Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The model gives good qualitative results in many cases and can be combined with other models that give better results where the tight-binding model fails. Though the tight-binding model is a one-electron model, the model also provides a basis for more advanced calculations like the calculation of surface states and application to various kinds ...
Here we give a simple derivation of the Peierls substitution, which is based on The Feynman Lectures (Vol. III, Chapter 21). [3] This derivation postulates that magnetic fields are incorporated in the tight-binding model by adding a phase to the hopping terms and show that it is consistent with the continuum Hamiltonian.
The Aubry–André model describes a one-dimensional lattice with hopping between nearest-neighbor sites and periodically varying onsite energies. It is a tight-binding (single-band) model with no interactions. The full Hamiltonian can be written as
The Hubbard model introduces short-range interactions between electrons to the tight-binding model, which only includes kinetic energy (a "hopping" term) and interactions with the atoms of the lattice (an "atomic" potential). When the interaction between electrons is strong, the behavior of the Hubbard model can be qualitatively different from ...
The motor size constant and motor velocity constant (, alternatively called the back EMF constant) are values used to describe characteristics of electrical motors. Motor constant [ edit ]
The kicked rotator, also spelled as kicked rotor, is a paradigmatic model for both Hamiltonian chaos (the study of chaos in Hamiltonian systems) and quantum chaos. It describes a free rotating stick (with moment of inertia I {\displaystyle I} ) in an inhomogeneous "gravitation like" field that is periodically switched on in short pulses.
The tight binding Hamiltonian in of a Kitaev chain considers a one dimensional lattice with N site and spinless particles at zero temperature, subjected to nearest neighbour hoping interactions, given in second quantization formalism as [4]
Each model describes some types of solids very well, and others poorly. The nearly free electron model works well for metals, but poorly for non-metals. The tight binding model is extremely accurate for ionic insulators, such as metal halide salts (e.g. NaCl).