2D Density of States Energy Independent

KingBigness
Messages
94
Reaction score
0
It's known that the Density of States in 2D is given by,
g_2(E)dE = \frac{a^2m}{\pi\hbar^2}dE

The density of states in 1D and 3D are as follows,
g_1(E)dE = \left(\frac{a}{\pi}\sqrt{\frac{2m}{\hbar^2}}\right)\frac{1}{\sqrt{E}}dE
g_3(E)dE = \frac{a^3}{2\pi^2}\left(\frac{2m}{\hbar^2}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}\sqrt{E}dE

It's clear that the 1D and 3D Density of States are dependent on energy but it seems for the 2D case the energy density is constant.

I was wondering why this was the case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
this is for a free electron. Not necessarily for every system.

I don't have a physical intuitive explanation. It just arises from the math of the system.
 
I think I have a mathematical explanation that is somewhat intuitive. If one accepts that the energy of the free electron is given by:

E=\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2m}

and that the "density" of states, when imagined as the density of points in reciprocal space, in 2D will be an areal density (area rather than volume or length for 1D), then you can see that those k are going to cancel.

All it means is that as you imagine going further out, from the origin, in your reciprocal space, the energy increases quadratically. Remember that we discretise the reciprocal space dependent on the number of electrons in the system. In all dimensions then, the number of points contained in a region (a length, area or volume) bounded by a k-point is determined by our deliberate choice to discretise reciprocal space, so as to give each point an equal fraction of the total space. It is only in the 2 D case that the number of points contained in a region increases quadratically with the size of your region (area of circle is proportional to radius squared). In 1 D and 3 D the increase is linear, and cubic, thus increasing slower and faster than the energy of state k at the boundary, respectively.

Conclusion: our choice of even length/area/volume per k-point and the physical reality that the energy is proportional to k^2 gives the result. The first part (the choice) is necessary for an easy derivation of the density of states, and so the actual answer is the nature of the energy equation.
 
Last edited:
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