How Is the Volume of an Element in K-Space Determined?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Master J
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Element Volume
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The volume of an element in k-space for a free electron gas in a crystal lattice is determined using the relation V = (2π)³, derived from state counting in a three-dimensional cube with periodic boundary conditions. The density of states is expressed as dn/dE = dn/dk . dk/dE, where dn = 4π(k²)dk/V. The discussion highlights the difference between periodic boundary conditions and hard wall boundary conditions, affecting the density of states calculations, specifically the factor of 2³ in the integration over k-space.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of k-space and its significance in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with the concepts of density of states and energy eigenstates
  • Knowledge of periodic boundary conditions in quantum systems
  • Basic proficiency in LaTeX for mathematical expressions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the density of states in k-space for different boundary conditions
  • Explore the implications of the uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the differences between periodic and hard wall boundary conditions
  • Investigate the mathematical techniques for integrating over k-space
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in condensed matter physics, quantum mechanics students, and researchers working with electron behavior in crystal lattices.

Master J
Messages
219
Reaction score
0
I've been trying to figure out the volume of an element in k-space (free electron gas in a crystal lattice).

In deriving the density of states, dn/dE = dn/dk . dk/dE. My dn = 4pi(k^2).dk / V, where V is the volume of an element in k-space.
I came across the spurious, Dk.Dx ~ 2pi (an uncertainty principle relation), where V was said to be (2pi)^3, but that UP doesn't make sense to me.


Could someone shed some light on this?

The ever so grateful MJ...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A relatively simple derivation follows from state counting. Consider a three dimensional cube with periodic boundary conditions and sides of length L. The single particle energy eigenstates are of the form exp(i k x) where k is given by k = \frac{2\pi}{L}(n_x, n_y,n_z) with arbitrary integers n.

Summing over all these states can be written as \sum_n = \sum_{n_x,n_y,n_z} \Delta n_x \Delta n_y \Delta n_z = \sum_{n_x,n_y,n_z} \Delta k_x \Delta k_y \Delta k_z \left(\frac{L}{2 \pi}\right)^3 \rightarrow \frac{V}{(2\pi)^3} \int d^3 k.

Thus we may approximate sums over discrete single particles states in a big box via an integral over three dimensional k space with the measure \frac{V}{(2\pi)^3} d^3 k.

Is this what you were looking for?
 
Ah, indeed.

The k value slightly confuses me tho. Should it not be k = pi / L (sorry I'm rubbish at LaTeX)??

If we let the electron wavefunction say be sin(kx) in the cube, with the condition taht it is zero at the edges, that gives k = n pi / L. Where does the 2 come from?
 
I used periodic boundary conditions while you are using hard wall boundary conditions. It is true that in your case all the allowed values of k make are \pi n/L but with n positive. Thus compared to my analysis you have a density of states of ( L^3/\pi^3) d^3 k but you're also allowed to only integrate over the totally positive k octant. In my formula I integrate over all 8 octants thus making up the missing factor of 2^3 = 8.

Hope this helps.
 
  • Like
Likes LunaFly
Thread 'Unexpected irregular reflection signal from a high-finesse cavity'
I am observing an irregular, aperiodic noise pattern in the reflection signal of a high-finesse optical cavity (finesse ≈ 20,000). The cavity is normally operated using a standard Pound–Drever–Hall (PDH) locking configuration, where an EOM provides phase modulation. The signals shown in the attached figures were recorded with the modulation turned off. Under these conditions, when scanning the laser frequency across a cavity resonance, I expected to observe a simple reflection dip. Instead...

Similar threads

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