Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/HTML-CSS/jax.js

Friday, January 16, 2015

Specific Heat

Hey everyone.
I promised to complete a write-up about our findings in class, and here I am.  Earlier, we found the relationship between the total energy (let's call this U for now) and the density of states D(E) :
U=topbottomD(E)f(E)EdEwheref(E)=11+exp[(Eμ)/kT]
For neatness' sake, I'll use Eb and Et to denote the bottom and the top of the band, respectively.
Q: How do we relate this to specific heat?
From CV=ΔUΔT (the specific heat at constant volume), we can write
CV=TEtEbD(E)f(E)EdEEtEbD(E)f(E)TEdE.Given thatf(Eb)TD(Eb)0andf(Et)TD(Et)0rather strongly,
we can justify D(E)D(E0)=constant, the density of states at the ground energy.  So,
CVD(E0)EtEbf(E)TEdE=D(E0)EtEbEμkT2exp[(Eμ)/kT](1+exp[(Eμ)/kT])2EdE
where μ is something we didn't really get to discuss in depth... anyway,
CVD(E0)kTEtEb(Eμ)exp[(Eμ)/kT](1+exp[(Eμ)/kT])2EdEkT.
We can make this integration easier by letting our limits go to infinity instead.  Physically, we're only including negligible contributions by doing this, so I'm pretty comfortable with that.  Furthermore, substituting  x=(Eμ)/kT  and  dx=dE/kT,  we get
CVD(E0)(kT)2TEkTxex(1+ex)2dxD(E0)k2T[EμkTxex(1+ex)2dx+μkTxex(1+ex)2dx]D(E0)k2T[x2ex(1+ex)2dx+μkTxex(1+ex)2dx]D(E0)k2Tx2ex(1+ex)2dx
since the second integral indeed cancels out by asymmetry.  We are left with an immediately repulsive integral, but closer inspection à la Wolfram reveals true beauty:
CVD(E0)k2Tπ23
As promised, this constant (π2/3) is a small contribution in the scheme of things, since D(E0), which is proportional to the number of atoms in the crystal, is such a large number by comparison.

Really, the take-away seems to be that heat capacity is linear with respect to temperature... at least to a first order approximation.  At the same time, it's interesting to note that this approach implies that different values of μ and E don't affect the heat capacity whatsoever, though that could be a result inherent to either the rough handling of μ or the idealized 1-dimensional nature of the problem.

Have a great 3-day weekend everyone.

1 comment:

  1. Wow. I was going to add this to the homework due Wednesday so you may have saved everyone a bunch of work. Does this seem correct? What do people think?

    A few thoughts about Eo and μ: perhaps in the context of a crystal will can call Eo the center-of-the-band energy since it is not the energy of the lowest state anymore but has become a marker for the middle of the band. Also, what is the relationship between μ and Eo? What fixes the value of μ?

    ReplyDelete