Conversion from cm^{-1} to eV - Ask Here!

  • Thread starter Thread starter carlo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ev
AI Thread Summary
The conversion factor from cm^{-1} to eV is commonly cited as 1 eV = 8.065 x 10^3 cm^{-1}, as referenced in Ashcroft and Mermin's "Solid State Physics." There is a distinction between using wave number (k) and momentum (p) in these calculations, which can lead to different factors. The factor of 1 = 1.932 keV-Angstroms is also mentioned, indicating a specific application context. Understanding the measurement context is crucial, as cm^{-1} and eV represent different physical quantities. Accurate conversion depends on whether k or p is being utilized in the analysis.
carlo
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi to everybody;

I wanted to ask: which is the factor of conversion from cm^{-1} to eV?

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
carlo said:
Hi to everybody;

I wanted to ask: which is the factor of conversion from cm^{-1} to eV?

Thank you!

I'll ask this first so that you know where to look. Do you have Ashcroft and Mermin's "Solid State Physics" text? It is listed in the table on the inside back cover of the book.

Zz.
 
not here

thanks
 
A number I use is that 1=1.932 keV-Angstroms.
 
It might help to give more information! Since "reciprocal of centimeter" and "electron volt" measure quite different things, I assume you are talking about a very specific application.
 
HallsofIvy said:
It might help to give more information! Since "reciprocal of centimeter" and "electron volt" measure quite different things, I assume you are talking about a very specific application.

In optical conductivity area of study, it is very common to talk in inverse length to signify a corresponding energy scale. This is because from experiment, the value of "k" (either crystal momentum, electronic momentum, or wave number) falls out naturally from measurement.

Zz.
 
So if you look in Ashcroft and Mermin, the standard "conversion" here is

1 eV = 8.065 \times 10^3 cm^{-1}

Zz.
 
The AM number and mine differ by a factor 2pi.
That is because mine is for k=1/lambda, with k in cm^-1,
and AM is for p=2pi/lambda with p in cm^-1.
You have to decide whether you are using k or p.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top