What Are These Energy Band Graphs Actually Showing?

WolfOfTheSteps
Messages
134
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Here is the problem:
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/748/64my8.th.jpg

The Attempt at a Solution



I got the effective mass. That's trivial. My question is, what are these graphs actually of? The horizontal and vertical axes are not labeled.

Is it an energy dispersion? If so, how come some of the curves are negative? All throughout the book, there is not a single energy dispersion curve with negative branches!

It can't be the effective mass vs K, because the second derivative of E with respect to k is not a parabola. And besides, the question "which band has the higher effective mass" would not make much sense. I know that on the dispersion curve, the narrower bands have lower effective mass. But the negative bands are just throwing me off.

I'm really frustrated. Please help if you can!

Much thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It represents energy as a function of wave vector of the electron. The upper and lower graphs are the conduction and valence bands of the material, respectively. The choice of where zero energy is chosen is arbitrary, really.

also, note that the electron momentum is proportional to the wave vector. this is simply because k = 2pi/lambda, but lambda = h/p, where p is momentum. therefore, k = 2pi/(h/p) = 2(pi)p/h. Or, p = (h-bar)k. So, you could have momentum on the x-axis instead of wave vector, if you like.
 
Thanks, leright!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top