|
The Schrödinger equation is one of the most celebrated equations in physics, not least
because it is a differential equation
that was much more "understandable" to the contemporaries of the 20 th century giants of physics who
invented - or discovered? - quantum theory than the
more abstract matrix formulation of Heisenberg
. |
|
|
In the context of the fully developed formalized quantum theory of today, the Schrödinger
equation has lost some of its clamor - it just happens to be the Eigenwert equation for the energy operator (also called
Hamilton
operator), but since the energy eigenvalues are of course of prime importance, the
Schrödinger equation is still a major equation in quantum theory. |
|
|
Here is the general Schrödinger equation |
|
|
– |
2 2m | · |
Dy '(r,t)
+ U(r,t) · y'(r,t ) |
= |
i | · |
¶y'(r,t)
¶t | |
|
|
|
|
U = U(x,y,z) = potential energy, and all
other symbols have their usual meaning. The D operator is written large
and in blue to avoird confusion with the regular D denoting small differences.
|
|
|
It is hard to imagine retrospectively how revolutionary an equation must have been that
intrinsically included
i, the unit of imaginary numbers, in a relation purporting to describe
physical reality. Pythagoras,
it is claimed, had one of his students executed because the poor guy claimed that irrational
numbers actually existed. Fortunately the tolerance level in science has gone up since then (though I'm not so sure about
religion, politics, and so on). |
|
Stationary states with sharp values of the total energy
that do not change in time can be described by |
| |
y '(r ,t) | =
| y (r) · exp |
(i w t) |
|
|
|
|
Insertion in the general Schrödinger equation gives the well-known time
independent form |
| |
– |
2 2m | · |
Dy (r,t)
+ | æ è |
U (r) – Etotal |
ö ø |
· y( r,t) |
= | 0 |
|
|
|
|
With Etotal = · w. |
|
For some given potential, the problem is thus reduced to solving a second
order partial differential equation, which is usually not easy, but essentially a mathematical problem.
|
|
|
Physics only comes in again by
- Finding some particular symmetries of the problem that must have a direct bearing
for the symmetries of the solution, and thus make the math somewhat easier. That is what the Bloch
theorem does, for example.
- Finding some physical approximations that allow to write down a simplified equation
that still makes some sense. The free electron gas approximation
is an example.
|
|
Combining the Schrödiner equation with the special theory of relativity yields the Dirac
equation . |
|
|
Another wonderul thing happens at that level: The math involved now cannot be satisfied by describing things
with complex numbers, it actually demands matrices. |
|
|
As a consequence, spin and antiparticles emerge naturally. |
|
Nobody so far has managed to combine the Schrödinger equation with the general theory
of relativity; the two even appear to be antoagonistic. This is in fact one of the biggest
unsoveld problems in fundamental physics. |
|
The mass action law, while simple in appearance, is one of the trickier laws of thermodynamics. |
|
|
It follows from considering equilibrium in a system where the number of particles may change,
but in a connected fashion: Any disappearance of some kind of particle from the ensemble must lead to the appearance of
some other kind. In other words: We are looking at chemical reactions and everything else that follows this very general
restriction. |
|
|
The reaction equation describing the connection between the particles Ai
can always be expressed as |
| |
|
|
|
and the n
i are the stoichiometric constants. The mass action law gives a relation between the equilibrium concentrations
of the particles, [Ai], that takes the general form |
|
|
P i |
[Ai ]n |
= | æ è |
S [Ai]S
n | ö ø |
· | exp – |
Si
gi·n RT |
|
|
|
|
With gi = free enthalpy of component i
and the concentrations measured in mols!. |
|
|
In this form, written with with the gas constant R, it is obviously
formulated for mols as a measure of concentrations. Note that the formula may change
significantly if you switch to other measures of concentrations, e.g. to particle numbers or densities. |
|
|
Working with the mass action law is difficult - there are a number of pitfalls. Consult the links to the
Hyperscript "Defects" for these topics: |
| |
|
The Einstein relation, or as it should be properly called, the Einstein-Smoluchowski relation, couples the mobility
µ and the diffusion coefficient D via |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
The mobility µ, before only defined as some kind of specific constant relating the average
drift velocity of carriers
in an electrical field, now is a general parameter
for all diffusing particles, even without any driving force, it is essentially the diffusion D somewhat disguised. |
|
|
The atomistic theory of diffusion correlates
the diffusion coefficient to atomistic properties via |
|
|
D | = |
g · a2 · n0 · exp – |
HM kT |
|
|
|
|
With g
= lattice factor in the order of 1, a = lattice constant, n0
= vibration frequency of the diffusing particle (rougly 1013 Hz), HM = activation
energy of migration (about 0,5 - 5 eV for particles (= atoms) in "common" crystals. |
|
This is, of course, only valid for diffusion where all individual jumps occur withthe same
mechanism. |
|
|
If several mechanisms act otgether (e.g. a particle is jumping around in a lattice, but every now and then
gets trapped at a defect. The jumping away from the defect the is a different mechanism then the jumps in the lattice),
the total diffusion coefficient will be some mixture of the mechanisms. |
|
In any case, the mobility can now be seen as a material constant
coming directly from atomic mechanisms. |
| |
|
|
Fick's laws are purely phenomenological laws relating the particle current j
of diffusing particles to the concentration gradient Ñc as the driving force. |
|
|
Fick's first law is quite simple |
| |
|
|
|
With the continuity assumption, i.e. no particles are
generated or lost, the change of the particle concentration in some volume element at (x,y,z) is easily derived
and called Fick's second law. |
|
|
¶ c
¶t | = – |
div(j) | = |
D · Ñ 2 · c |
= |
D · Dc |
|
|
|
While these differential equations look deceptively simple, their solutions generally are not.
Even simple cases usually involve statistical functions - as well they should, considering that diffusion is a statistical
phenomenon. |
|
Fick's empirical laws are easily
derived from a consideration of simple atomic mechanisms. |
|
|
The basic underlying statistical concept is random walk, as encountered
in simple diffusion mechanisms, e.g. vacancy or interstitial diffusion. For more complicated mechanisms, Fick's laws can
not be applied anymore without proper corrections. Note that diffusion in semiconductors is amost always such a "more
complicated" case. |
|
|
If there are other driving forces besides the concentration gradients, and if particles are generated and/or
disappear with certain ((x,y,z) dependent) rates (consider i.e. carriers generated by light
and disappearing by recombination), additional terms must be added. |
|
|
|
The Poisson equation is not a basic equation, but follows directly from the
Maxwell equations if all time derivatives are zero, i.e. for electrostatic conditions. The first Maxwell equation
for the electrical field E under these conditions is div D
= r or, for spatially homogeneous dielectric properties, |
| |
|
|
|
Using the potential V, E can be expressed
as |
| |
|
|
|
Insertion in the first Maxwell equation yields the Poisson equation! |
| |
– ( Ñ · Ñ) · V
| = |
r0
e · e0 |
|
|
|
Ñ ·Ñ · V,
of course, can be written as |
| |
(Ñ · Ñ) · V
|
= Ñ2 · V = |
¶2 V
¶ x2 | + |
¶2 V
¶ y2 | + |
¶2 V
¶ z2 |
|
|
|
|
This gives the Poisson equation in its usual form |
|
|
|
|
We have used the definition of the electrical field E as the (negative) gradient of the potential;
E = – ÑV . |
|
|
Since the second
derivative of the electrical potential times e · e0
is just the charge density as asserted by Poisson's equation, integrating the charge density once
essentially yields the electrical field strength, integrating it twice
the potential. We will use this feature quite often. |
|
A few words to the signs: |
|
|
The negative sign comes from the general definition
of a potential, which applies to the electrostatic potential V, too. The existence of a potential demands
that the work done to a unit charge moving in the gradient of the potential is independent of the path. |
|
|
In other words, moving a charge q in an electrical field from A to B, the work
W done is |
| |
W | = – q |
B ó õ
A | E ·
ds | = q |
B ó õ
A | Ñ V · ds
| = q |
æ è |
V(B) – V(A) |
ö ø |
|
|
|
|
So if q is negative, moving it to a point with a higher
potential (assuming that V(B) > V(A)), gives a negative
sign of the work – i.e. work is coming out of the system. For a positive
charge, W is positive and work needs to be done to the system – everything is as it should be. |
| | |
|
The continuity equation is simply a balance equation, stating that the change in density n
(of whatever) that you will find at a time t in a given
volume element at (x,y,z), is determined by how much flows in per time unit minus how much flows out. |
|
|
Think of your bank account. The amount of money in it will change depending on how much is deposited minus
how much is withdrawn. |
|
While this is elementary, the statement contains two not so obvious topics that are also easily
understood thinking about your money in the bank |
|
|
No statement whatsoever is made considering the absolute
amount of money in your account. If you deposit $ 1,000 a day and withdraw $ 500, you are finding
$ 500
more in your account and your new balance now might be $ 1,000,500 instead
of $ 1,000,000 , or $ 250 instead of –$ 250, or whatever – only you know because you know the initial condition . |
|
|
No statement whatsoever is made considering the absolute
amount of deposits and withdrawal either. You would have obtained the same result for the example above if you would
have deposited $ 500,000 and withdrawn $ 499,500 – only the difference
counts. |
|
In mathematical terms, the continuity equation writes |
| |
¶n
¶t |
= – Ñ· jpart(x,y,z) |
|
|
|
|
and jpart is the particle current
of whatever particles you are considering, |
|
|
If j is an electrical current while r
is the charge density, you may express it as |
| |
|
|
In this version of the continuity equation it is assumed that the particle number is conserved,
i.e. no particles are generated or annihilated. So, integrating n (or r)
over the total volume where particles (or charges) might be, always gives the same total number of particles (or the same
total charge). This is the continuity assumption. |
| |
This is a perfectly good assumption for classical
particles and always applicable to, e.g., the flow of water or air. |
|
It is not necessarily, however, a good assumption for electrons and holes in semiconductors. |
|
|
First of all, electrons and holes disappear all the time by recombination and appear by generation. However,
since in equilibrium the generation rate G and the recombination rate R are identical, there
is a constant particle number on average and we can use the continuity equation in its
simple form. |
|
|
But if we now illuminate a defined part of a semiconductor, we have
some defined localized additional generation and some enhanced recombination somewhere, too. The "somewhere" comes from the fact that the recombination does not
have to take place wherever the generation took place – the carrier diffuse away before the eventually disappear. |
|
The continuity equation now must be written as follows: |
| |
¶ n
¶ t |
= |
G(x,y,z) – R(x,y,z) – Ñ·
jpart(x,y,z) |
|
|
|
|
While we may know G(x,y,z) for an illuminated semiconductor, R(x,y,z)
is not known a priori, and solving the continuity equation together with the two other equations (Ohm's law and Fick's law),
making statements about currents may not be easy. |
| |
|
|
Maxwell's equations contain all there is to know about electromagnetic phenomena in a classical
world (including the special theory of relativity). They essentially link the abstract quantities
electric field, magnetic field, charge
and electrical current. |
|
|
Note that the Maxwell equations contain (or demand, as you like it) the special
theory of relativity, because the velocity of charges is involved. Which velocity? The number you get depends
on the frame of reference you chose. |
|
|
The paradigmatic "experiment" to that is to look at two electrons, moving with some velocity
in parallel. They will attract each other magnetically. What happens if you chose a frame of reference that is tied to the
electrons? They are now at rest - no more magnetic attraction? |
|
This is a very difficult question. Look up the answer in any good textbook, e.g. in the Feynman
lectures II; chapter 13-6. |
|
Here is an overview, giving the common vector formulation and the
integral formulation in prose. Some more laws either following form the Maxwell equation, or needed in the general context,
are also given |
|
|
|
| 1. equation |
| (Flux of E
through a closed surface) = ( Charge inside)/e0 |
| | |
| |
|
| 2. equation |
| Line integral of E
around a loop = -¶/¶t (Flux of B
through the loop) |
| |
| | |
| | 3. equation |
| (Flux of B through a closed surface) = 0
There are no magnetic "charges" |
| | |
| |
|
| 4. equation |
c2Ñ × B | = |
j e 0 | + |
¶ E
¶ t |
|
|
c2 · (Integral of B around a loop) = (current through the loop)/e 0 + ¶/¶
t (Flux of E through the loop) |
|
| | |
|
|
These are the Maxwell equations. Note that they are not only valid for vacuum,
but also for materials if the correct charge density is included (we do not really need the electrical
"displacement" D. We also use what is often called "magnetic
induction B " as the primary quantity calling it "magnetic field", and not the outdated
secondary quantity H . |
|
|
The conservation of total charge (essentially the continuity equation "falling out"
of the Maxwell equations) gives us. |
|
| |
| |
Charge Conservation |
|
Flux of current through a closed surface) = –dr/d t(Charge inside) |
|
| | |
|
|
The coupling to classical mechanics is achieved by introducing the force F
via the force law and Newtons law expressed for the momentum p |
| |
| | Force law |
| Also known as Lorentz law. |
|
| | |
|
| |
Newtons law |
| |
| |
| | |
|
And the special theory of relativity is included by using the relativistic momentum |
| |
| |
Special relativity |
| |
|
If we throw in the (classical) law of gravitation, we have almost
all basic equations of classical physics as it was known up to about 1905, in just half a page! |
| |
| | Gravitation |
| Gr is the gravitational constant |
| | |
| |
© H. Föll (Semiconductors - Script)