Averaging over random potential of impurities

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of averaging over the random potential of impurities in superconductors, particularly focusing on how this averaging leads to translational invariance in both time and space. Participants seek clarification on the implications of this concept and request examples or references to enhance understanding.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that averaging over the random potential of impurities implies that the statistical expected value is invariant with respect to spatial translation and independent of time.
  • One participant notes that the expected value is derived from a sufficiently large sample of measurements of impurity concentrations in semiconductors.
  • Another participant expresses an intuitive understanding of the concept, linking it to the scattering of impurities, but seeks a mathematical example to illustrate the idea further.
  • There is a discussion about the need to define the "population" being sampled in terms of homogeneity, with a suggestion that the distribution of impurity concentrations may vary by type and processing of superconductors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a general understanding of the concept of translational invariance through averaging, but there is no consensus on the mathematical demonstration or specific examples. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the precise implications and applications of the averaging process in different contexts.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of specific mathematical examples to illustrate the concept of translational invariance and the need for clarity on the definitions of the populations being discussed.

AJS2011
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hey,

In doing calculations on superconductors, I often hear that people say "averaging over the random potential of impurities make the theory translationally invariant both in time and space".

I do not exactly understand it? Could you please explain it through a simple example or by citing a readable reference?

Thanks a lot!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
AJS2011 said:
Hey,

In doing calculations on superconductors, I often hear that people say "averaging over the random potential of impurities make the theory translationally invariant both in time and space".

I do not exactly understand it? Could you please explain it through a simple example or by citing a readable reference?

Thanks a lot!

I can't address specific issues with superconductors, but in general the statement means location in space and time does not affect the statistical expected value of the "potential" for impurities. That is, the expected value is invariant with respect to translation in space and independent of time (at least within some understood context). Specifically, the expected value would be the mean of a suitably large sample (or multiple samples) of measurements of concentrations of impurities in specific semiconductors.
 
Last edited:
SW VandeCarr said:
I can't address specific issues with superconductors, but in general the statement means location in space and time does not affect the statistical expected value of the "potential" for impurities. That is, the expected value is invariant with respect to translation in space and independent of time (at least within some understood context).

Thanks, SW VandeCarr! Intuitively, I understand that because of huge number of scatterings from impurities in all directions, preferred directions in space disappear; however I do not see how it can happen in mathematics through a concrete example.
 
AJS2011 said:
Thanks, SW VandeCarr! Intuitively, I understand that because of huge number of scatterings from impurities in all directions, preferred directions in space disappear; however I do not see how it can happen in mathematics through a concrete example.

I anticipated your response and edited my previous post. Just speaking generally,an average is based on data, not theory. You also need to define as precisely as possible the "population" being sampled in terms of homogeneity so that you can make useful inferences. Are you talking about all superconductors? I would think the distribution of concentrations of impurities might vary by type, processing etc.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
1K