Question 3. What is meant by kinematical and dynamical approach to diffraction.

Explain in detail the effects in a diffraction pattern due to dynamical diffraction. Kinematical theory assumes that there is no multiple events and constructive or destructive interference along the optical axis(on the electron propagation direction) inside the specimen. Therefore, it evaluates the diffracted beams at the bottom of specimen (exiting surface) as theyre all at same amplititude. So, when we look at the a diffraction pattern or a TEM image, according to kinematical theory we should see only one type of intensity.
In scattering physics, kinematical word is used to refer single events and dynamical word is used to refer multiple interactions[1] .In kinematical theory, diffracted intensity comes from repetitive spherical wavelets(which is like a characteristic part of a wave which increases from zero and decreases to zero amplititude). For very thin specimens(less then 0.1 g), it is mentioned that kinematical theory is giving more reliable results in comparison to two-beam dynamical theory [2]. In case of x-ray diffraction, kinematical theory can be used since x-rays have much less scattering then electrons. But in electron scattering, kinematical theory may have true approach roughly below 100 atom thickness. In the specimens which are thicker than 100 atoms, dynamical theory comes into play through lots of scattering and multiple diffraction events. [3]

Dynamical theory is an approach that aims to take all beam-lattice interactions into account. In the practice, it is inevitable to have multiple scattering and interference effect on the diffracted beam. It is assumed that diffraction is centrosymmetric and medium is non-absorbing(elastic scattering).
Unlike the kinematical theory, intensity is various at DPs and TEM images. Dynamical theory says that incident beam and diffracted beam or seperately diffracted beams interfere each other. When they interfere, their amplititude is changing from maximum value to minimum value as in the form that back and forth. Thus, in the regions which have different thickness, amplititude from the bottom surface of specimen will be different as we mentioned above. So, this amplititude difference brings the intensity range in the images/DPs. Total wave function is formulated according to Howie-Whelan equations; [4] Here, 0 means amplititude of transmitted beam and Qg s are meaning that amplititude of diffracted beams from g1...gn reciprocal points. Following equation says amplititude of beam also depends on the excitation error s and extinction distance, s.

Following figures are showing the physical meaning of extinction distance and excitation error geometry.

Excitation error (s) is a magnit de of deviation from the exact Laue condition (s=0) in which the intensity is highest at DP. In the images and DPs, according to dynamical theory, there should be an intensity gradient. Thickness fringes are also shown in the same manner. Picture in the below shows very well the concepts are related to kinematical and dynamical theories.

Figure. Effective extinction distance, effg s1eff , and intensities of transmitted and diffracted beams for a two-beam condition in a thick crystal.[6]

Figure. (A) CBED pattern under kinematical conditions. Such patterns give us no more information than SADPs, and their only advantage over SAD is that they come from a smaller region of the sample. (B) CBED pattern from a thicker area of the same specimen in (A) showing detailed dynamical-contrast phenomena. [7]

Fi

Geomet for rel ti t e diffraction error to kx. (a) When s = 0, and (b) after rotating k0 by the angle + so s < 0 [5] .

Figure.(a) The mean intensity distribution of the transmitted (BF, I0) and diffracted (DF, Ig ) beams with depth for a dynamical condition. ( b) Schematic diagram of a wedge-shaped defect-free specimen and the positions of the thickness fringes in the image. (c,d) BF and DF dynamical images of the same area of a wedge -shaped Al foil showing dislocations and thickness fringes. ( e) The intensity distribution versus depth for the transmitted and diffracted beams in a kinematical condition. ( f,g) BF and DF kinematical images of the same area as c, d, showing dislocations but with only faint thickness fringes in BF. [8]

Question 2. What is meant by extinction distance ? Explain in detail.

It is a concept that tells us about amplititude restriction of a diffracted beam. Its a characteristic length that diffracted beam can log inside the specimen from a minimum (which is zero in respect to interference with directly transmitted beam) to maximum amplititude. In fixed circumstances, this length does not change for the diffraction planes. As we can see in the following formulation, extinction distance is a function of atomic packing factor (through scatteri g factor), acceleration n voltage(through wavelength) and the reflection from material.

[9] Following formulation says that diffraction intensity is a sinusoidal function of thickness.

[10] Physical meaning of the extinction distance is formed in my perception as the following. In some certain conditions (same material, acceleration voltage and selected diffracting set of planes are same), there is a maximum value that amplititude can reach. Then it makes back and forth consecutively. To give an imaginary example, if we had two samples made of same material whose both are transparent to electrons in thickness of 200 nm and 1 km. Amplititude of the diffracted beam from both samples would not change because of the interference with multiple scattered beams and directly transmitted beam.

Sources [1 Brent Fultz, James Howe, Transmission Electron Microscobe and Diffractometry of Materials,3th Edition, page:646 [2] Brent Fultz, James Howe, Transmission Electron Microscobe and Diffractometry of Materials,3th Edition, page,page:655 [3]http://www.ap.cityu.edu.hk/personal-website/Van-Hove_files/pubs/395-ElDiffrReview-EncyclPhys(2005).pdf [4] David B. Williams,C. Barry Carter,Transmission Electron Microscopy:A Textbook for Materials Science, page:224 [5] Brent Fultz, James Howe, Transmission Electron Microscobe and Diffractometry of Materials,3th Edition, page,page:617 [6] Brent Fultz, James Howe, Transmission Electron Microscobe and Diffractometry of Materials,3th Edition, page:344 [7] David B. Williams,C. Barry Carter,Transmission Electron Microscopy:A Textbook for Materials Science, page:330 [8] Brent Fultz, James Howe, Transmission Electron Microscobe and Diffractometry of Materials,3th Edition, page,page:351 [9] Brent Fultz, James Howe, Transmission Electron Microscobe and Diffractometry of Materials,3th Edition, page,page:343 [10] Brent Fultz, James Howe, Transmission Electron Microscobe and Diffractometry of Materials,3th Edition, page,page:342