Scientists Learn How Electrons Crystallize

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Image: M. BONITZ, University of Rostock

To the list of intriguing structures that physicists hope to soon make in the lab, add Wigner crystals¿strange bull's-eye patterns formed only from electrons. Theorists have predicted that squeezing a handful of electrons in a liquid state might force them to crystallize in this way, the lowest energy configuration possible, since the 1930s. But only indirect evidence over the years supported the idea. Now scientists from Germany have developed a new model of Wigner crystals, which suggests not only how they might be created but how they might behave as well.

Michael Bonitz of the University of Rostock and his colleagues describe their work in today's issue of the Physical Review Letters (PRL 86, 3851). Part of the difficulty their new model had to overcome was accounting for both the Coulomb repulsion between electrons and quantum forces that rule over Wigner crystals. Once in place, the group used the model to analyze random electron arrangements, narrowing the results down to those with the lowest possible energy. To determine the exact conditions under which Wigner crystals form, they repeated the analysis at various temperatures and pressures.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


They discovered that Wigner crystals form when the electrons are tightly compressed in a plane (see top image). Squeeze them too tightly, however, and the crystal will dissolve into a so-called quantum liquid as the electron wave functions begin to overlap (see bottom image). Another bit of advice they offer to would-be Wigner crystal makers: the stability of the crystals depends heavily on the number of electrons they contain.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe