Fermi-Dirac statistics valid for electron gas in metals?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Fermi-Dirac statistics to a free electron gas in metals, particularly focusing on the implications of coherence length and quantum states of electrons. Participants explore the relationship between coherence, quantum states, and the validity of Fermi-Dirac statistics in different contexts, including spatial separation of electrons and their behavior in crystalline structures.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the use of Fermi-Dirac statistics due to the coherence length of electrons being approximately 1 Angström, suggesting that this may imply a lack of coherence across the entire metal.
  • Another participant clarifies that Fermi-Dirac statistics are based on the exclusion principle, which states that no two electrons can occupy the same quantum state, and this is related to the symmetry of the wavefunction.
  • A participant raises the issue of how to determine when electrons can be described by the same wavefunction, particularly when considering spatial separation between electrons in different crystals versus a single crystal.
  • There is a discussion about the distinction between quantum states and quantum numbers, with one participant emphasizing that electrons in a metal cannot be assigned traditional quantum numbers due to their free movement.
  • Another participant elaborates on the concept of Bloch states and the complexity of energy bands in k-space, suggesting that while electrons cannot occupy the same state, there are many available states due to the dense packing of energy bands.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of coherence length and the nature of quantum states in relation to Fermi-Dirac statistics. There is no consensus on how these concepts interact, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the conditions under which electrons can be considered in the same quantum state.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding the relationship between coherence length and quantum states, as well as the complexities involved in describing electrons in a periodic potential versus free electrons. The discussion reflects the nuanced nature of these concepts without reaching definitive conclusions.

blue2script
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Hello!

In my course of solid states physics we use the fermi-dirac statistics for a free electron gas in metals. The fermi wave length of the electrons is about 1 Angström. Now, the wavelength may be intepreted as something as a coherence range - the electron should forget about the state of the other electrons on a scale of about 1 Angström, right? But then, how can we use FD-statistics if there is no coherence of the electron gas along the whole metal (or crystal)?

Thanks for all answers!

Blue2script
 
Physics news on Phys.org
FD statistics has nothing to do with the coherence length.
Two electrons can not occupy the same quantum state, i.e. they obey the exclusion principle which is why they obey FD statistics.
Mathematically this is related to the the symmetry of the total wavefunction (more specifically if it changes sign when you swap the particles around) which in turn is related to the spin of the electron; electrons are fermions since they have half-integer spin (1/2)
 
Yeah, ok, but how do I know if electrons are to be described by the same wave function? I mean, taking two separated crystals would give separate FD statistics. But bringing them together would yield all electrons to be described by one wavefunction thus obeying one FD statistic.

So, the question is: When is the distance between two electrons big enough so that the two can be in the same quantum numbers? Any relation to the coherence length?

Thanks again!

Blue2script
 
It is not the same quantum number; it is the same quantum state. It is not the same thing.
Two electrons that are spatially separated are not in the same state.
 
Hmmm... ? But isn't quantum state und the set of all quantum numbers the same? I mean, the state of an electron is determined by its quantum numbers, right? And so the state of two electrons is the same if they have the same quantum number? I am confused...

Sure this only holds if the two electrons are not separated spatially. But so are electrons in a crystal? Could you explain your statement in more detail, f95toli? I have the feeling to be one the wrong path...

Thank you!

Blue2script
 
blue2script said:
Hmmm... ? But isn't quantum state und the set of all quantum numbers the same?

Not quite. it is true that if the electron is bound to an atom we can use quantum numbers to do the "bookkeeping", two electrons with the same numers would indeed be in the same state which is forbidden. However, electrons in a metal are free to move so you can't assign numbers like n,l,m etc to them. Instead we have to start from the beginning and solve the SE for electrons in a periodic potential (in the simplest case), we then get new numbers that I guess you could call "quantum numbers" that are associated with Bloch states which in turn depend on the wavevector k. This rather simple description still give rise to quite complicated physics, specficially a very large number of energy bands in k-space that can be occuiped by electrons (the bands are very densily packed, which is why we talk about the density of states as a continuum). The main point here is that whereas we can still only have one electron per state there is a huge number of states available and I suppose two electrons could at least in principle be in the "same place" (whatever that means) as long as they had different momentum.
Note that "real space" descriptions become rather complicated, it is much easier to describe what is going on in k-space.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
525
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K