How to Calculate the Fermi Wavevector from the Fermi Level?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Toni103
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fermi Fermi level
AI Thread Summary
To calculate the Fermi wavevector from the Fermi level of copper at 7 eV, the user initially considered the formula Kf=(3pi^2ne)^(2/3) but was confused about the variable definitions. They later opted for the equation E = (h(bar)^2 * k^2) / (2m), which yielded a wavevector of approximately 1.359 x 10^10 m^(-1). This value is not considered large in the context of solid state physics, where typical wavevector magnitudes are around 10^13 m^(-1). The user realized that their expectation of a smaller value was incorrect, as the calculated wavevector is relatively small compared to phonons. Understanding the context of wavevector values clarified their confusion.
Toni103
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Note: I already asked this question ion the introductory physics forums but have had no replies.

The question I'm being asked is: If the Fermi level of copper is 7eV calculate the magnitude of the Fermi wavevector?The formula I'm pretty sure it goes with is Kf=(3pi^2ne)^2/3
The reason I'm unsure is when I looked it up I found conflicting information on what the variables stood for? I'm not looking for anyone to do the question or anything for me I'm just looking for help on what the variables stand for.

EDIT: Ok now I'm thinking the formula E = h(bar)^2k^2/2m would be better. Using this formula I've found the wave vector to be 1.359x10^10 which seems like an extremely large number. Is this right?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yup, that's what I get too.

Values for the wave vectors typically have very large values (around 10^13 m^(-1) ) in solid state physics so this is not an extremely large number in this context, I would rather say that it is a small value of a wave vector, considering that phonons typically have wavevectors with a magnitude of 10^13 m^(-1).
 
Great thanks very much Kloptok! For some reason I thought I should be getting a very small number but I see with the equation now its actually the opposite.
 
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