How Does Pressure Affect Volta Potential in Identical Metal Samples?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gregg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Potential
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the volta potential between two identical metal samples subjected to different pressures (1 atm and 100 atm). The original poster seeks clarification on the assumptions regarding electron density and how to compute the change in Fermi energy due to pressure changes, given the bulk modulus.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between pressure, volume change, and electron density. There are questions about whether the density provided is at 1 atm and how to compute the new density under pressure. Some suggest that the potential energy difference for an electron is related to the difference in Fermi energies, while others discuss the implications of treating volume as an independent variable.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering various approaches to compute the volume change and its effect on electron density. There is a recognition of the need to consider integrals for accurate calculations, and some participants express uncertainty about the reasonableness of their results. No explicit consensus has been reached, but several productive lines of inquiry are being explored.

Contextual Notes

There are discussions about the assumptions made regarding the density of the metal samples and the implications of using the bulk modulus in calculations. Participants note the complexity introduced by the large change in pressure and the potential need for more advanced mathematical treatment.

Gregg
Messages
452
Reaction score
0
1.

I need to find the volta potential between two samples of the same metal.

2.

The electron density is given, ## \rho ##, and each sample are subject to different pressures (1 atm and 100 atm), and it has bulk modulus ##K=1 \times 10^{11} \text{N m}^{-2}##

Is the density given assumed to be the density at 1 atm?

3.

I know that the Fermi energy is

## \epsilon_F = \frac{\hbar^2}{2 m_e}\left(\frac{3\pi ^2N}{V}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}} ##

##N/V = \rho ## .

##K = - V \frac{d P}{dV} ##

So to find the difference in Fermi energies ##\rho_1## is given at 1 atm, and then you can find the other one somehow? Do you assume that the samples are identical and find a new electron density? How do I find the Volta potential once I have the difference in Fermi energies?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[itex]N[/itex] is fixed, so you don't really need to solve for the new density. But you have enough information to do so if you want (using the change in volume).
 
Do you think that is the way you solve this?
 
Gregg said:
Do you think that is the way you solve this?

I do. The potential energy difference for an electron is the difference between the Fermi energies. The electrostatic potential is related to that by dividing by the charge.

By saying that you don't have to solve for the density, I don't want to discourage you from doing it that way. There's a few ways to arrange the formulas, but they all boil down to computing the change in volume of the sample under pressure.
 
I'm unsure how to compute the volume change.

## K dV = -V dP ##

But ##V=V(P)## so I don't think it's that. It is probably quite simple. Could it be:

## \Delta V = -\frac{V \Delta P}{K}##?

If so I have

## \Delta V = -99 \frac{V_0}{10^{11}} \times (1.0133 \times 10^5 \text{ N m}^{-2}) = V_0 1.003\times 10^{-4} ##So the other ##\rho_2## is ##N/V_2 = 1.001 \rho_1 #### \Delta \epsilon_F = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m_e} \left[ ( 3 \pi^2 \rho_1) ^{2/3}-( 3 \pi^2 \rho_2) ^{2/3} \right] ##

Now I've found the change in Fermi energy, the potential difference for the electron is going to be this. To get the Volta potential divide by the charge?
 
Gregg said:
I'm unsure how to compute the volume change.

## K dV = -V dP ##

But ##V=V(P)## so I don't think it's that. It is probably quite simple.

I would say that since [itex]dP/dV[/itex] is specified, we should treat [itex]V[/itex] as the independent variable and [itex]P=P(V)[/itex] is the dependent variable.

Could it be:

## \Delta V = -\frac{V \Delta P}{K}##?

If so I have

## \Delta V = -99 \frac{V_0}{10^{11}} \times (1.0133 \times 10^5 \text{ N m}^{-2}) = V_0 1.003\times 10^{-4} ##

The problem here is that [itex]\Delta P/P[/itex] is large, so we should really do an integral to find the result.

So the other ##\rho_2## is ##N/V_2 = 1.001 \rho_1 ##


## \Delta \epsilon_F = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m_e} \left[ ( 3 \pi^2 \rho_1) ^{2/3}-( 3 \pi^2 \rho_2) ^{2/3} \right] ##

Now I've found the change in Fermi energy, the potential difference for the electron is going to be this. To get the Volta potential divide by the charge?

Electric potential and electric potential energy are related by the charge of whatever charge carrier is involved.
 
By doing an integral I end up with ## -K \Delta V = V\Delta P ## as well don't I? I get

## U = -5.3570 \times 10^{-23} ##I remember now that ## U = qV = -eV ## So, I get ## V = 0.3343 \text{ mV} ##Is this reasonable?
 
Last edited:
Gregg said:
By doing an integral I end up with ## -K \Delta V = V\Delta P ## as well don't I?

No, the integral gives a log function.

I get

## U = -\text{5.356978328904951$\grave{ }$*${}^{\wedge}$-23} ##


I remember now that ## U = qV = -eV ##


So, I get ## V = 1.035 \text{ mV} ##


Is this reasonable?

I don't know what the answer is supposed to be. I'd guess it should be [STRIKE]within[/STRIKE] a few percent of the Fermi energy, but I haven't tried to work it out.
 
Last edited:
Oh, how did I miss that... do you mean:

## \int_{V_1}^{V_2} \frac{dV}{V} = -\int_{P_1}^{P_2} \frac{dP}{K} ##

## V_2 = V_1 \exp{-\Delta P \over K} ##

So that,

## \rho_2 = \rho_1 \exp{\Delta P \over K} ##

Using

## V = \frac{1}{-e}\frac{\hbar^2}{2 m_e}( (2 \pi^2)^{2/3} (\rho_1^{2/3}-\rho_2^{2/3})) ##

And here I end up with ## 0.5015 \text{ mV} ##
 
  • #10
It looks ok to me.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K