Which Element Is Ideal for Solid State Physics?

rayman123
Messages
138
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I have just started solid state physics course and we got an assignment to choose one element that we are going to work with. Which element is interesting from a solid state physics point of view (and relatively not too difficult to work with)?



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


 
Physics news on Phys.org
rayman123 said:
I have just started solid state physics course and we got an assignment to choose one element that we are going to work with. Which element is interesting from a solid state physics point of view (and relatively not too difficult to work with)?

Carbon is pretty cool. All you have to do is stick tape to some graphite, pull off some layers of graphene ... and there's your Nobel Prize. :smile: kidding of course
 
ah okej:)
any other options in case if there will be 'fight' for it among the other students?
I thought about germanium maybe? some alkalimetals? Do not want to be too ambitious and pick up the most difficult one:P
It is important also to find relative information as well;)
 
how about a superconductor? lead and mercury are known to superconduct at near 0K
 
hm that sounds very interesting. I did not think about it. I wonder if their crystallography is also nice to work with?
We are going to look at the chosen element with respect to its crystal structure, magnetism, paramagnetism, termical properties and so on.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top