A Crystal field when inversion is absent

ftft
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I find in many textbooks that when expanding the crystal field in spherical harmonics, those terms of odd ranks do not appear in the expansion even if the crystal lacks an inversion centre such as the tetrahedral crystal field. Why is that? and when one should include spherical harmonics of odd ranks?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would expect that in a tetrahedral field, there are no odd terms because of the high remaining symmetry of the tetrahedron. In mathematical language: inversion symmetry is sufficient but not necessary for the absence of odd terms.
In general the crystal field should transform as a totally symmetric representation of the symmetry group. As the symmetry group of the crystal is a subgroup of the total rotational symmetry group SO(3) of which the spherical harmonics span irreducible representations, you can look up how these irreducible representations split up when going to the crystal field subgroup, e.g. using the character table.
 
Does it mean that when the crystal lacks any symmetry at all, i.e. when it is classified as C1, all terms in the expansion are important?
 
Yes
 
Thank you DrDu
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top