A Modified Formal Theory on Semi-Relativistic Effects during Electron Emission from Metallic Surfaces upon the Impact of High Energy Particles

In this paper we introduce a formal theory on unveiling relativistic effects during electron emission from clean metallic surfaces upon high charged particle impact using a Jellium-type wave function including suitable spinors. In addition image charge final state electron surface interactions have been initiated in the relativistic region as well as the scattering of the projectile from the multi-center bulk potential. Finally, a semi-relativistic condition is considered in place of the ionization mechanism of scattering from an aluminium semi-infinite solid target by non-relativistic electrons to determine multiple differential cross-section.

• Ionization; Cross-Section; Relativistic; Electron; Scattering

1. Introduction

In the last three decades significant progress has been made in understanding the atomic physics of electronatom ionization both theoretically and experimentally for relativistic energies [1-14] as well as for non-relativistic energies [15-26]. Capabilities of different theoretical models in reproducing various features of experimental results have been widely tested for different kinematical conditions. Study of energy spectrum of ejected electrons could be very interesting. The complexity of this reaction is already revealed in the simplest case of low-energy electron impact ionization of atomic hydrogen where final state interactions of escaping particles strongly modify the observed electron spectra [16,21]. Hence a realistic approximate eigenfunction of the non-separable three body Hamiltonian is essential. Generally, a theoretical description of this process from solid targets has to deal with various aspects of the beam-solids interactions. A relativistic charge particle impinging on a metallic target, which is the study of this work, leads to charge-density fluctuation of the solid. Asymptotically, this causes an image-charge distribution of the incoming and outgoing particles [22]. Moreover, the motion of the various electrons is periodically distributed by the interaction with the bulk potential [24,25]. The aim of this paper is to investigate the energy spectrum of electron ejection from clean metalic surfaces upon higher charged particle impact for relativistic energies [10,12,23]. The present study of the formal theory is the assumption that the degrees of freedom of the projectile can be decoupled from those of the target. This is justified, since we assumed the momenta of the incoming and outgoing electron to be considerably larger than the Fermi momentum. To obtain the analytical theory that can be analyzed, a Jellium wave function [23] with suitable spinors [12] of the initially bound electron is assumed. Asymptotic image-charge distribution of the Vacuum electron is taken into account. As well as the binary collision of the projectile with the bound electron, the scattering of the incident particle from the multicenter bulk potential is treated in the kinematic approximation [25,26]. A screened Coulomb muffin-tin bulk potential is adopted. Recently using the multiple scattering theory [17] multiplied with some spinors has calculated the energy spectrum of scattered electrons in k-shell ionization of medium heavy atoms by relativistic electrons [10-12] which agree nicely with experiments. In the present study we developed the theory of relativistic scattering mechanism process using a Jellium wave function [23] of the undistributed surface in the initial state. In addition, image-charge final state electron surface interactions have been included. Moreover, the scattering of the projectile from the multicentre bulk potential is considered. The proposed theory will provide scattering cross-sections results of different kinematical conditions. Hence we introduced a modified theory on semi-relativistic effects during electron emission from aluminium surfaces upon the impact of high energy particles.

2. Theory

In this theory, we consider an atomic scattering system consisting of a projectile with nuclear change and mass being inelastically scattered from a clean metallic semi-infinite solid ejecting one electron into the vacuum level of the solid. Then the total Hamiltonian of the projectile-solid system is

where is the Hamiltonian of the simi-infinite solid in the absence of the projectile, W_pe is the projectileejected electron interaction, and H_p represents the projectile-crystal interaction and contains the plasmon and phonon modes and their interaction with electron. The initial and final state boundary conditions are specified by eigenstates of asymptotically unperturbed initial and final channel Hamiltonian and respectively, i.e.,

where are the corresponding asymptotic eigen energies. The transition amplitude T for the scattering system from initial state, to the final state is determined by the prior form

or the post form

where and are the eigensates of the total Hamiltonian H according to the state and respectively. From Equations (4) and (5) the perturbations potential and are given by

The eigenstates of H can be written as

where the MØller wave operator is given by

where is the Green operator of the total Hamiltonian H. Combining Equations (9), (8) and (4), the T matrix element may be written as

where

Here assuming to be a multiple-center potential, the first term of Equation (10), that is describes the transition of the system from state to due to a single scattering from each individual scattering center. One center and multicenter multiple scattering is contained in the matrix element in Equations (10) and (12), since the Lippmann-Schwinger equation of the total Green operator leads to the expansion

where and V are the full free propagator and the total potential of the projectile-solid compound. It should be noted here that the labels and of the amplitudes and refer to single and multiple scattering specifically from the potential. The potential in the initial channel can be written as

The operator stands for the particle-bulk interaction and its explicit functional form is specified below. The potential is less prominent. Since it is an asymptotic (imagine charge) perturbation. For the asymptotic final-channel Hamiltonian [23] is given by

Here the kinetic-energy operator of the secondary electron is referred to by, whereas amounts to the asymptotic final state interaction of this electron with semi-infinite solid. The choice Equation (15) leads to the final-channel distribution operator

where denotes the short-range interaction of the secondary electron with the surface. Upon substitution of Equation (14) into Equation (11), the matrix element can be decomposed into the form

where

The amplitudes, given by Equations (18) and (19), provide the first-order approximation of the matrix element T. The term in Equation (20) is less prominent since is an asymptotic (image charge) perturbation. Hence it has no significant contribution to the term. So, the amplitude, given by Equation (20) is neglected here.

2.1. Analytical Calculation of the Transition Amplitude Term in Relativistic Effects

In a position-space representation the transition operator occurring in the Equation (18) has the form

where and are the position vectors of the projectile and ionized electron respectively. Also is time structure constant and (effective nuclear charge) = Nuclearcharge − 0.3. To avoid difficulties arising from the infinite range of coulomb interactions we introduce the cutoff potential [23]

The eigenfunction of of Equation (15) at a given asymptotic energy [23] is readily deduced in semirelativistic form [1,12] as

In addition the Jelliun wave function [23] can be expressed in terms of reflection and transmission coefficient may be written as in semi-relativistic form [1,12] as

Here and are the spin co-ordinates in the initial and the final states of the electrons. and are the momenta and energies of the final two electrons and are the momentum and energy of the incident electron. Here and are the Dirac spinors of the atomic electrons and the incident electron. Also and represent the Dirac spinors of scattered and ejected electron. In the Equation (23) the term is the phase modification of the asymptotically free electron motion due to its image charge where and the Sommerfeld parameter indicates the strength of this interaction. In case, we end up with the final state being a product of the two free-particles states. The final state energy is given by. The refection and transmission coefficient R and T are given by

and

In the present case, the transition amplitude term may be written as in semi-relativistic integral form [23] as

Therefore

where

and

Upon replacing the logarithmic phase in Equation (29) by its integral representation, given by

where, and. Then performing the integral over the projectile co-ordinates, Equation (29) simplifies to

where

In Equation (33) we introduced the complex vector. Using the theory [23], we have

where the vector is given by. By the Fourier transform evaluates to

Now after inserting the Equation (35) into a Equation (32), the remaining one dimensional integral can be algebraically transformed to the Beta function integral representation

give

The functions are given by

where

Making use Equation (36) and after calculation, the final expression

2.2. Analytical Calculation of the Transition Amplitude Term in Relativistic Effects

In this case the transition amplitude term of the Equation (19), the screened Coulomb potential [26] for relativistic case is given by

The effective parameter account for the screaming of the pure ionic field due to the presence of the localized positive cores as well as delocalized electrons [26]. For aluminum surface the numerical value of is 0.886. Equation (19) can be written as in semi-relativistic form

Here

where is the ionic core potential at the state, N is the number of ions in the solid and is periodic in each layer parallel to the x − y plane, but not in zdirections. The j-th ion in the layer has the coordinates. Thus the periodic potential at the position can be written as

Since is periodic in the x and y directions, we can introduce [26] two dimensional reciprocal vectors and write at the position as

The two dimensional Fourier transform is given by

where. The lattice constants in the x, y and z directions are, and respectively.

Using Equations (23), (24) and (42) the final expression for may be written as in the semi-relativistic form

where

with

In case we obtain for,

whereas if the following relation is valid:

Also, the expression for may be written as

The function, we have been defined as

where, and. Since is an asymptotic (image charge ) perturbation, so the term is neglected here. Therefore the expression for the -matrix element may be written as in semi-relativistic form

where

Now taking sum over final spin states and an average over initial states

Now the spin sums can be obtained

So, we obtain from Equation (56),

where and are the real and imaginary parts of the matrix element.

Finally, the differential cross-section [23] for - matrix in semi-relativistic form is given by

where, also and are the solid angles of the emitted electron and scattered projectile respectively.

This is the modified formal theory on semi-relativistic effects during electron emission from metallic surfaces upon impact of high energy particles to determine differential cross-section of different kinematic conditions.

3. Concluding Remarks

A theoretical formulation of scattering cross-section of high energy change particles from clean metallic semiinfinite solid in the relativistic region has presented single scattering amplitude term [23]. In this theory, for multiply differential cross-sections, we used a semi-relativistic Jellium initial state wave function. A relativistic final state electron surface image charge interaction has been included in its asymptotic form. We will utilize another multiple scattering term [23] which can provide better results for cross-section. Such analytical calculation and numerical results are in progress and will be reported in the next work.

4. Acknowledgements

Part of this work was done when one of the authors (SD) was the DAAD Fellow at the institute of Physics, Martin-Luther University, Halle, Germany under Prof. Jamal Berakdar. This work also partially supported by Higher Education Quality Enhancement Program (HEQEP) of World Bank.

References

1. J. N. Das, “Differential Cross-Section for the Inner-Shell Ionization of Medium-Heavy Atoms by the Electrons,” Il Nuovo Cimento B, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1972, pp. 197-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02822628

2. J. N. Das and S. Chakraborthy, “Atomic Inner-Shell Ionization,” Physical Review A, Vol. 32, No. 1, 1985, pp. 176-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.32.176

3. D. H. Jakubassa-Amundsen, “A Systematic Study of Re- lativistic (e, 2e) Collisions in Comparison with Experiment,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Op- tical Physics, Vol. 25, No. 6, 1992, p. 1297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0953-4075/25/6/020

4. X. Zhang, C. T. Whelan and H. R. J. Walters, “Local Supersymmetry for Spinning Particles,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 64, No. 4, 1976, pp. 435-438. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(76)90115-5

5. Allan, P. Bickert and W. Hink, “(e, 2e) Cross Sections for Inner-Shell Ionization of Argon and Neon,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Vol. 25, No. 20, 1992, p. 4325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0953-4075/25/20/025

6. S. Kellir, R. M. Dreizler. L. U. Ancarni and H. R. J. Walfers, Z. Phys. D, Vol. 37, 1996, p. 191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s004600050028

7. E. Schüle and W. Nakel, “Triply-Differential Cross Section for K-Shell Ionisation Of silver by Relativistic Electron Impact,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Vol. 15, No. 17, 1982, p. L639. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0022-3700/15/17/013

8. H. Ruoff and W. Nakel, “Absolute Triply Differential Cross Section for K-Shell Ionisation by Relativistic Electron Impact for High Atomic Number,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Vol. 20, No. 10, 1987, p. 2299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0022-3700/20/10/022

9. J. Bonfert, H. Graf and W. Nakel, “Relativistic (e,2e) Processes on Atomic Inner Shells,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Vol. 24, No. 6, 1991, p. 1423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0953-4075/24/6/026

10. J. N. Das and S. Dhar, “Energy Spectrum of Scattered Electrons in K-Shell Ionization of Medium to Heavy Atoms by Relativistic Electrons,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Vol. 31, No. 10, 1998, p. 2355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0953-4075/31/10/021

11. S. Dhar and M. R. Alam, “Computation of Triple Differential Cross-Sections with the Inclusion of Exchange Effects in Atomic K-Shell Ionization by Relativistic Electrons for Symmetric Geometry,” Pramana, Vol. 69, No. 3, 2007, p. 387. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12043-007-0140-3

12. S. Dhar, “The Energy Spectrum of Scattered Particles in the K-Shell Ionization of Medium Heavy Atoms by Relativistic Electrons and Positrons with Exchange Effects,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Vol. 41, No. 15, 2008, p. 155204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0953-4075/41/15/155204

13. I. E. Mc Carthy and E. Weigold, “Electron Momentum Spectroscopy of Atoms and Molecules,” Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 54, No. 6, 1991, p. 789. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/54/6/001

14. H. Ehrhardt, K. Jung, G. Knoth and P. Schlemmer, “Dif- ferential Cross Sections of Direct Single Electron Impact Ionization,” Zeitschrift für Physik D Atoms, Molecules and Clusters, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1986, pp. 3-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01384654

15. F. W. Byron Jr. and C. J. Joachain, “Theory of (e, 2e) Reactions,” Physics Reports, Vol. 179, No. 4, 1989, pp. 211-272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-1573(89)90158-0

16. C. T. Whelan, R. J. Allan, J. Rasch, H. R. J. Walters, X. Zhang, J. Roder, K. Jung and H. Ehrhardt, “Coulomb three-Body Effects in (e,2e) Collisions: The Ionization of H in Coplanar Symmetric Geometry,” Physical Review A, Vol. 50, No. 5, 1994, pp. 4394-4396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.50.4394

17. J. N. Das and S. Seal, “Electron-Hydrogenatom Ioniza- tion Collisions at Intermediate (5I0-20I0) and High (≥20I0) Energies,” Physical Review A, Vol. 47, No. 4, 1993, pp. 2978-2986. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.47.2978

18. J. N. Das and S. Seal, Australian Journal of Physics, Vol. 47, 1994, p. 99.

19. Sunil Dhar, “Electron Impact Ionisation of Metastable 2s-state Hydrogen Atoms,” Australian Journal of Physics, Vol. 47, No. 5, 1994, pp. 937-944. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/PH960937

20. J. N.Das and S. Dhar, “Energy Spectrum of Ejected Electrons in Ionization of Hydrogen Atoms by Electrons,” Pramana, Vol. 53, No. 5, 1999, pp. 869-875. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12043-999-0121-9

21. J. Berakdar, J. Roder, J. S. Brggs and H. Ehrhardt, “The Effect of Target Atom Polarization and Wavefunction Distortion in (e - 2e) Ionization of Hydrogen,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Vol. 29, No. 9, 1996, p. 1767. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0953-4075/29/9/021

22. P. J. Jenning, R. O. Jones, and M. Weinert, “Surface Barrier for Electrons in Metals,” Physical Review B, Vol. 37, No. 11, 1988, pp. 6113-6120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.37.6113

23. J. Berakdar and M. P. Das, “Electron Ejection from Clean Metallic Surfaces upon Charged Particle Impact,” Physical Review A, Vol. 56, No. 2, 1997, pp. 1403-1413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.56.1403

24. C. B. Duke, “Advances in Chemical Physies,” Wiley, New York, 1974.

25. J. B. Pendry, “Low Energy Electron Diffraction,” Academic, London, 1974.

26. U. Thumm and J. S. Briggs, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B, Vol. 43, 1989, p. 471.