How do electrons behave in metals?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Brock
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electrons Metals
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the behavior of electrons in metals, focusing on their movement and distribution within the metallic structure. Participants examine concepts such as the "sea" of electrons, the effects of gravity, and the implications of spinning metal on voltage differences.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that electrons in metals can be thought of as a "floating" sea, moving freely relative to the atomic lattice.
  • Others argue that gravity's effect on electrons is negligible at the atomic scale, suggesting that electromagnetic forces dominate and prevent electrons from "falling" within a vertical metal pole.
  • A participant discusses the comparison of energy scales between free electrons and gravitational potential energy, indicating that gravitational effects can be ignored for typical metal dimensions.
  • One participant introduces the Jellium model, noting that while it assumes a uniform charge distribution, real charge density varies based on proximity to lattice sites.
  • A question is raised about the potential for spinning a star-shaped piece of metal to create a voltage difference, with some participants speculating on the required conditions for such an effect to be observable.
  • Another participant suggests that significant tangential velocities, comparable to the Fermi velocity, would be necessary to notice changes in charge density due to spinning.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that electrons can be viewed as floating within metals and that gravity is not a significant factor in their behavior. However, there is no consensus on the implications of spinning metal and the conditions necessary to observe voltage differences.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in the Jellium model and the complexities of charge density variations. The discussion also highlights the need for specific conditions to observe effects related to spinning metal, which remain unresolved.

Brock
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
"Sea" of electrons in metals

Is it a "floating" sea of electrons in metals? meaning they are not restricted to a spot relative to the atoms, but they just "float" around as long as it's in the metal, and the charge is almost perfectly level throughout the metal. (I doubt it would be absolutly entropicly level)

Arn't electrons pulled by gravity? So a metal pole being held up vertically would stay there because the atoms are "locked" into place with relation to each other, but the floating electrons are not, so would they fall to the bottom edge of the pole? This effect might be very very small because the entropy of the charge forces would be much stronger then gravity.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To your first question, yes, I think they do just 'float' around in the metal.

As for your second question, I'm pretty sure that gravity is so insignificant as to be meaningless on the atomic scale. The other forces (electromagnetic, strong nuclear, weak nuclear) are many orders of magnitude stronger. So no, the electrons will not 'fall' to the bottom of the pole. If they did, you'd get shocked every time you touched a pole ;)
 
Ariste said:
To your first question, yes, I think they do just 'float' around in the metal.

As for your second question, I'm pretty sure that gravity is so insignificant...

In this case you are right since the two energy scales that should be compared are the typical
energies of free electrons in the fermi sea versus typical gravitational potential energies. Thus we are comparing a number on the order of 10 eV (typical fermi energy) to the number
[tex] m_e g h[/tex]
where h is the height.

In order for the gravitational potential energy to be comparable one would need
[tex] h \approx 10000 \textrm{meters}[/tex]

If, on the other hand, we were talking about a free gas of, say, air molecules instead of electrons, then we would compare to kT (much less than typical E_f usually) and find a height of much less. That's why one does have to take gravitational potential energy into account in the thermodynamics of air in the atmosphere, for example... but for the case of electrons in a rod one can safely ignore gravity except in the case of a very very very long rod.

Cheers.
 
Brock said:
Is it a "floating" sea of electrons in metals? meaning they are not restricted to a spot relative to the atoms, but they just "float" around as long as it's in the metal, and the charge is almost perfectly level throughout the metal.
This is only true within a Jellium model where the fixed positive charge is assumed to be uniformly distributed. In reality, the charge density is different depending on whether you are near a lattice site or far from it (i.e., since the underlying potential is not invariant under continuous spatial translations, neither should you anticipate the resulting charge density to be).

See also:
Bloch states
Nearly free electron approximation
Tight binding model
 
Last edited:
Thanks. I wounder if spinning a star shaped (or anything that comes to points on the outer radious) piece of metal, at extremely fast rmp would cause a voltage difference from the centre of the spin to the outer edge of the spin. Or are the other forces that keep the electrons still far too stronge to overcome? Well ofcourse there would be some voltage, though maybe unmeasureably small.
 
that's an interesting question, but again I think that the frequency would have to be quite high indeed to observe any effect.
 
I'd imagine that would take tangential velocities comparable to the Fermi velocity (~106 m/s) before you notice much change in the charge density.
 

Similar threads

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