Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The name "tight binding" of this electronic band structure model suggests that this quantum mechanical model describes the properties of tightly bound electrons in solids. . The electrons in this model should be tightly bound to the atom to which they belong and they should have limited interaction with states and potentials on surrounding atoms of the sol
Here we give a simple derivation of the Peierls substitution, which is based on The Feynman Lectures (Vol. III, Chapter 21). [3] This derivation postulates that magnetic fields are incorporated in the tight-binding model by adding a phase to the hopping terms and show that it is consistent with the continuum Hamiltonian.
The Hubbard model is based on the tight-binding approximation from solid-state physics, which describes particles moving in a periodic potential, typically referred to as a lattice. For real materials, each lattice site might correspond with an ionic core, and the particles would be the valence electrons of these ions.
For real systems like solids, the self-energy is a very complex quantity and usually approximations are needed to solve the problem. One such approximation is the GW approximation, so called from the mathematical form the self-energy takes as the product Σ = GW of the Green's function G and the dynamically screened interaction W.
Other examples are the embedded-atom method (EAM), [43] the EDIP, [41] and the Tight-Binding Second Moment Approximation (TBSMA) potentials, [44] where the electron density of states in the region of an atom is calculated from a sum of contributions from surrounding atoms, and the potential energy contribution is then a function of this sum.
Within this π-band approximation, using a conventional tight-binding model, the dispersion relation (restricted to first-nearest-neighbor interactions only) that produces energy of the electrons with wave vector = [,] is [4] [5]
The tight-binding approximation significantly simplifies the second quantized Hamiltonian, though it introduces several limitations at the same time: For single-site states with several particles in a single state, the interactions may couple to higher Bloch bands, which contradicts base assumptions.
The Rashba model in solids can be derived in the framework of the k·p perturbation theory [12] or from the point of view of a tight binding approximation. [13] However, the specifics of these methods are considered tedious and many prefer an intuitive toy model that gives qualitatively the same physics (quantitatively it gives a poor ...