About Relaxation Time Approximation

hokhani
Messages
554
Reaction score
15
I have seriously stocked in the subject below.

According to Ashcrift & Mermin (chapter 13):

If the electrons about r have equilibrium distribution appropriate to local temperature T(r),
g_n (r,k,t)=g_n^o (r,k)=\frac {1}{ exp^{(\epsilon_n (k) -\mu (r))/kT} +1} (formula 13.2) then collisions will not alter the form of distribution function. We know in the time interval dt a fraction \frac{dt}{\tau_n(r,k)} of electrons in band n with wave vector k near position r will suffer a collision that does alter their band index and/or wave vector. If the above form of distribution function is nevertheless to be unaltered, then the distribution of those electrons that emerge from collisions into band n with wave vector k during the same interval must precisely compensate for this loss. Thus:
g_n (r,k,t)=\frac{dt}{\tau_n(r,k)} g_n^o (r,k) (formula 13.3)

I don’t know how is 13.3 obtained.

In fact I don’t know what the text means by form of distribution function in the expression “collisions will not alter the form of distribution function”? On one hand if the electrons near r which left the point (n,k) due to collision are precisely compensated then at a specific (r,k) the distribution function doesn’t have to change and the expression means that g_n (r,k,t)=g_n^o (r,k) which is 13.2. on the other hand using this interpretation, near position r at time interval dt due to collisions\frac{dt}{\tau_n(r,k)} electrons will leave the point (r,n,k) to another point say (r,n^\prime,k^\prime) so that dg_n (r,k,t)=g^0_n{\prime} (r,k^\prime,t^\prime)- g_n^0 (r,k,t) where t^\prime=t+dt.

However if we were to accept this, how can we consider the dg_n as the number of electrons which have left (r,n,k) toward (r,n\prime,k\prime) due to collision at time interval dt namely\frac{dt}{\tau_n(r,k)} g_n^o (r,k)? If so, we necessarily must have just prior to collision g^0_n(r,k,t)= g^0_n\prime(r,k\prime,t) so that this amount of electrons that enter there, perform a change in distribution function as much as\frac{dt}{\tau_n(r,k)} g_n^o (r,k)!

Could anyone please help me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hmmm, the definition of thermal equilibrium is that (a) because of the finite temperature collisions occur and (b) in equilibrium the (average) situation is static, i.e. time derivatives of statistical properties vanish.

For this to be true, every electron scattered away from band n/wave vector k must be replaced by an electron coming from a different band/wave vector. The population of each band/wave vector therefore stays (on average) constant. With that the form of the distribution function remains constant.
 
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