Why does the velocity of 2D plasmon diverge at small q?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the divergence of the group velocity of 2D plasmons as the wave number q approaches zero, where the group velocity is expressed as vg2D ∼ 1/√q. This divergence raises questions about the implications of exceeding the speed of light. The conversation references the derivation of the electric field and potential in a 2D system, highlighting the non-Coulombic interactions that alter the dispersion relation. Key references include a paper from Phys. Rev. Lett. 36: 145(1976) and a derivation that assumes charges interact via Coulombic forces.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of plasma physics and wave dynamics.
  • Familiarity with 2D and 3D dispersion relations.
  • Knowledge of Maxwell's equations and electric field theory.
  • Experience with mathematical modeling of charge distributions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of 2D plasmon dispersion relations in detail.
  • Explore the implications of non-Coulombic interactions in plasma physics.
  • Investigate the experimental verification of 2D plasmon behavior in published literature.
  • Learn about the role of vector potentials in electromagnetic theory.
USEFUL FOR

Researchers in plasma physics, theoretical physicists, and anyone studying the behavior of 2D materials and their electromagnetic properties.

hiyok
Messages
106
Reaction score
0
Now plasma represents collective wave-like motions of charged particles. In 3D, their frequency is well known to be almost a constant, ##\omega^{3D}_p \approx \sqrt{4\pi ne^2/m}## with n=charge density, m=particle mass. However, in 2D, one can show that it becomes ##\omega^{2D}_p \sim \sqrt{q}##, where q= wave number. It gets dispersion. The group velocity is then ##v^{2D}_g \sim 1/\sqrt{q}##, which diverges as q→0. How could this be possible ? How could ##v^{2D}_g## exceed the speed of light ? This sounds ridiculous !

Highly appreciate your attention !
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you provide a reference? There are no truly 2d systems in nature, so this may depend on details of the system.
 
Here is a reference: http://rmf.smf.mx/pdf/rmf/39/4/39_4_640.pdf
 
In that derivation, they assumed that the charges only interact via Coulombic forces. This is strictly true in the 3D case, as the charge density is longitudinal and the Coulomb field is the only longitudinal electric field. In the 2D case this is no longer true. You can calculate the field of a time dependent charge distribution locatet in the xy-plane and traveling in the x-direction: ##\rho(t,r)=\rho_0 \delta(z) \exp(iqx-i\omega t)## and you will find that it's electric field is not purely longitudinal. Hence the interaction is not purely Coulombic. I suppose this will change the dispersion relation, especially for small q.
 
Thanks for your suggestion. But that kind of dispersion had been experimentally verified: see e.g. Phys. Rev. Lett. 36: 145(1976).
 
I must say that I don't understand this paper: In eq (5) they express div E in terms of first the potential and then again in terms of the charge density, but ##\nabla\cdot E=\rho## by Maxwells equation, so there must be something fishy.
 
Ok, I suppose he means the nabla in reduced density. Using the ansatz for the charge distribution given above, I find for the electric potential ##E=(\kappa/(iq) e_x+\mathrm{sgn}(z)e_z)\rho/2 \exp(-\kappa |z|) \exp(iqx-i\omega t)##, where ##\kappa=\sqrt(|\omega^2-q^2|)##.
Hence the driving force in equation 5 does not depend linearly on q but on kappa. For large values of q, kappa goes like q but for small values like omega. Hence for small values of q there should the dispersion relation changes.
 
Last edited:
Thank you very much for your insightful advice !
 
there might be some small errors, but the expression for E is a correct solution of the wave equation for z not equal zero while forming the divergence yields the correct charge density. Forming the 2d-divergence in eq. 5 ammounts to multiplication of the x component with iq which yields kappa.
Maybe you could post your solution?
 
Last edited:
  • #10
I found the electric potential to be ##V(\vec{r},z) = \frac{\rho_0}{2}\kappa^{-1}e^{i(\vec{q}\vec{r}-\omega t)}e^{-\kappa|z|}##, where ##\vec{r}## denotes the in-plane components. The electric field strength in the x-direction is ##E_x = \frac{\rho_0}{2}(-iq_x\kappa^{-1})e^{i(\vec{q}\vec{r}-\omega t)}e^{-\kappa|z|}##. Here I keep the speed of light so that ##\kappa = \sqrt{|q^2-\omega^2/c^2|}##. Now the plasmon dispersion is determined by this equation, ##\omega^4|q^2-\omega^2/c^2| = \frac{2\pi n_0 e^2}{m}q^4##. Indeed the initial problem is solved !
 
  • #11
I also found that, if both scalar and vector potentials are included, the plasmon dispersion is determined by an even simple equation: ##\left(2\pi n_0 e^2/m\right)^2 |q^2-\omega^2/c^2| = \omega^4##. Obviously, the dispersion becomes linear for small ##q##.
 
  • #12
This is what looks like:
 

Attachments

  • #13
You can't derive a retarded field from only a potential. Namely your potential gives ##\nabla^2 V=\omega^2 V\ne 0## for ##z \ne 0##, however, it should be the charge density which vanishes for nonzero z.
 
  • #14
The retarded potential I gave is a solution to this equation: ##(\partial^2_{\vec{x}}-\partial^2_t/c^2) V(\vec{x},t)= -\rho_0e^{i(\vec{q}\vec{r}-\omega t)}\delta(z)##.
 
  • #15
But the electric field is cannot be expressed in terms of a retarded potential alone, you will also have to specify the retarded magnetic vector potential.
 
  • #16
That is exactly what I did. I have worked out the vector potential as well. The final result was shown in the figure attached in previous post.
 
  • #17
So what is the z-component of the electric field you found?
 
  • #18
The z-component is obtained as ##E_z = -\partial_z V(\vec{x},t) - c^{-1}\partial_tA_z(\vec{x},t)##, where ##A_z## is the z-component of the vector potential. The final expressions are a little complicated, because now the vector potential depends on the current density, which further depends on the conductivity of the system.
 
  • #19
Current density is completely determined by continuity.
 
  • #20
Dear DrDu,

I'm much grateful for your comments which have led me to a good understanding of my problem. As this understanding is significant in improving one of my recent manuscripts, which I'll submit for publication, I'm thinking formally acknowledging you or adding you as a coauthor. So, if possible, I hope to discuss more by private emails, instead here. I definitely have to know you real profile before I can do this.

Thanks.

hiyok
 
  • #21
I just want to tie some loose ends: due to continuity ##\nabla \cdot j=\dot{\rho}## we find ##j=\omega \rho/q e_x## and thus ##A=V\omega/q e_x## (don't try to pin me down on signs). Hence ##E_z## can be derived from the potential you gave, but there is an extra term in ##E_x## due to the vector potential. A superficial check showed that the final expression for ##E_x## coincides with the one I derived earlier.
 
  • #22
Now I agree with you. I thought your were referring to the part due to ##V## only. Putting all pieces together, we agree.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K