Are Holes and Positrons Essentially the Same Entity?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Swapnil
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Holes
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conceptual relationship between holes in solid-state physics and positrons, exploring whether they can be considered the same entity or if they are fundamentally different. The scope includes theoretical considerations and conceptual clarifications related to particle physics and condensed matter physics.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that holes are more than just a convenient abstraction, suggesting they may have properties akin to real particles.
  • Others argue that holes and positrons are fundamentally different, with holes representing an absence of electrons and positrons being anti-electrons that can annihilate with electrons.
  • A participant notes that while holes and positrons are different, the mathematical treatment of holes can be similar to that of positrons, particularly in terms of particle creation and annihilation processes.
  • It is mentioned that holes can exhibit different effective masses depending on their electronic environment, which adds complexity to their characterization as particles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of holes and positrons, with no consensus reached on whether they can be considered the same entity or not.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexities of defining holes in the context of solid-state physics and their comparison to positrons, with unresolved aspects regarding the implications of their mathematical similarities and physical behaviors.

Swapnil
Messages
459
Reaction score
6
I am studying the concept of holes in my device physics class. They say that holes a hole is just an absence of an electron. Yet we do all kinds of stuff with holes as though it was a real physical particle.

So here's is the question. Are holes and positrons the same thing or possibly the same thing? If they are, then it would give me a reason to believe that holes are something more than just something we invented for convenience.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
holes are something more than just something we invented for convenience.
But you didn't "invent" it; the hole is there whether you acknowledge it or not. So what if the hole shares many qualities with "real" particles? That just means those qualities aren't the exclusive property of real particles.
 
Holes and positrons are quite different. Holes are absences of electrons, with the excess + charge from atomic nuclei. Positrons, as you know, are anti-electrons, which would quickly be annihilated by contact with electrons.
 
mathman said:
Holes and positrons are quite different. Holes are absences of electrons, with the excess + charge from atomic nuclei. Positrons, as you know, are anti-electrons, which would quickly be annihilated by contact with electrons.

However, the mathematics are the same.

The ground state of a fermionic system is equivalent to the vacuum state. The creation of an electron and a hole out of the ground state has the identical description of the electron-positron pair creation. The recombination of electron with a hole can, in fact, generate a photon the same way that electron-positron anhilation can.

The major difference between the two analogies is that a hole can have a different "effective mass" than an electron, because it can "live" in an entirely different electronic environment.

Regardless of that, the consideration of a hole as if it is any ordinary particle is as valid as any other description that we have within condensed matter/solid state physics.

Zz.
 
Swapnil said:
I am studying the concept of holes in my device physics class. They say that holes a hole is just an absence of an electron. Yet we do all kinds of stuff with holes as though it was a real physical particle.

So here's is the question. Are holes and positrons the same thing or possibly the same thing? If they are, then it would give me a reason to believe that holes are something more than just something we invented for convenience.
Consider that a hole behaves differently from an electron, in a solid, e.g., a semiconductor; for this reason it can be considered as "a particle", but different from an electron; this should be enough for you, since, even for a real physical particle, you study its properties and its behaviour, as Hurkyl said.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K