Fermi Energy: Calculating Probabilities for Different Temperatures

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating probabilities using the Fermi-Dirac probability function at various temperatures (150 K, 300 K, and 600 K) for a given energy difference from the Fermi energy. Participants are exploring the implications of these calculations and the underlying physics concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants attempt to compute probabilities for different energy levels and temperatures using the Fermi-Dirac equation. There are questions regarding the inclusion of constants and the interpretation of energy differences. Some participants express confusion about the calculations and the logic behind determining whether states are filled or empty.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exchange of calculations and corrections, with some participants refining their approaches based on feedback. While there is no explicit consensus, the discussion is progressing with more accurate values being suggested.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework assignment, which may limit the information available for calculations. There are indications of missing constants and potential misunderstandings regarding the Fermi-Dirac function's application.

orangeincup
Messages
121
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Part 1) Use the fermi dirac probability function for t=150k, t=300k, and t=600k to fill in the table below.

Part 2) Also show a sample calculation for (e-ef)=0.06eV and T=300k.

Part 3)(Same as part 2?) Calculate the probabilities of a state at E -EF =0.06 eV being empty for T =150 K , T = 300 K , and T = 600 K .

Homework Equations


F=1/((e^((E-Ef)/T)+1)

The Attempt at a Solution


I'm just learning about this topic now so bare with me.
So for E-Ef =(-0.15) in the first row, and T=150k..

F=1/((e^((-0.15+1)/150)+1)*100
=49.86% for (-.150) at 150K

1/((e^((-0.15+1)/300)+1) * 100
=49.93% for (-.150) at 300K

1/((e^(-0.15+1)/600)+1)*100
=49.96% for (-.150) at 600k

That is the three values for row 1, -.150 E-Ef

Repeat with the rest of the values using the same formula, switching the (-.150) for the appropriate value in the chart.

For part 2, I'm a bit lost. So for a sample calculation, would it be 1/((e^((-0.06+1)/300)+1)? That comes out to be 49.99%.

Part 3) The way I'm reading it, it's asking for basically the same as part 2, except it wants when the state is empty and not filled? So would it be 100%- the probability of an electron being inside? Here's my calculation for it using that logic:

1/((e^((-0.06+1)/150)+1) * 100 = 49.84%
100%-49.84%=50.2% the state is empty
 

Attachments

  • ttable.png
    ttable.png
    3.7 KB · Views: 464
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you add 1 in the exponents?
I think the Boltzmann constant is missing there.

For energies below the Fermi energy, the states should be more than 50% occupied.

Part 2: Just write down the formulas you used for part 1 I think. Pay attention to the sign of the energy difference.

Part 3:
orangeincup said:
100%-49.84%=50.2% the state is empty
That's the correct approach, but the number has to get fixed.
 
I redid all my calculations using the Boltzmann constant

1/((e^((-0.15)/(150*(8.62*10^-5)))+1)
=99.99%

1/((e^((-0.15)/(150*(8.62*10^-5)))+1)
=99.7%
1/((e^((-0.15)/(600*(8.62*10^-5)))+1)
=94.79%

Part 2...
1/((e^((0.06)/(300*(8.62*10^-5)))+1) = 0.089
=8.90%?

Part 3...
1/((e^((0.06)/(150*(8.62*10^-5)))+1) = 0.00956
=0.956%? 100%-0.956%=99.04%

1/((e^((0.06)/(300*(8.62*10^-5)))+1) = .0895
100%-8.95% = 91.05%

1/((e^((0.06)/(600*(8.62*10^-5)))+1)=.2387
100%-23.87%=76.13%
 
Last edited:
Those numbers look much more realistic.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
6K