Bloch's Theorem in Crystals

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 พ.ค. 2019
  • / edmundsj
    If you want to see more of these videos, or would like to say thanks for this one, the best way you can do that is by becoming a patron - see the link above :). And a huge thank you to all my existing patrons - you make these videos possible.
    In this video I sketch out a basic proof of Bloch's theorem in crystals and also talk about where it breaks down and why we might want to use it.
    This is part of my graduate series on optoelectronics / photonics, and is based primarily on Coldren's book on Lasers as well as graduate-level coursework I have taken in the EECS department at UC Berkeley.
    Hope you found this video helpful, please post in the comments below anything I can do to improve future videos, or suggestions you have for future videos.

ความคิดเห็น • 88

  • @Cunboss
    @Cunboss 4 ปีที่แล้ว +105

    "Space is curved anyway, so deal with it"
    That got real for a second lol.

  • @dheerajkumar2534
    @dheerajkumar2534 4 ปีที่แล้ว +34

    Best explanation of bloch's theorem in YT

  • @jaugretler9140
    @jaugretler9140 3 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    I have a qm exam tmrw and only learned about this now. Wish me luck

    • @dwarapureddijagadeesh5374
      @dwarapureddijagadeesh5374 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Goooooooood luck
      You're a lucky person to get wishes from me

    • @dddhhj8709
      @dddhhj8709 ปีที่แล้ว

      lmao you learned this is a solid state video 🤣.science is science

    • @Shudarsanpoudel
      @Shudarsanpoudel 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      What was your exam bro? I'm asking after 3 years

    • @jaugretler9140
      @jaugretler9140 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Shudarsanpoudel the subject was called: quantum physics

  • @husseinh.thebyani508
    @husseinh.thebyani508 4 ปีที่แล้ว +13

    It's an amazing explanation, Thanks a lot from Saudi Arabia

  • @_The_Alchemist_
    @_The_Alchemist_ 2 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Clear and lucid explanation. Finally understood the Bloch Theorem after so much struggle.

  • @zarintasnim2634
    @zarintasnim2634 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    You explain things quite visually. It's so helpful to understand.. thank you!!

  • @PetitCorpsSalade
    @PetitCorpsSalade 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Studying for my physical chemistry class, this is actually great! Thanks!!!!

  • @taraschutora9166
    @taraschutora9166 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    The best explanation so far in internet!!!

  • @behnammohammadi504
    @behnammohammadi504 18 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Very clear explanation. Thank you very much for your time and effort. You helped me a lot and saved my time by this video

  • @oliviahoran4525
    @oliviahoran4525 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Wow, I was struggling so much to understand this bloch theorem but now sir you made me to love 🎉this bloch theorem, thank you so much for your efforts ❤❤❤

  • @saifamu1989
    @saifamu1989 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    You have no idea how much favor you are doing for explaining these things...

  • @amandobhal4264
    @amandobhal4264 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Nicely explained.
    Thank you

  • @m.sureshthanjavur9975
    @m.sureshthanjavur9975 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Smart and good explanation about Bloch theorem. I understand the theorem. Thanks a lot

  • @lawanyasingh4497
    @lawanyasingh4497 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    best explanation of blochs theorem ..very informative

  • @romerofuentero
    @romerofuentero 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Great video! cheers from Spain.

  • @saicharanmarrivada5077
    @saicharanmarrivada5077 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thank you sir for the wonderful explanation

  • @alicansaray2940
    @alicansaray2940 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Amazing video, thank you very much. Already subscribed by just watching one video.

  • @stringsam
    @stringsam 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    amazing explanation!!!

  • @fungi42021
    @fungi42021 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Great explanation 👍

  • @dexterfang7516
    @dexterfang7516 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    great video, thanks

  • @mausamgupta888
    @mausamgupta888 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you so much sir 💞💞

  • @josemariacolingalvez2725
    @josemariacolingalvez2725 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Bro, thaks for the explanation, it was so cool

  • @tcl98387
    @tcl98387 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    The new index at @10:44 should be (2*pi*s)/(N*a)

    • @chloe7808
      @chloe7808 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      thanks, it got me confused !

  • @delafrog
    @delafrog 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Why should the wave function of a particle in a periodic potential be an eigenfunction of the translation operator? (As it was written in 2: 55) How does this derive from the equality of the values of the wave functions for "x "and" x+a"? It is not entirely clear why we should assume namely this relation- with the product, and not with the sum operation, for example?
    Other issue. Is it really necessary to make a periodic closure of the wave function on the lattice boundaries to prove Bloch's theorem?

  •  5 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    Hi Jordan,
    thank you for your videos, they are very good. Please, I have a question about this one. Just before you introduce u_k(x) function 10:30. There is a step where you rewrite PSI(x) function with index k in the exponent. Where did the "
    "a" go?

    • @JordanEdmundsEECS
      @JordanEdmundsEECS  5 ปีที่แล้ว +16

      Whoops! k should be equal to 2*pi*s/(N*a), that’s a mistake on my part. k has units of inverse length.

    • @biswajeetpatro9990
      @biswajeetpatro9990 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Hey Jordan, can you share your mail id, can I contact you for any of my doubts?

    • @y3rzhan
      @y3rzhan 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@JordanEdmundsEECS was looking for the comment, thanks!

  • @emankopeal4210
    @emankopeal4210 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thank you for the amazing explanation (:

    • @JordanEdmundsEECS
      @JordanEdmundsEECS  2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      You are welcome! I shamelessly steal the best explanations I find from others, of course :)p

  • @Ayah_S_Taihi
    @Ayah_S_Taihi 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    So clear! Thanks :)

  • @navjotsinghdhiber3454
    @navjotsinghdhiber3454 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you sir.

  • @md.rayidhasanmojumder5039
    @md.rayidhasanmojumder5039 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    At 9:28, where did Shi(x) go in the equation of Shi(x+a)? why did you wrote (x+a)/a over the exponential omitting the Shi(x)?

  • @brotherstech3901
    @brotherstech3901 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Enjoyed.

  • @kevinsweeney2809
    @kevinsweeney2809 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you!

  • @shanujwilson1204
    @shanujwilson1204 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    A small question. Does this also explain if asked for super lattices? Like those infinite square wells?
    Thanks in advance. ♥

    • @JordanEdmundsEECS
      @JordanEdmundsEECS  4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      100% yes sir, you can use it any time you have periodicity.

  • @PresCalvinCoolidge
    @PresCalvinCoolidge ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I'm confused because we still don't know u_k(x). It seems like we have not gained anything, we just traded not knowing psi(x) for u_k(x).

  • @coursecczu152
    @coursecczu152 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    at 9:22 why we add (x+a) to e ^i 2piS/N, where does it come from? could some one give me a hint?

  • @zacharythatcher7328
    @zacharythatcher7328 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    So I understand this, and can see that crystal momentum is just spatial frequency. But I am having a lot of trouble seeing how photons come into the picture. I’m cool with Laue and Bragg, and I’ve seen that there is a classical way to prove that wave number is conserved at the interface with snell’s law. But why and how does all of that relate to band structure? Any good videos covering this?

    • @JordanEdmundsEECS
      @JordanEdmundsEECS  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Yeah so I have a video on "optical band structure" and a bunch of videos on optoelectronics/photonics (you might want to just see the introduction) I made studying for my prelim exam :)p. Photons come into the picture as they are the mediator that lets electrons go from states in the valence band to states in the conduction band (and vice-versa via emission).

  • @physicsdiva1871
    @physicsdiva1871 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Well explained

  • @maryfucci3131
    @maryfucci3131 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    At 9:25, when you divide the (x+a) term by a, I don’t see why you only get and x/a left and not (x/a+1). Is it because (x+a) is equal to x? So you’re not actually diving out your just substituting x for the numerator x+a ?

  • @jatinkashyap1491
    @jatinkashyap1491 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    "Space is curved anyway, SO DEAL WITH THAT" some serious gangsta shades 😎! JK, love it.

  • @sherinsaraphilip1869
    @sherinsaraphilip1869 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you

  • @randydandy8196
    @randydandy8196 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    So k is the crystal momentum and not the wave vector?

  • @ghezzalimohamed2483
    @ghezzalimohamed2483 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    you are the best

  • @akashcallofdutymobile8888
    @akashcallofdutymobile8888 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you sir

  • @TheIndolence
    @TheIndolence 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    What is happening when you say at around 9:05 "the e^(i2pi s/N) term has to be a function of x. Say, 'times x, and then we add an a to it". This seems completely arbitrary, and yet it's an essential step in the whole development to arrive at the final Bloch theorem. Why not a function of x in a way more complex way? Does it not work if it does not depend on x?

  • @atulbisht5774
    @atulbisht5774 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Helo sr nice explanation..I want to ask how u made such video....means device or software..plz reply

    • @JordanEdmundsEECS
      @JordanEdmundsEECS  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      iPad Pro/duet Pro on Windows 10 PC with Autodesk Sketchbook for drawing and OBS Studio for recording.

  • @beatthekraken7088
    @beatthekraken7088 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    4.46 it is not clearly nonsense, it is the definiton of infinity in complex analysis, where the straight lines equal to circles. Why? Because 2 straights cut themselves in the same amount of points like circles. 1,2 or infinity (The breaking fact is that infitiy is always a point where they cut themselves) This is because e^ikx is non ambigious. Imagine a map on polar coordinates (stereographic projection from the north pole) then every radial path you take to infinity leads you to the north pole. It will help you if you draw the mapping of the square Rx[0,2pi) via exp(x+iy).

    • @JordanEdmundsEECS
      @JordanEdmundsEECS  3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yup, I'm familiar. It's a beautiful definition, and the world of pure math is a bizarre one indeed.

  • @mariamhasany5250
    @mariamhasany5250 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    space is curved, is that referring to the Einstein's theory of general relativity?

  • @shivammishra6624
    @shivammishra6624 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Great

  • @arunbrvce
    @arunbrvce 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Very interesting explanation. I followed you very well up until the point where you established C^N=1 (i.e. C is the nth root of unity). Why do we need a fancy function to satisfy this condition? C=1 itself is a solution isn't it?

  • @nomingirl
    @nomingirl 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    lot of thanks from mongolia ;)))

    • @JordanEdmundsEECS
      @JordanEdmundsEECS  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Thanks! I’ve always wanted to visit Mongolia! XD

    • @nomingirl
      @nomingirl 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Always welcome :))

  • @LL-mq7gj
    @LL-mq7gj 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    where did the a term go at 10:34?

    • @LL-mq7gj
      @LL-mq7gj 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      using your definition of k, i cannot reproduce your calculation of psi(x+a) at 11:30

    • @user-tz3hp6jo9d
      @user-tz3hp6jo9d 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      he tried to explain about a point in circle refer first 1min again

    • @LL-mq7gj
      @LL-mq7gj 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@user-tz3hp6jo9d thanks

  • @FernandoMartinez-wf4jd
    @FernandoMartinez-wf4jd 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you for the headache 😂

  • @santalos5
    @santalos5 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    I dont see the benefit of assuming its a circle? 04:00

  • @caleb7799
    @caleb7799 ปีที่แล้ว

    just gotta watch them uhms/ahs

  • @GBY13
    @GBY13 ปีที่แล้ว

    The explanation from 9:00 is bit chaotic...

  • @miro.s
    @miro.s 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    If we use symmetry, wave function should be identical after shifting the position of some periods, not rotated in complex space. Wave function from principle of equivalence between atoms can not number them. From its perspective all of them are same, there is no other information. This is against what you are showing. You are describing circulant matrix where order matters.

    • @miro.s
      @miro.s 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      The same for electromagnetic potential functions, they are same after shifting some periods. The same in optics with periodic entangled coherent sources of light. These examples are totally against what you claim.

    • @miro.s
      @miro.s 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      You are showing not standing wave that is equivalent to the Mexican wave and present at all cycles, because atoms in that constellation can never reach synchronization all together.

    • @black1blade74
      @black1blade74 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Only the probability density is actually observable in this system so the phase can vary.

    • @pseudolullus
      @pseudolullus ปีที่แล้ว

      @@black1blade74 Everything is fine unless there is some topological funny crap going on, of course :P

    • @pseudolullus
      @pseudolullus ปีที่แล้ว

      @miros There is an extra degree of freedom in condensed matter physics which is both important and denied by your treatment. The phase indeed can vary and this is crucial for some effects.