Understanding the Kronig-Penney Model in Solid State Physics"

  • Thread starter Thread starter maria clara
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Model
AI Thread Summary
The Kronig-Penney model describes a particle in a periodic potential, illustrating how energy gaps and bands arise due to the periodic arrangement of ions in solids. Using Bloch's theorem, the model derives an equation that highlights the limitations of energy values, leading to the formation of energy bands. While the model assumes a square well potential for simplicity, real potentials are often more complex, resembling parabolic shapes. Despite its simplifications, the model effectively captures the qualitative features of solid-state behavior, such as band structure. For more accurate predictions, solid-state physicists typically employ more realistic potential models.
maria clara
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to understand the idea behind the Kronig-Penney model, and its relevance to solid state physics. I understand that the model refers to a particle in a periodic potential. Using Bloch's theorem, and regular boundary conditions the following equation is obtained:
\frac{P}{ka}sin(ka)+cos(ka)=cos(qa)
(a is the period of the potential)
Since the expression on the right-hand side of the equation takes only values between -1 and 1, and the function on left-hand side might get values outside this range, energy gaps (and "energy bands") are created.
So this is a good description of the energy of an electron in a periodic potential. But is this description relevant to all solids? In conductors there is no forbidden gap between the valence band and the conduction band; In semiconductors there is a gap but it's relatively small, and in insulators this gap is relatively large. Does that mean that the difference between these situations is the parameter "P" in the equation above?

Thanks:shy:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maria, I suspect this question would be better answered were you to post it in the Solid State forum. After all, this is not a homework question. Anyways, here's what I can tell you:

We do know that in solids ions are periodically arranged, and we can expect that their electrostatic potentials would vary periodically. So the presence of periodic potential is relevant to all solids.

Then we usually make a further assumption, that the conduction electron is nearly free. That is, we assume it to be a otherwise free, except for being in a weak periodic potential. This is not generally true, but it turns out that predictions are made from such models are good approximations to actual behavior of solids.

To get to the 'Kronig Penny Model' we make one more assumption, the periodic potential is in the form of square wells. Whereas in reality we should expect something a bit more parabolic( electrostatic potential falls off as 1/r from the source). So the Kronig Penny Model is even less general, but simpler for calculations, but we still see the qualitative features of solids, like band structure, emerge from it.

To get more accurate quantitative predictions, I suppose solid state physicists use more realistic potentials.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top