How Does the Fermi Surface Form a Perfect Square in a 2D Tight Binding Model?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the formation of the Fermi surface in a 2D tight binding model, specifically questioning how it can be a perfect square given the dispersion characteristics. Participants also explore concepts related to electron occupancy in lattice sites and the implications for the chemical potential.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the Fermi surface can be a perfect square when the dispersion does not appear to support this conclusion.
  • Another participant suggests that both tight binding and perturbation theory can explain the formation of a square Fermi surface.
  • There is a clarification that the half-filled case corresponds to one electron per lattice site, while two electrons would indicate a completely filled case.
  • A later reply raises the issue of calculating the Fermi level for practical applications, particularly in density functional theory (DFT) software, and questions the effectiveness of such calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between the dispersion and the shape of the Fermi surface, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not fully resolved the assumptions regarding the dispersion characteristics and their implications for the Fermi surface shape. There are also unresolved questions about the electron occupancy and its relation to the chemical potential.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
On the attached file the tight binding dispersion for a 2d square lattice is described. It is then assumed that the fermi surface is a square. My question is: How can it ever be a perfect square when the dispersion looks as it does.
Also can someone explain:
Why does the half filled case correspond to:
-1 electron per lattice site (why will 2 electrons not occupy the ground state etc.)
- chemical potential μ=0
 

Attachments

  • fermisurface.png
    fermisurface.png
    13.6 KB · Views: 2,076
Physics news on Phys.org
aaaa202 said:
On the attached file the tight binding dispersion for a 2d square lattice is described. It is then assumed that the fermi surface is a square. My question is: How can it ever be a perfect square when the dispersion looks as it does.
Also can someone explain:
Why does the half filled case correspond to:
-1 electron per lattice site (why will 2 electrons not occupy the ground state etc.)
- chemical potential μ=0

I suppose that the formula (1) on the attachment file supplied by you has already answered your question,i.e., "How can it ever be a perfect square when the dispersion looks as it does."

Not noly tight binding can describe it,but also perturbation theory can support it.
 
You are exactly right that in principle 2 electrons could occupy each lattice site; this would be the "completely filled" case. If there is only 1 electron per lattice site, we call that "half filled."
 
t!m said:
You are exactly right that in principle 2 electrons could occupy each lattice site; this would be the "completely filled" case. If there is only 1 electron per lattice site, we call that "half filled."

Actually,I think the more important problem here is "how to caltulate the fermi level for actual computation",for example,how to make it come true in some DFT softwares ,and how about its effictiveness,and so on.
 

Similar threads

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