Dear Adel
Many thanks for your informative reply.
Now I think I have resolved the problem here. The result kwant
obtained is correct.
One thing is that for odd L, the transmission is always unity, not
extinction.
This quite counter-intuitive. As even the hopping is
Dear Joe,
Many thanks for your reply.
After replacing all the manually given hoppings by lat.neighbors()
method, I still obtain the same result. Also, the system is plotted for the
length L of even and odd numbers, which gives corrected tight-binding
system.
So I think as
Dear Liu,
I think that there is no problem in your result. It is the expected
physical result!
This behaviour is due to the fact that you are near the middle of the
conduction band.
To see it better, put the energy exactly =0. you will find that the
conductance is zero for odd numbers and
Dear Liu,
> I have met a strange problem in computing conductance of 1D
> quantum wire.
> The setup is as follows:
> The hopping of the quantum wire is given by the first kind of
> Bessel function, for example, J0(A).
> The coupling of the lead is set as 1.
> As we
Dear All,
I have met a strange problem in computing conductance of 1D quantum
wire.
The setup is as follows:
The hopping of the quantum wire is given by the first kind of Bessel
function, for example, J0(A).
The coupling of the lead is set as 1.
As we know in this
Hi Rafal and Joseph,
Thank you for your replies.
“Tight binding” can have multiple meanings in this context, so I could use a
little clarification.
The dispersion that I showed is already a tight-binding model in the sense that
the spin
