How Does the Fermi Surface Form a Perfect Square in a 2D Tight Binding Model?

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
On the attached file the tight binding dispersion for a 2d square lattice is described. It is then assumed that the fermi surface is a square. My question is: How can it ever be a perfect square when the dispersion looks as it does.
Also can someone explain:
Why does the half filled case correspond to:
-1 electron per lattice site (why will 2 electrons not occupy the ground state etc.)
- chemical potential μ=0
 

Attachments

  • fermisurface.png
    fermisurface.png
    13.6 KB · Views: 2,007
Physics news on Phys.org
aaaa202 said:
On the attached file the tight binding dispersion for a 2d square lattice is described. It is then assumed that the fermi surface is a square. My question is: How can it ever be a perfect square when the dispersion looks as it does.
Also can someone explain:
Why does the half filled case correspond to:
-1 electron per lattice site (why will 2 electrons not occupy the ground state etc.)
- chemical potential μ=0

I suppose that the formula (1) on the attachment file supplied by you has already answered your question,i.e., "How can it ever be a perfect square when the dispersion looks as it does."

Not noly tight binding can describe it,but also perturbation theory can support it.
 
You are exactly right that in principle 2 electrons could occupy each lattice site; this would be the "completely filled" case. If there is only 1 electron per lattice site, we call that "half filled."
 
t!m said:
You are exactly right that in principle 2 electrons could occupy each lattice site; this would be the "completely filled" case. If there is only 1 electron per lattice site, we call that "half filled."

Actually,I think the more important problem here is "how to caltulate the fermi level for actual computation",for example,how to make it come true in some DFT softwares ,and how about its effictiveness,and so on.
 
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