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 is a version of the Fermi gas model,
which we extend by including electron-electron interactions using
time-independent perturbation theory.
0th order
Let us start with the 0th order of the perturbation expansion.
Without interactions or potentials, this is simply a Fermi gas,
so the single-electron wavefunctions are just plane waves.
For mathematical convenience, we consider these waves
in a cube of volume V with periodic boundaries,
leading to a discrete spectrum of allowed wavevectors k,
which becomes continuous for V→∞.
The unperturbed many-particle Hamiltonian H^0 is given below in the
second quantization,
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
Which, at absolute zero T=0, has an N-electron ground state
known as the Fermi sphere∣FS⟩
that is constructed by filling up the single-electron states
starting from the lowest energy:
∣FS⟩=s∏j=1∏N/2c^s,kj†∣0⟩
From our analysis of the Fermi gas, we have an important result
for the wavenumber kF=∣kN/2∣ of the highest filled orbital,
as a function of the particle density n=N/V:
kF3=3π2n
Now, let us calculate the total N-particle ground state
energy E(0) of the unperturbed system:
Where we have recognized the spin’s irrelevance,
by replacing the sum over s with a factor 2.
Next, we turn the sum over the allowed k-values into an integral,
which is a common trick
enabled by our periodic boundary conditions, yielding:
E(0)=(2π)32V∫−∞∞2mℏ2∣k∣2⟨FS∣c^k†c^k∣FS⟩dk
The matrix element
⟨FS∣c^k†c^k∣FS⟩dk
is either 0 or 1, depending on whether k
is outside the Fermi sphere, or, equivalently,
whether ∣k∣ is above or below kF.
We can write this fact by introducing a
Heaviside step functionΘ(k):
E(0)=8π3mℏ2V∫−∞∞∣k∣2Θ(kF−∣k∣)dk
We evaluate this in
spherical coordinates
and find that E(0) is proportional to kF5:
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/V:
NE(0)=10m3ℏ2kF2∝n2/3
Traditionally, this is rewritten using the Wigner-Seitz radiusrs,
defined as the radius of a sphere containing a single electron,
measured in Bohr radii a0≡4πε0ℏ2/(e02m):
34π(a0rs)3≡n1⟹rs=(4πa03n3)1/3
Note that this is dimensionless due to our choice of a0 as a unit.
In the Fermi gas, we have:
rs=(49π)1/3a0kF1⟹kF=(49π)1/3a0rs1
By inserting this into the ground state energy
and using the definition of a0, we can write:
Where the last parenthesized expression is
the Rydberg unit of energy Ry≈13.6eV, so:
NE(0)≈rs22.21Ry
This result is found in a lot of literature.
The choice of Rydberg units is simply a tradition.
1st order
In the next term of the perturbation expansion,
we start to include Coulomb interactions.
Clearly, this will give better results when the interaction is relatively weak,
but is that ever the case?
The Coulomb potential is proportional to the inverse distance,
and the average electron spacing is roughly n−1/3,
so the interaction energy Eint scales as n1/3.
We also know that the kinetic energy Ekin=E(0)
is proportional to n2/3,
meaning that it is reasonable to use perturbation theory
as long as 1≫Eint/Ekin∝n−1/3,
i.e. 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.