Jellium, also called the uniform or homogeneous electron gas,
is a theoretical material where all electrons are free,
and the ions’ positive charge is smeared into a uniform background “jelly”.
This simple model lets us study electron interactions easily.
Without interactions
Let us start by neglecting electron-electron interactions.
This is clearly a dubious assumption, but we will stick with it for now.
For an infinitely large sample of jellium,
the single-electron states are simply plane waves.
We consider an arbitrary cube of volume V,
and impose periodic boundary conditions on it,
such that the single-particle orbitals are (suppressing spin):
Where nx,ny,nz∈Z.
This is a discrete (but infinite) set of independent orbitals,
so it is natural to use the
second quantization
to write the non-interacting Hamiltonian H^0,
where ℏ2∣k∣2/(2m) is the kinetic energy
of the orbital with wavevector k, and s is the spin:
H^0=s∑k∑2mℏ2∣k∣2c^s,k†c^s,k
Assuming that the temperature T=0,
the N-electron ground state of this Hamiltonian
is known as the Fermi sea or Fermi sphere∣FS⟩,
and is constructed by filling up the single-electron states
starting from the lowest energy:
∣FS⟩=s∏j=1∏N/2c^s,kj†∣0⟩
Because T=0, all the electrons stay in their assigned state.
The energy and wavenumber ∣k∣ of the highest filled orbital
are called the Fermi energyϵF and Fermi wavenumberkF,
and obey the expected kinetic energy relation:
ϵF=2mℏ2kF2
The Fermi sea can be visualized in k-space as a sphere with radius kF.
Because k is discrete, the sphere’s surface is not smooth,
but in the limit V→∞ it becomes perfect.
Now, we would like a relation between the system’s parameters,
e.g. N and V, and the resulting values of ϵF or kF.
The total population N must be given by:
Where we have turned the sum over k into an integral with a constant factor,
by using that each orbital exclusively occupies a volume (2π)3/V in k-space.
At zero temperature, this inner product can only be 0 or 1,
depending on whether k is outside or inside the Fermi sphere.
We can therefore rewrite using a
Heaviside step function:
Where we realized that spin does not matter,
and replaced the sum over s by a factor 2.
In order to evaluate this 3D integral,
we go to spherical coordinates(∣k∣,θ,φ):
Using that the electron density n=N/V,
we thus arrive at the following relation:
kF3=3π2n
This result also justifies our assumption that T=0:
we can accurately calculate the density n for many conducting materials,
and this relation then gives kF and ϵF.
It turns out that ϵF is usually very large
compared to the thermal energy kBT at reasonable temperatures,
so we can conclude that thermal fluctuations are negligible.
Now, ϵF is the highest single-electron energy,
but about the total N-particle energy E(0)?
In general, it is more useful to consider
the average kinetic energy per electron E(0)/N,
which we find to be as follows, using that kF3=3π2n:
NE(0)=10m3ℏ2kF2=53ϵF∼n2/3
Traditionally, this is expressed using a dimensionless parameter rs,
defined as the radius of a sphere containing a single electron,
measured in Bohr radii a0≡4πε0ℏ2/(e2m):
To include Coulomb interactions, let us try
time-independent pertubation theory.
Clearly, this will give better results when the interaction is relatively weak, if ever.
The Coulomb potential is proportional to the inverse distance,
and the average electron spacing is roughly n−1/3,
so the interaction energy Eint should scale as n1/3.
We already know that the kinetic energy Ekin=E(0) scales as n2/3,
meaning perturbation theory should be reasonable
if 1≫Eint/Ekin∼n−1/3,
so in the limit of high density n→∞.
The two-body Coulomb interaction operator W^
is as follows in second-quantized form:
This inner product can only be nonzero
if the two creation operators c^†
are for the same orbitals as the two annihilation operators c^.
Since q=0, this means that s1=s2,
and that momentum is conserved: k2=k1+q.
And of course both k1 and k1+q
must be inside the Fermi sphere,
to avoid annihilating an empty orbital.
Let s=s1 and k=k1:
Next, we convert the sum over q into an integral in spherical coordinates.
Clearly, q is the “jump” made by an electron from one orbital to another,
so the largest possible jump
goes from a point on the Fermi surface to the opposite point,
and thus has length 2kF.
This yields the integration limit, and therefore leads to:
Where we have used that the direction of q,
i.e. (θq,φq), is irrelevant,
as long as we define θk as
the angle between q and k+q
when we go to spherical coordinates (∣k∣,θk,φk) for k:
Unfortunately, this last step function is less easy to translate into integration limits.
In effect, we are trying to calculate the intersection volume of two spheres,
both with radius kF, one centered on the origin (for k),
and the other centered on q (for k+q).
Imagine a triangle with side lengths ∣k∣, ∣q∣ and ∣k+q∣2,
where θk is the angle between ∣k∣ and ∣k+q∣.
The law of cosines then gives the following relation:
∣k∣2=∣q∣2+∣k+q∣2−2∣q∣∣k+q∣cos(θk)
We already know that ∣k∣<kF and 0<∣q∣<2kF,
so by isolating for cos(θk),
we can obtain bounds on θk and ∣k∣.
Let ∣k∣→kF in both cases, then:
Meaning that 0<θk<arccos∣q∣/(2kF).
To get a lower limit for ∣k∣, we “cheat” by artificially demanding
that k does not cross the halfway point between the spheres,
with the result that ∣k∣cos(θk)>∣q∣/2.
Then, thanks to symmetry (both spheres have the same radius),
we just multiply the integral by 2,
for k on the other side of the halfway point.
Armed with these integration limits, we return to calculating E(1),
substituting ξ≡cos(θk):
Consequently, for sufficiently high densities n,
the total energy E per particle is given by:
NE≈(rs22.21−rs0.92)Ry
Unfortunately, this is as far as we can go.
In theory, the second-order energy correction E(2) is as shown below,
but it turns out that it (and all higher orders) diverge:
E(2)=Ψn=FS∑E(0)−En⟨FS∣W^∣Ψn⟩2
The only cure for this is to go to infinite order,
where all the infinities add up to a finite result.
References
H. Bruus, K. Flensberg,
Many-body quantum theory in condensed matter physics,
2016, Oxford.