Umklapp Process: K_1+K_2=K_3+G Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter ehrenfest
  • Start date Start date
ehrenfest
Messages
2,001
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Can someone please explain to me how umklapp processes K_1 +K_2 = K_3 +G where G is nonzero conserve momentum? I have read the explanation in Kittel over and over and I just don't understand. I also read https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=165385 so don't just give me a link to that.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
ehrenfest said:

Homework Statement


Can someone please explain to me how umklapp processes K_1 +K_2 = K_3 +G where G is nonzero conserve momentum?
your K's are not momentum--they are quasi-momentum. They enter into the theory via bloch's theorem which presumes the existence of an external periodic potential. because of this potential, eigenstates of the hamiltonian (labelled by their quasi-momentum) are not eigenstates of the momentum operator.

Quasi-momentum is not conserved.

Similarly, *in the presence of an external potential* true momentum is not conserved either.



I have read the explanation in Kittel over and over and I just don't understand. I also read https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=165385 so don't just give me a link to that.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
olgranpappy said:
your K's are not momentum--they are quasi-momentum. They enter into the theory via bloch's theorem which presumes the existence of an external periodic potential. because of this potential, eigenstates of the hamiltonian (labelled by their quasi-momentum) are not eigenstates of the momentum operator.

Quasi-momentum is not conserved.

Similarly, *in the presence of an external potential* true momentum is not conserved either.

OK. So, is there a conservation of momentum equation associated with a given umklapp collision that we can write down or is that not part of the theory?
 
the relevant equation is the one you wrote down where quasi-momentum is not-conservered, but is "conserved modulo a reciproal lattice vector". So, for example, if I scatter a particle of energy E and (quasi) momentum \vec p by absorbing a phonon of energy \omega and wave-vector \vec q, then I have for conservation of energy and (non) conservation of quasi-momentum
<br /> E_{\rm final}=E(p)+\omega(q)<br />
and
<br /> \vec p_{\rm final}=\vec p + \vec q + \vec Q<br />
where Q is a vector of the reciprocal lattice.
 
Perhaps another way to look at it is that conservation of momentum is a result of translation invariance -- application of Noether's theorem. So if I have a non-uniform potential through space I should not expect momentum to be conserved. Here, we have the slightly perculiar feature that spatial translation is invariant if you do it by a lattice vector. So we have a variable k which is "conserved up to a reciprocal lattice vector".
 
Hi, I had an exam and I completely messed up a problem. Especially one part which was necessary for the rest of the problem. Basically, I have a wormhole metric: $$(ds)^2 = -(dt)^2 + (dr)^2 + (r^2 + b^2)( (d\theta)^2 + sin^2 \theta (d\phi)^2 )$$ Where ##b=1## with an orbit only in the equatorial plane. We also know from the question that the orbit must satisfy this relationship: $$\varepsilon = \frac{1}{2} (\frac{dr}{d\tau})^2 + V_{eff}(r)$$ Ultimately, I was tasked to find the initial...
The value of H equals ## 10^{3}## in natural units, According to : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_units, ## t \sim 10^{-21} sec = 10^{21} Hz ##, and since ## \text{GeV} \sim 10^{24} \text{Hz } ##, ## GeV \sim 10^{24} \times 10^{-21} = 10^3 ## in natural units. So is this conversion correct? Also in the above formula, can I convert H to that natural units , since it’s a constant, while keeping k in Hz ?
Back
Top