Anderson localization,electron flow/diffusion and Born rules

Foundations of physics and/or philosophy of physics, and in particular, posts on unresolved or controversial issues

Anderson localization,electron flow/diffusion and Born rules

Postby Jarek » Wed Dec 09, 2015 2:05 am

Imagine a semiconductor lattice - a regular lattice (e.g. of Si or Ga) with a small fractions of a different atoms (like Mn).
The natural question is: how electrons flow through it?
It can be measured experimentally: put a potential and use scanning tunneling microscope to map electron flow from the surface.
Here are some nice pictures of such experiment for two different concentrations of Mn from (Science 2010)
http://chair.itp.ac.ru/biblio/papers/st ... e.full.pdf

Image

We can see some strong localization properties - generally called Anderson localization.
The problem is that standard diffusion leads to nearly uniform probability distribution instead.

Hence, if attaching a potential gradient, electrons would flow - semiconductor would be a conductor.
In contrast, it often isn't - as in the pictures, electrons are imprisoned (in local potential/entropic wells), what makes conductance/flow more difficult.

Hence Anderson localization is seen as a quantum phenomena, requiring to imagine electron as waves.
So cannot we see electrons (charge carriers) from stochastic perspective: probabilities of traveling between regions, flows?


I would like to argue/discuss that we can.
Specifically, that the problem with standard diffusion models is that they only approximate the (Jaynes) maximal entropy principle - which is crucial for statistical physics models.
We can maximize entropy in the space of random walks (transition probabilities) instead, getting Maximal Entropy Random Walk (MERW) - and diffusion models based on it.
While it has similar local behavior as standard random walk (GRW), it can have very different global behavior for nonhomogeneous space - for example here are densities after 10, 100, 1000 steps in a defected lattice: all nodes but the defects (squares) have additional self-loop (edge to itself):

Image

It turns out that MERW leads to exactly the same stationary probability distribution as QM: squares of coordinates of the dominant eigenvector of adjacency matrix, which corresponds to minus Hamiltonian (Bose-Hubbard in discrete case, Schrodinger in continuous limit).
So in contrast to standard diffusion, MERW-based diffusion is no longer in disagreement with thermodynamical predictions of QM, like Anderson localization for semi-conductor.

Basically MERW is uniform probability distribution among paths - becomes Boltzmann distribution when adding potential.
This is very similar to euclidean path integrals - the differences are:
- motivation - here we just repair diffusion, path internals are "Wick rotation" of QM to imaginary time,
- normalization - path integral propagator is not yet stochastic,
- here we start with better understood: discrete system, with continuous in path integrals.

It also brings a natural intuition for the Born rules: squares relating amplitudes and probabilities.
So we ask about probability in fixed time cut of ensemble of infinite paths.
Amplitudes corresponds to probability at the end of half-paths: toward past, or alternatively toward the future (and they are equal).
To get a given random value, we need to get it from both half-paths, so the probability is multiplication of both amplitudes:

Image

Materials about MERW:
Our PRL paper: http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v102/i16/e160602
My PhD thesis: http://www.fais.uj.edu.pl/documents/416 ... 74256fd065
Slides: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/124 ... ERWsem.pdf
Mathematica conductance simulator: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/124 ... uctance.nb

Are we restricted to see electrons from quantum perspective here - as waves?
Can we ask about flow of electrons - transition probabilities, diffusion models?
Is MERW the proper way for quantum corrections of diffusion models?
Beside semiconductor, in what other situations (like molecular dynamics) such corrections seem crucial?
Jarek
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:57 am

Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 73 guests

cron
CodeCogs - An Open Source Scientific Library