I Are electron bands symmetric in the reciprocal space?

dRic2
Gold Member
Messages
887
Reaction score
225
Hi, in the lecture notes my professor gave us, it is stated that, due to Kramers theorem, the energy in a band must satisfy this condition:
$$E(-k) = E(k)$$
But, judging from actual pictures of band structures I don't find this condition to be true. Here's a (random) picture
15690962134621080100212305718610.jpg

I guess it looks "kind of" symmetric in the lower bands, but I wouldn't certainly call it that way.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am not sure you know how to read the diagram correctly. The part left of the middle is actually a different direction or slice than the right half of the diagram. That is typical situation for energy band diagrams. Instead of just plotting how the energy bands go along one direction, it takes a path through k space. Often points on the path are labeled with letters like ##\Gamma##, but in your case it seems to have indicated the direction with vectors. I borrowed this diagram for education purposes. So you would not see in the diagram what happens if you keep going from M to ##\Gamma## until the end, because once you hit ##\Gamma## the path actually turns up to Z. They do this so a 2D plot can show what happens in multiple directions, but it won't show the symmetry you're seeking.
1569102881024.png
 

Attachments

  • 1569102849758.png
    1569102849758.png
    19.7 KB · Views: 391
  • Like
Likes aaroman and dRic2
1000 times thank you. I didn't even notice that the Miller indexes are different.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top