A Charge density of carbon nanotubes and graphene

Nod
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone!
I'm trying to solve the following problem: given the charge densities of carbon nanotubes and graphene, the charge density difference of 2 systems must be found. So I need to unfold in some way the nanotube and compare it charge density with the graphene's one. But how this unfolding process should be done? I mean, the nanotube has different distances between the carbons than the graphene, should it be so also once I map it on the plane? Or is it fine to just map it as a graphene structure and find some way of describing the charge density in an adequate manner? And which way would be adequate?
Thanks for any ideas, because I'm out of any.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I suppose it depends on what you're after, but maybe just compare the 2-carbon unit cell of graphene to an analogous 2-carbon "unit cell" of nanotubes. Otherwise, you'll have to worry about boundary conditions and such.
 
The boundary conditions are already applied to the nanotubes. I was given a hint that I need to open up the nanotube and "map" it: just like the mapping of the round Earth is made on a flat surface. But even in this case I saw that there are manu ways of doing it. Should I preserve the distances? Or modify the charge density? The charge densities for both cases are given as values on the grid points.
 
Is this for homework? I think your answer consists in combining:
Nod said:
The charge densities for both cases are given as values on the grid points.
and
Nod said:
"map" it
Does each case have different numbers of grid points?
 
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...
Back
Top