Fermi distribution interpretation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of the Fermi-Dirac distribution in the context of electron occupancy in energy levels, particularly in semiconductors. Participants explore the relationship between probability and the actual presence of electrons as described by the Fermi distribution.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Emily introduces the concept of the Fermi-Dirac distribution and questions whether a sum of mean occupancy can imply the actual presence of electrons in a system.
  • One participant suggests that the Fermi factor represents the mean number of electrons in a k-space state and notes that the sum of mean numbers typically does not equal one unless specific states are chosen.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the initial post may not have been clear and reiterates that the example was meant to illustrate the use of the Fermi distribution rather than represent a real scenario.
  • There is a discussion about the interchangeability of probability and actual presence of particles, with one participant questioning the meaning of "actual presence." They note that in quantum mechanics, discussing "actual" quantities can be problematic.
  • Another participant states that the Fermi distribution provides statistical properties of a system and cannot predict the exact number of electrons in a specific state at a given time.
  • One participant mentions that in practical scenarios, the Fermi distribution can yield accurate estimates of occupancy due to the large number of electrons involved, while cautioning that in systems with few electrons, interpretations must be more careful.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the Fermi distribution, particularly regarding the relationship between probability and actual electron presence. There is no consensus on the implications of the Fermi distribution in terms of actual occupancy.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of interpreting statistical distributions in quantum mechanics and the limitations of applying these concepts to systems with varying numbers of electrons.

EmilyRuck
Messages
134
Reaction score
6
Hello!
Let E_1, E_2, \ldots, E_n be n allowed energy levels for a system of electrons. This system can be described by the Fermi-Dirac distribution f(E).
Each of those levels can be occupied by two electrons if they have opposite spins.
Suppose that E_1, E_2, \ldots, E_n are such that

\displaystyle 2 \sum_{k = 1}^n f(E_k) = 1

where the 2 is due to the degeneracy of states (two electrons allowed for each state). So, can it be stated that in such a system is actually present one electron, that is the result of the sum?
If someone could even explain why, it would be very appreciated.
In any case, thank you for having read.

Emily
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If I understand it correctly, the Fermi factor is the mean number of electrons in a state in k-space. You sum over all the k-space states and it adds up to the number of electrons N in your system. Unless you are very selective with the k-space states that you sum over, you won't get the sum of the mean numbers to add up to 1. (if you pick a bunch of very highly energetic states, then maybe on the average only one of these states will be occupied.)
 
Charles Link said:
If I understand it correctly, the Fermi factor is the mean number of electrons in a state in k-space.

Did you deduce this from my post or by your own?

Charles Link said:
Unless you are very selective with the k-space states that you sum over, you won't get the sum of the mean numbers to add up to 1. (if you pick a bunch of very highly energetic states, then maybe on the average only one of these states will be occupied.)

The first post was maybe not clear about this. Don't consider my problem as real and don't take its numbers as absolute: it was just an example to show how the Fermi distribution is used to count the electrons in a band of energies.
The strange fact about Fermi distribution is that we start talking that f(E) is the probability that the quantum state at level E is occupied; then we talk about the number of electrons that populate the conduction band of a semiconductor by doing

\displaystyle \int_{E_c}^{+\infty} g_c(E) f(E) dE

(g_c(E) is the density of states in the conduction band). So, how can we speak almost interchangeably about probability and actual presence of a particle?
 
EmilyRuck said:
So, how can we speak almost interchangeably about probability and actual presence of a particle?

What do you mean by actual presence of a particle?
 
Hyo X said:
What do you mean by actual presence of a particle?

I know that, in Quantum Mechanics, talking about "actual" quantities is inappropriate.
Anyway, it is common to compute the number of electrons in conduction band, for example, in a semiconductor (e.g. here, penultimate formula). During the computation, Fermi distribution and density of states are used. The resulting number n is considered as if it were the number of actual particles populating that band.

Hoping to have clarified your doubt, this is what I meant.
 
Until observation shows the model to be found significantly deficient, and/or until there is a better one, this is how n is estimated.
 
How many electrons are "actually" present is not really a meaningful question in this case. The Fermi distribution tells you something about the statistical properties of a system; it can't be used to predict e.g. exactly how many electrons are going to be in a specific state at a given time.

Note that this is not really a practical problem, in most cases we are dealing with either so many electrons or such long times that Fermi distribution will give you a very accurate estimate of the occupancy as in the case of the formula for the semiconductor.

There are system where we are really dealing with a few electrons (e.g. quantum dots) and then you have to be more careful about really interpreting the results as an probability.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mic*
@EmilyRuck. What do you mean y actual presence ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K