I Understanding the Derivation of Reciprocal Lattice Basis from Equations 5 and 6

sam45
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
I am trying to understand how to determine the reciprocal lattice basis from the lattice basis vectors
may someone explain to me or show me the steps of how equations 7a, 7b, 7c were determined from equations 5 and 6
1578337028016.png

1578337041041.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can check directly that those formulas for the ##b_i## satisfy the equations that you want. For example, ##b_1\cdot a_1=2\pi\frac{a_1\cdot (a_2\times a_3)}{a_1\cdot (a_2\times a_3)}=2\pi##.

Since the vectors ##a_i## are linearly independent, the equations ##b_i\cdot a_j=2\pi\delta_{ij}## can be uniquely solved for the ##b_i##, and hence the above are the unique solutions.

If you wanted to figure out these formulas from scratch, you could argue like this: since ##b_1## is orthogonal to both ##a_2## and ##a_3##, you know that ##b_1=c_1 (a_2\times a_3)## for some constant ##c_1##. Then the equation ##a_1\cdot b_1=2\pi## let's you solve for ##c_1##, etc.
 
hello,

thank you. yes, but my question is how are they solved for bi i.e. what are the steps to find b1 for example

thank you
 
See the last paragraph of my post
Infrared said:
If you wanted to figure out these formulas from scratch, you could argue like this: since ##b_1## is orthogonal to both ##a_2## and ##a_3##, you know that ##b_1=c_1 (a_2\times a_3)## for some constant ##c_1##. Then the equation ##a_1\cdot b_1=2\pi## let's you solve for ##c_1##, etc.
 
  • Like
Likes sam45
thank you for your help!
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top