Question about QM description of metallic conduction

  • Thread starter Thread starter samgrace
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Conduction Qm
samgrace
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
I have read in a classical EM book:

" The picture of conduction electrons moving freely in conductors is an oversimplification, although it gives a good qualitative description of many of the properties of electric current.

In some materials the current is due to the motion of carriers with a charge equal in size to that on the electron but opposite sign. These carriers are called holes and can be regarded as gaps or holes in the conductor which otherwise has a full complement of electrons, to account for the neutrality that arises from each electron's pair nuclei.

The proper description of metallic conduction requires the use of quantum mechanics. "
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Was there a question?
 
What is the quantum mechanical description of metallic conduction?
 
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_and_quantum_conductivity
 
There is actually no description on quantum mechanical description of metallic conduction at this wiki webpage.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top