Talk:Fermi gas

Untitled
The last paragraph is not quite true. It states that the Fermi gas neglects interactions by definition, so that the study of a Fermi gas reduces to the study of single particles. Even if elecron-electron interactions are neglected, the Pauli principle must be obeyed. Therefore the fermionic statistics makes the problem a bit more complicated than simply the study of single electrons. The constraint is that the total many-particle wavefunction needs to be antisymmetric under the interchange of any two of the electrons. This gives rise to the Fermi surface alluded to earlier in the article. If one was simply studying a single fermion, there would be no fermi surface. Therefore the study of many non-interacting electrons is not the same as studying one electron. 01:32, 30 November 2004‎ User:Tom davis

Rewrite
This article needs serious work. It needs more mathematical rigor in defining the properties of a Fermi gas. It should also lead into an introduction of band theory and the nearly free electron model, and link to the relevant articles (which looks like they could use work too...). We should be careful not to reproduce effort already done on the Fermi-Dirac statistics page, however, and simply reference those results. A more in-depth (but still brief) overview of the examples cited (neutron star, metals) would also be helpful.

I'll start work on this when I have time. Deklund 08:07, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Almost ten years on and nothing done. :P Hope everything is well, Deklund. Well, I agree with this comment and the one above it, that the Fermi gas is a very well-defined theoretical ideal gas of fermions. At least that's how all my stat mech books speak of it, so that seems to be the common attitude. So, I am planning to move most of the material from Fermi energy to here, and merge in some material from free electron model. Nanite (talk) 08:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

First paragraph
The first paragraph has the following: "...the Pauli principle acts as a sort of interaction/pressure that keeps the fermions separated and moving." This needs to be rewritten. A scientific principle does not act as pressure. The principle is a description, it is not the force itself. Typical reifying language from scientists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.166.163 (talk) 00:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Fixed - Any scientist would agree its merely a grammatical error. PAR (talk) 05:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fermi gas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919073627/http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/ugrad/sphys_old/sphys_webct/PHYS3905_SM/TSM12.pdf to http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/ugrad/sphys_old/sphys_webct/PHYS3905_SM/TSM12.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:43, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Merge with Fermi energy
I'm proposing a merge between Fermi energy page and Fermi gas into one page (Fermi gas) as the former is a subproperty of the latter concept. This proposal also takes in fact the Fermi energy article has better equations and is better explained than the Fermi gas article so mostly the new merged article won't lose any generality. MaoGo (talk) 17:44, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

typical value of fermi momentum?
For us lazy-bones, it would be nice to have typical values for the fermi momentum too. So, for example, for metals, I think, maybe, that the fermi momentum, is more than a few inverse angstroms, i.e. less than the interatomic spacing, right? But it would be nice to know without having to whip out my calculator, and googling around. (and what about the fermi temperature? What might that be?) and out of shear curiosty, same for white dwarves, nuclei. And neutron stars? 162.204.250.21 (talk) 02:07, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Should it be added that oganesson's electron structure might be close to a fermi gas?
I have found many articles that have stated that oganesson's electrons do not follow orbitals closely and are smeared out, with many of them saying, including Wikipedia's oganesson article itself, that oganesson's electrons come close to the limiting factor of a Fermi Gas. Should this be addressed in the article? 2601:600:9080:A4B0:E94F:A79B:8A0A:3F60 (talk) 21:28, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

"Illustration of the energy states"
The article has an image labeled "Illustration of the energy states". The diagram as captioned makes no sense to me. What does it have to do with Fermi gas? Why are some level occupied and other not? Where in the text is the diagram useful?

I propose to delete it. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:48, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The picture was clearly described but it is not really related to a Fermi gas and it is more complicated than what it should be. Picture removed.--ReyHahn (talk) 16:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)