User talk:Edib76

Bloch wave
Hello!! Thank you for your good work with the fonts in the Bloch wave article. I looked at your change to the "Bloch wave versus energy eigenstates" section, and I don't think your change is correct. But I'm not 100% sure. I started a discussion here to figure it out:

Talk:Bloch_wave

I undid your change for now, for reasons discussed on that page, i.e. to keep the article internally self-consistent. (We can always put your change back in.)

Sorry if I misunderstood anything ... :-D --Steve (talk) 01:53, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello!

I'm not sure how to use this messaging. I'm reading Aschroft and Mermin (SOLID STATE physics) page 133: ... eigenstates of the one-electron Hamiltonian ..., can be chosen to have the form... Now I see confusion. Here are reasons to change "Bloch wave versus energy eigenstates" or to delete it 1. never seen anyone mixing states with different quasi-momentum k and the same energy, 2. in both proves (p. 134 and 137), authors never used that Bloch's states are eigenstates of Hamiltonian, only that translations commute with Hamiltonian, 3. in the second proof of the theorem authors get Bloch's states but there are still equations to be solved in constants c_{k-K} to get Hamiltonian eigenstates (Eq. 8.41).

Discussion is always the best.

Sorry if I started this in the wrong way (not sure how to use wiki)


 * You didn't do anything wrong! You tried to improve an article ... that's the right thing to do! Much appreciated!


 * Thanks for explaining that, I'm going to read that section of Ashcroft and Mermin as you suggest. I don't have the book with me right now, but I'll do it tomorrow. :-D --Steve (talk) 13:40, 13 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I think you're right! I deleted that section altogether actually, and went through the whole article to keep it internally consistent with the new definition. See Talk:Bloch_wave (bottom section) for my thought process. (You are welcome to join in that discussion; see Help:Using talk pages.)


 * And if you disagree with anything I did, don't be shy! Go ahead and change the article again! The culture is "Be bold", i.e. if you see a way to improve the article, just go ahead and do it. If somebody disagrees, they will undo it, but they don't mean any offense to you!! Then you can discuss on the talk page, like what is happening here.


 * Again, thanks for your careful reading and good work! :-D --Steve (talk) 20:44, 14 January 2014 (UTC)