Can lattice deformation preserve DOS and simplify calculations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rigetFrog
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dos Transform
rigetFrog
Messages
112
Reaction score
4
To calculate the DOS of a material, the electronic structure typically needs to be calculated first. This requires lots of expertise and the accuracy is questionable.

I'm interested in seeing if there's some shortcut to get some general properties of the DOS:

If I could arbitrarily deform the crystal lattice while preserving the ionic charge density (I can also magically change ionic charge to preserve change density), are there any general statements I could say about the final DOS?

I would like to say the cumulative DOS calculated by integrating from -infinity to a specific energy 'E' would be invariant.

Comments anyone?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am not aware of any way to calculate the DOS without prior knowledge of the electronic states and I do not think it can be done in the manner you are suggesting.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Ok, how bout this.

If we increase the crystal lattice constant, and preserve the ionic charge density (by magically changing the proton and electron charge), then I assert that the density of states would not change. (I'm using units of #states/dE, not #states/(dE*m^3))

Do you agree?
 
Still doesn't seem right, from over 20 years in condensed matter theory, I've never seen the DOS calculated in any other way than using the electronic states via the band structure, matter a fact, that is how it is defined.
 
Ok. I can prove it now.

You've seen that picture plotting the D(E) vs lattice constant, 'a', for the different bands. It shows hows the partial D(E) goes from very sharp at large lattice constant to very broad at small lattice constants.

This process is described by continually splitting of narrow atomic states. No new states are created with decreasing 'a'. Rather, existing degenerate states are split. As long as you're below the upper edge of the band, the total number of states below that energy doesn't change. QED.

Now, any thoughts if I can use this to simplify D(E) calculations?
Can this thought process be generalized to formation of surface states?

(I'm a ~10 year experimentalist whose job description forbids using WIEN2k and am forced to slave away in a lab under threat of lashes. So I spend time dreaming about alternative approaches to the forbidden theory.)
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top