This RG discussion (thread) is an open teaching & learning talk about the use of the TB method in the solid-state.

TB has proven to be a very powerful no-relativistic quantum mechanical (NRQM) technic in order to match experimental data and theories in several branches of solid-state where quasiparticle excitations play the fundamental role, i. e., electrons and holes in metals, magnons and phonons, and Cooper pairs among other systems, it helps even in the physics of insulated systems where there is a gap between the conduction and the valence bands.

TB helps to understand more deeply into solids with respect to the free & nearly free electron models. The 3 methods create a wonderful picture of quasiparticles and interactions that take place in solids. In addition, with visualizing tools, TB becomes a very powerful method that can lead to important conclusions and give physical insight into STP complicated problems.

I learned the subject using the IV chapter (electron in a perfect lattice) of the classical book by Prof. Rudolph Peierls “Quantum Theory of Solids” – 1955 [1]. Later on, the subject of TB was popularized by another couple of classical books: Prof. Ziman’s book “Principles of the Theory of Solids” – 1972 [2] & Profs. Ashcroft and Mermin´s book “Solid State Physics” [3] - 1976. Finally, the TB method was magistrally exposed by Prof. W. A. Harrison, "Electronic Structure and Properties of Solids" [4] - 1980.

TB implies that electrons & holes which are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian are spread entirely on the crystal (like in the free & nearly free eh-models), but that they also are localized at lattice sites (free & nearly free e-models do have no such a requirement). This is a really important statement. In addition, the TB approach for example helps to understand the metal insulation transition by means of the Peierls instability & transition between metallic and insulating solid states [4].

Nowadays, there are important advances, both theoretical such as the one where using a TB approach Prof. Chris Nelson [7] still has the only model that predicted the frustration-based behavior of the structural glass transition in As2Se3, He used TB to fit experimental nuclear quadrupole resonance data (NQR). In addition, with TB there are ab initio ones using this powerful, rigorous but also, intuitive tool in the physics of the solid-state, please see for the latest news on Green functions and TB [8].

All RG community members are welcome to discuss and share teaching and research findings using the TB method. Thank you all in advance for your participation.

Main References:

[1] Rudolph Peierls: Quantum theory of Solids. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1955.

[2] J.M. Ziman: Principles of the Theory of Solids, Cambridge University Press, London, 1972.

[3] N.W. Ashcroft and N.D. Mermin: Solid State Physics, HRW International Editions, 1976.

[5] W. A. Harrison, Electronic Structure and Properties of Solids, Dover, New York, 1980.

[6] Rudolph Peierls: More Surprises in Theoretical Physics. Vol. 105. Princeton University Press, 1991.

[7] W. A. Harrison

Article @ 1989 IUPAC Tight-binding theory of molecules and solids

[8] Chris Nelson, A frustration based model of the structural glass transition in As2Se3 201 Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids s 398–399:48–56

Article A frustration based model of the structural glass transition in As2Se3

[9] S. Repetsky, I. Vyshyvana, S. Kruchinin, and S. Bellucci. 2020. Tight-binding model in the theory of disordered crystals. Modern Physics Letters B Vol. 34, No. 19

More Pedro L. Contreras E.'s questions See All
Similar questions and discussions