Symmetry of E(k) in the first BZ

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter hokhani
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Symmetry
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the symmetry of the energy-momentum relationship E(k) in the first Brillouin zone, specifically addressing why E(k) equals E(-k) in one-dimensional lattices and more generally. The conversation touches on theoretical implications, mathematical proofs, and the role of time reversal invariance.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that E(k) = E(-k) is a consequence of Bloch's theorem and the properties of Bloch states, as demonstrated through mathematical derivations involving the Schrödinger equation.
  • Others argue that the symmetry is also a result of time reversal invariance, which involves taking the complex conjugate of the wave function and its implications for the Hamiltonian.
  • A later reply questions the necessity of taking the complex conjugate versus the Hermitian adjoint in the context of time reversal operations, especially when external factors like magnetic fields are considered.
  • Some participants note that in certain materials, such as ferromagnets, the symmetry E(k) = E(-k) can be violated due to spontaneous breaking of time reversal symmetry.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the symmetry of E(k) in the context of Bloch's theorem and time reversal invariance, but there is disagreement regarding the implications of these principles in specific scenarios, such as the presence of magnetic fields or spin-orbit coupling.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the definitions of time reversal invariance and the specific conditions under which E(k) = E(-k) holds, particularly in the presence of external fields or interactions that may break symmetry.

hokhani
Messages
601
Reaction score
22
Why the curve E(k) in the first brillouin zoon is symmetric? For example why in the first BZ of a one-dimensional lattice we have E(k)=E(-k)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hokhani said:
Why the curve E(k) in the first brillouin zoon is symmetric? For example why in the first BZ of a one-dimensional lattice we have E(k)=E(-k)?

This is true in general, not just for 1-D. By Bloch's theorem the solutions of your Schrödinger equation will be Bloch states given by

##\psi_{\textbf{k}}(\textbf{r}) = \exp(i\textbf{k}.\textbf{r})u_{\textbf{k}}(\textbf{r})##

We can note a property of the Bloch states when ##\textbf{k} \rightarrow -\textbf{k}##. When we take the Hermitian conjugate of the above equation we get

##\psi_{\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r}) = \exp(-i\textbf{k}.\textbf{r})u_{\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r})##

Changing ##\textbf{k} \rightarrow -\textbf{k}## in the above equation we get

##\psi_{-\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r}) = \exp(i\textbf{k}.\textbf{r})u_{-\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r})##

Comparing this with the very first equation it can be seen that

##\psi_{-\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r}) = \psi_{\textbf{k}}(\textbf{r})##

##u_{-\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r}) = u_{\textbf{k}}(\textbf{r})##

The Bloch states must obviously satisfy Schrödinger's equation

##H \psi_{\textbf{k}}(\textbf{r}) = \left[-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2+V(\textbf{r})\right] \psi_{\textbf{k}}(\textbf{r}) = E_{\textbf{k}} \psi_{\textbf{k}}(\textbf{r})##

Now, we know that the Hamiltonian is Hermitian (i.e. ##H = H^\dagger##). Therefore taking the Hermitian conjugate of the above equation we get:

##H^\dagger \psi_{\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r}) = \left[-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2+V(\textbf{r})\right] \psi_{\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r}) = E_{\textbf{k}} \psi_{\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r})##

##E_{\textbf{k}}## stays the same since eigenvalues of a Hermitian operator are real. Now, once again changing ##\textbf{k} \rightarrow -\textbf{k}## we get

##\left[-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2+V(\textbf{r})\right] \psi_{-\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r}) = E_{-\textbf{k}} \psi_{-\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r})##

Using the property of Bloch states shown above the ##\psi_{-\textbf{k}}^*(\textbf{r})## can be replaced to give

##\left[-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2+V(\textbf{r})\right] \psi_{\textbf{k}}(\textbf{r}) = E_{-\textbf{k}} \psi_{\textbf{k}}(\textbf{r})##

Comparing this with the original Schrödinger equation you can see that

##E_{-\textbf{k}} = E_{\textbf{k}}##
 
Thank you PhysTech.
 
E(k)=E(-k) is a consequence of time reversal invariance.
 
DrDu said:
E(k)=E(-k) is a consequence of time reversal invariance.

Could you please explain some more?
 
This is basically what phystech tried to explain. Ignoring spin, the time reversal operation consist in taking t->-t and in taking the complex conjugate. Taking the complex conjugate is often the same as taking the hermitian adjoint as phystech implied, but not always.
In going through the proof by phystech you can convince yourself that it is necessary to take the complex conjugate and not the hermitian adjoint, although both operations coincide for the hamiltonian considered.
E.g. when a magnetic field is present, the Hamiltonian is still hermitian but not equal to it's complex conjugate as
[itex]H=\frac{1}{2m} (\mathbf{p}+ie\mathbf{A})^2 +V(\mathrm{r})[/itex]
In position representation, p will be represented by an anti-symmetric matrix while A is a symmetric matrix so that their relative sign changes on taking the complex conjugate.
Similar effects can be observed when spin orbit coupling is present. In fact there are some materials, e.g. ferromagnets, where E(k)=E(-k) is violated as time reversal symmetry is spontaneously broken.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K