Question about Bloch function in Reduced Zone Scheme

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ck00
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the derivation of the relation between Bloch functions in the context of solid state physics, specifically referencing the textbook "Introduction to Solid State Physics" by Charles Kittel. The key equation presented is ψ_{k’}(r) = exp(ik’r) u_{k’}(r), which transforms into ψ_k(r) through the introduction of a reciprocal lattice vector G. The relationship exp(-iGr) u_{k’}(r) = u_k(r) is questioned, suggesting that u_k(r) is defined as u_{k’}(r) multiplied by a complex phase factor. This highlights the significance of reciprocal lattice vectors in defining Bloch functions within the first Brillouin zone.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Bloch's theorem in solid state physics
  • Familiarity with Brillouin zones and reciprocal lattice vectors
  • Knowledge of complex exponential functions in quantum mechanics
  • Basic principles of wave functions in periodic potentials
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Bloch's theorem in solid state physics
  • Learn about the properties of reciprocal lattice vectors
  • Explore the concept of Brillouin zones in more detail
  • Investigate the role of complex phase factors in quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in solid state physics, physicists working with wave functions in periodic potentials, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of Bloch functions and their applications in condensed matter physics.

ck00
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
The classical textbook, Introduction to solid state physics by Charles Kittle said:
"If we encounter a Bloch function written as ψ_{k’}(r)=exp(i{k’}r) u_{k’}(r), with k’ outside the first zone, we may find a suitable reciprocal lattice vector G such that k=k’+G lies within the first Brillouin zone. Then
ψ_{k’}(r)=exp(ik’r) u_{k’}(r)=exp(ikr) [exp(-iGr) u_{k’}(r)]
=exp(ikr) u_k(r)=ψ_k(r)"
I wonder why exp(-iGr) u_{k’}(r)=u_k(r), how to derive this relation?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
He probably defines u_k(r) this way. It is just the old u times a complex phase.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
8K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
16K