as pertains to adsorption to graphene, is that most DFT functionals do not accurately reproduce van der Waals forces.There's a lot of http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0306033" [Broken] in this area, often using graphite/graphene/fullerene structures as testbeds.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
alxm said:
The relativistic effects are quite small in a light element such as carbon. Smaller than the error of any DFT method.

I don't think knghrts17 was referring to "real" relativistic effects. Graphene is very strange material and one reason for that is that the effective mass is (ideally) zero in some directions (the gap is essentially "V" shaped, not parabolic); graphene is very different from other forms of carbon.
Some people have suggested that one should therefore use the Dirac equation instead of the Schroedinger equation in order to calculate some of the properties of graphene.
There are even suggestions that it might eventually be possible to repeat some of the experiments normally done in particle accelerators in graphene.

There is still a lot of hype surrounding graphene so it is not surprising that there are all sorts of more or less realistic ideas floating around.
 
  • #4
f95toli said:
Some people have suggested that one should therefore use the Dirac equation instead of the Schroedinger equation in order to calculate some of the properties of graphene.

Well that's reasonable of course. And I'm a bit unsure of the value of DFT methods overall when it comes to electronic structure (what with the 'physicality' of Kohn-Sham orbitals being a subject of constant debate).

So, to be more specific, calculating 'molecular' (as opposed to Solid State/electronic structure) properties, such as bond strengths, forces, energies and the like, the relativistic effects on those properties will be small. I'd wager ~1 kJ/mol. In the case of adsorption, which is essentially all London forces, the largest error by far will come from how accurately the correlation functional reproduces vdW effects.
 
  • #5
Thank you all for all your input. I have thought about this some more and would like to throw out a question concerning my previous post. For a long time it was know through tight-binding calculations that a monolayer hexagonal lattice possessed a linear dispersion relation with a velocity that was independent of of both energy and momentum. To the best of my knowledge, there is nothing relativistic about the traditional tight-binding approach though I'm sure it can be reformulated in such a manner. Could it therefore be that the Schrodinger equation, while able to predict the band structure and behavior about the Dirac points cannot explain the other ancillary phenomena that arise due to the linear dispersion relation (i.e anomalous QHE, Klein paradox, etc)


Thanks in advance

-E
 
  • #6
The so-called "relativistic" aspects of graphene are not a manifestation of anything deeper than a linear dispersion relation around the points of the Fermi surface. Graphene is well-described by simply solving the Schrodinger equation (or the equivalent 2nd quantised form).
 
  • #7
The relativistic effects are important to explain a QHE. A magnetic field is applied in graphene structure and using tight-biding approach is possible to calculate the resistance rho_{xy} which related with the landau levels. A good reference to understand the methodology is a paper of Castro Neto. Search for this paper in web of science site.
 

1. What is DFT?

DFT stands for Density Functional Theory. It is a computational method used to study the electronic structure of materials, including graphene. DFT is based on the concept that the total energy of a system can be determined by the electron density of the system.

2. What is the difference between Schrodinger and Dirac equations?

Schrodinger and Dirac equations are two different mathematical models used in quantum mechanics to describe the behavior of electrons. The Schrodinger equation is a non-relativistic equation, meaning it does not account for the effects of special relativity. The Dirac equation, on the other hand, is a relativistic equation that takes into account the effects of special relativity on the behavior of electrons.

3. How does DFT help us understand graphene?

DFT can help us understand the electronic structure of graphene by calculating the electronic properties of graphene, such as the band structure and energy levels. This allows us to predict and analyze the behavior of electrons in graphene, providing valuable insights into its properties and potential applications.

4. What are some limitations of DFT in studying graphene?

One limitation of DFT in studying graphene is that it assumes the electrons in the material are in a continuous distribution, which may not be accurate for certain properties of graphene. Additionally, DFT calculations can be computationally intensive and may not be feasible for larger graphene systems.

5. How can DFT and graphene research benefit each other?

DFT and graphene research can benefit each other by providing a deeper understanding of both DFT methods and graphene properties. DFT can help researchers design and optimize graphene-based materials for specific applications, while graphene research can help improve and refine DFT methods for studying other materials.

Similar threads

  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
6
Views
8K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top