Puzzle about electron affinity in solid-state physics

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the definition of electron affinity in solid-state physics, highlighting its distinction from the chemical definition. Participants emphasize that electron affinity is defined as the energy difference between the vacuum level and the lowest state in the conduction band, asserting it as a bulk property unaffected by surface band structure. References to seminal works by physicists such as Shockley and Sze are made, questioning the lack of rigorous proof for the fixed nature of this property. The conversation suggests that further quantitative analysis and derivations related to quantum mechanics are necessary for a deeper understanding.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of solid-state physics principles
  • Familiarity with semiconductor physics
  • Knowledge of quantum mechanics (QM) concepts
  • Basic grasp of energy band theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the electron affinity definition in Ashcroft and Mermin's "Solid State Physics"
  • Explore the concept of conduction band bending in semiconductor materials
  • Study the work function and its relationship to electron affinity
  • Examine quantitative analyses of electron affinity in peer-reviewed papers
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students and researchers in solid-state physics, semiconductor engineers, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of electron affinity and its implications in material science.

qilong
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone, I am a student studying semiconductors and solid-state physics. I have a question which is haunting for several years. That is about the definition of electron affinity in solid-state physics. Its definition in solid state physics may be quite different from that in chemistry. Almost in every textbook it is said to be fixed, no matter if the conduction band is bent or not. But nobody gives a rigid proof or a quantitative analysis of this. They just throw out the definition:a value between the vacuum energy and the bottom of the conduction band, and then say it is fixed by nature. I even doubt how those great physicists like Shockley or Sze.M dared to use it without a thorough understanding. Can anybody offer a quantitative explanation to this? Both some derivations related to QM are some papers are welcomed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I still don't see exactly where you see a problem. What do you mean with bending of the conduction band? I think the electron affinity is usually defined for homogeneous bulk materials.
 
I mean the X in the attached picture. This is from Mott's paper of the metal-semiconductor rectifying theory. He just said it varies a little and even did not mention what was its name.
 

Attachments

  • ???.png
    ???.png
    40.4 KB · Views: 888
I think what he tries to explain is that the work function is not identical to the electron affinity.
Note that the electron affinity is defined as the difference between the zero level of energy and the lowest state in the conduction band far inside the semiconductor. That means it is a bulk property and by definition does not depend on the band structure near the surface.
You may find something in Ashcroft and Mermin's book.
 
Hi DrDu, I have browsed this book but little was found. Can you be more specific? Thank you very much!
 
Chapter 18, The Work Function
 
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 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K