Why Does the Upper Integration Limit Change in Quantum Mechanics Problems?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a quantum mechanics problem involving a wave function in an infinite potential well. The scenario describes a wave function initially in its second excited state, which is affected by the sudden expansion of the potential well's boundaries.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of changing the upper limit of integration in the context of probability calculations. Questions arise regarding why the limit changes from 2a to a, with some participants suggesting that the particle is confined to the region from 0 to a after the expansion.

Discussion Status

Participants are engaged in clarifying the reasoning behind the integration limits and the behavior of the wave function after the potential well is expanded. There is acknowledgment of the initial wave function being zero outside the original boundaries, which influences the integration limits.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of potential discrepancies in the book's notation regarding the limits of integration, which may contribute to confusion among participants.

Woozie
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
By the way, this isn't a homework problem, it's self study.

Homework Statement


We're given that we have a wave function in an infinite potential well, with the well having 0 PE from 0 to a. The wave function would be described by

[tex]{\Phi}_n={\sqrt{\frac{2}{a}}Sin({\frac{n{\pi}x}{a})}[/tex]. It was given that the function is originally in it's second exicited state, meaning it's original state can be described by [tex]{\Phi}_3={\sqrt{\frac{2}{a}}Sin({\frac{3{\pi}x}{a})}[/tex]

The box is suddenly expanded, so that it's rightmost boundary is now 2a. This means the new basis vectors are of the form
[tex]|{\Theta}_n>={\sqrt{\frac{1}{a}}} Sin{\frac{n{\pi}x}{2a}})[/tex]

What the book asks is for me to find the probability of this particle being found in states n=1 and 2. I figured the probability of finding it in any given state would be [tex]<{\Theta}_n|{\Phi_3}>[/tex]
=[tex]{\int}_0^{2a}({\sqrt{\frac{1}{a}}} Sin({\frac{n{\pi}x}{2a}}))({\sqrt{\frac{2}{a}}Sin({\frac{3{\pi}x}{a})})dx[/tex]

I had no problems up to here. It's the next step in their analysis that threw me off.

[tex]={\frac{{\sqrt{2}}}{a}{\int}_0^aSin({\frac{n{\pi}x}{2a}})Sin({\frac{3{\pi}x}{a})}dx[/tex]

Looks like they simplified the equation in the exact same way that I did. The problem is that the upper limit of integration has changed from 2a to a. I've been looking at this problem for a while now and I cannot figure out why the limit of integration changes. Why is it that the upper limit of integration changes from 2a to a when all they did was simplify a few terms? Shouldn't the limit of integration still be 2a? When I do use 2a, all of the probabilities vanish, so obviously I'm wrong and the book is right. I just cannot figure out why that is the case. Why does the upper limit become a instead of 2a?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Shouldn't it be 0 to a from the beginning since that is the area the particle is confined to immediately after the walls have been expanded?
 
The integration is from 0 to 2a, but your initial wavefunction is zero for |x|>a
 
Galileo said:
The integration is from 0 to 2a, but your initial wavefunction is zero for |x|>a

Oh, thanks, I didn't forgot about that. Thank you.
 
Wait, in that case, shouldn't the equations be:

=[tex]{\int}_0^{a}({\sqrt{\frac{1}{a}}} Sin({\frac{n{\pi}x}{2a}}))({\sqrt{\frac{2}{a}}Sin({\frac{3{\pi}x}{a})})dx[/tex] ?

Because the book does in fact write this integral out with 2a as the upper limit of integration.
 
Woozie said:
Wait, in that case, shouldn't the equations be:

=[tex]{\int}_0^{a}({\sqrt{\frac{1}{a}}} Sin({\frac{n{\pi}x}{2a}}))({\sqrt{\frac{2}{a}}Sin({\frac{3{\pi}x}{a})})dx[/tex] ?

Because the book does in fact write this integral out with 2a as the upper limit of integration.

then that's a typo in the book.
 
Oh okay, thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
46
Views
4K