In Steven Simons The oxford Sold state basics, the Nearly free electron model is tackled by treated the weak periodic potential as a perturbation to the free electron model. That is, the full hamiltonian is of the form $$H=H_0+V(\vec{r})$$ where $H_0=\frac{\hat{p}^2}{2m}$ and $V(\vec{r})=V(\vec{r}+\vec{R})$ where $\vec{R}$ is any direct lattice vector. The eigenstates of the unperturbed free electron hamiltonian are simply plane waves of the form $|\vec{k}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{L^3}}e^{i\vec{k}\cdot \vec{r}}$ where $\vec{k}$ satisfies the BVK boundary conditions and $L^3$ is the volume of the entire crystal. Now to use perturbation theory, we must determine the matrix elements of $V(\vec{r})$ in the unperturbed basis. The elements are of the form (I am omitting the vector over-bars in my notation for brevity) : $$\langle k'|V|k\rangle =\frac{1}{L^3}\int e^{-i(k'-k)\cdot r}\,\,V(r)\,d^3r \tag{1}$$ Now my first question is whether this integral is over a single unit cell within the crystal or if its over the entire crystal volume? Steven Simons then goes on to say that this integral is zero unless $\vec{k'}-\vec{k}$ is a reciprocal lattice vector. Why is this the case though? I realize that because of the periodicity of $V$, its fourier coefficients are of the form $$V_G=\frac{1}{V_{cell}}\int_{cell}e^{-i\vec{G} \cdot \vec{r}}V(\vec{r})d^3r \tag{2}$$ But as far as I'm aware, this does not imply that any integral of the form in eq 2 must equal to zero unless $k'-k=G$? My other issue is that he claims that the integrals in equation 1 are the fourier coefficients of $V(\vec{r})$ but they can't be because eq 1 goes over the entire crystal (?) while eq 2 integrates only over a unit cell in the lattice. So what is going on here? Why is equation to zero unless $\vec{k'}-\vec{k}$ is a reciprocal lattice vector?
Any help on this would be most appreciated!