Explanation around Fermi Wave Vector and Metallic Behaviour

bennyq
Messages
23
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I was to calculate the Fermi Wave Vector $K_F$ for a metallic structure then explain why the nearly free elctron model is consistent with its behaviour?

The Attempt at a Solution


After calculating the wave vector, I see that the fermi wave vector is within an energy band, hence the energy band is only partially filled allowing easy promotion of electrons into higher energy states.. Allowing for easy conduction? Would this explain why the nearly free electron model is consistent?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bennyq said:

Homework Statement


I was to calculate the Fermi Wave Vector $K_F$ for a metallic structure then explain why the nearly free elctron model is consistent with its behaviour?

The Attempt at a Solution


After calculating the wave vector, I see that the fermi wave vector is within an energy band, hence the energy band is only partially filled allowing easy promotion of electrons into higher energy states.. Allowing for easy conduction? Would this explain why the nearly free electron model is consistent?
I didn't get the question exactly...But I think what you said is ok. we can say in nearly free electron model that in the edge there is a gap due to superposition of traveling waves directed opposite to each other..Now if the band is filled then it's insulator...and if the fermi momentum lies within a band and it's nt filled then it's a metal...
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top