Fermi-Liquid - amount of electrons available for the interaction

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of energy levels in the context of Fermi-liquid theory, specifically regarding the energies of electrons and their interactions. Participants explore the implications of energy ratios and their significance in understanding electron behavior in a crystalline conductor.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the ratio \((e_1/e_f)^2\) can be less than 1 given that \(e_1\) is greater than \(e_f\) and suggests a misunderstanding of the energy measurements.
  • Another participant clarifies that \(\epsilon_1\) and \(\epsilon_2\) are measured from \(\epsilon_F\), which is set to zero, and discusses the shell argument used in the context.
  • There is a repeated assertion that \(e_1\) is greater than \(e_f\), indicating a potential misunderstanding or miscommunication among participants.
  • A participant proposes that introducing variables measured from the lowest valence electron level could clarify the discussion, suggesting a different approach to defining energy levels.
  • One participant seeks to understand what the fraction \((\frac{\epsilon_1}{\epsilon_F})^2\) indicates about the number of electrons available for interaction, pondering whether it represents a fraction or percentage of electrons that can interact with higher energy states.
  • Another participant agrees with the interpretation of the fraction but notes that both interpretations of its meaning seem equivalent, emphasizing its role in explaining low electron-electron scattering in crystalline conductors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of energy levels and the implications of the ratio \((\frac{\epsilon_1}{\epsilon_F})^2\). There is no consensus on the clarity of the definitions or the implications of the fraction discussed.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions of energy levels and the implications of the ratios discussed, indicating potential limitations in the clarity of the original material referenced.

annaphys
Messages
69
Reaction score
1
I have attached the pages in Kittel's book (pages 417-420) regarding my question. My question is simply based off of the second to last photo, where e_f = 5*10^4 K and e_1 = 1K.

e_2<e_f and |e_2|<e_1. So how can (e_1/e_f)^2 be less than 1? The energy of the free flowing electron is assumed to be greater than e_f.
 

Attachments

  • Bildschirmfoto 2020-03-26 um 14.06.19.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2020-03-26 um 14.06.19.png
    43.8 KB · Views: 399
  • Bildschirmfoto 2020-03-26 um 14.06.27.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2020-03-26 um 14.06.27.png
    60.1 KB · Views: 420
  • Bildschirmfoto 2020-03-26 um 14.06.47.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2020-03-26 um 14.06.47.png
    61.6 KB · Views: 432
  • Bildschirmfoto 2020-03-26 um 14.06.57.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2020-03-26 um 14.06.57.png
    3.2 KB · Views: 399
Physics news on Phys.org
If you read the bottom of the first page, you will see that they are measuring ##\epsilon_1## and ##\epsilon_2## from ##\epsilon_F##, which they set to zero. Then on the third page they make a shell argument and use the actual value of ##\epsilon_F##.
 
Either way e_1 > e_f, though.
 
annaphys said:
Either way e_1 > e_f, though.

I can understand your difficulty, but ##\epsilon_1## is still a small quantity.

It would be more clear if he first introduced variables that are measured from the lowest valence electron level, such as ##\epsilon'_1##, ##\epsilon'_2##, and ##\epsilon_F##, which are all large quantities. Then he could introduce the electron energies measured from the Fermi energy: ##\epsilon_1=\epsilon'_1 - \epsilon_F##, and ##\epsilon_2 =\epsilon'_2 -\epsilon_F,##. That way the shell argument would still use the ratio ##\frac{\epsilon_1}{\epsilon_F}##, which you can see also equals ##\frac{\epsilon'_1-\epsilon_F}{\epsilon_F}##.
 
Ah, got it. So e_1 is just the small difference, and not the complete distance from the origin, right?

Another question, what does this fraction actually tell us? I would assume it would give us the amount of electrons that have enough energy to interact with e_1 to get then e_3 and e_4 outside the fermi sphere, but it is a number much smaller than one. Or is it simply the percentage of electrons that could allow for e_3 and e_4 to be outside of the sphere?
 
annaphys said:
Ah, got it. So e_1 is just the small difference, and not the complete distance from the origin, right?
Yes, that is correct, but with a small caveat. This is in reciprocal space and thus the points are vectors, and we know energy is a scalar. For this model, the mapping is $$E=\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2m},$$ where ##k## is the radial distance from the origin.

annaphys said:
Another question, what does this fraction actually tell us? I would assume it would give us the amount of electrons that have enough energy to interact with e_1 to get then e_3 and e_4 outside the fermi sphere, but it is a number much smaller than one. Or is it simply the percentage of electrons that could allow for e_3 and e_4 to be outside of the sphere?
I don't immediately see the difference between your two options. Upon a first reading, they both seem equivalent (except for a conversion from a fraction to a percentage) and basically correct . The final term ##(\frac{\epsilon_1}{\epsilon_F})^2## gives us an idea of the fraction of the total valence electrons that an electron of energy ##\epsilon_1## can interact with. Thus showing us why there isn't much electron-electron scattering in crystalline conductors.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: annaphys

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K