Solving Liboff 5.33: Showing <E> \geq E_1 and Condition on \psi(x)

  • Thread starter Thread starter quasar987
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Condition
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem from Liboff regarding a particle in an infinite one-dimensional well, specifically addressing the average energy and conditions on the wave function \psi(x). Participants explore the implications of the wave function's composition on energy values and the conditions under which equals the ground state energy E_1.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the relationship between the wave function \psi(x) and the energy eigenvalues, questioning whether the energy of a superposition of states is simply the sum of the individual energies. Some express uncertainty about the implications of using a linear combination of eigenstates.

Discussion Status

There is an active exploration of the mathematical relationships involved, with some participants providing insights into the average energy calculation and the implications of using non-eigenstate wave functions. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being examined, particularly regarding the energy contributions from different states.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential confusion regarding notation and the formalism used in quantum mechanics, indicating varying levels of familiarity with the concepts being discussed.

quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
32
There's this question ngyah (Liboff 5.33) that says

"We consider a particle in an infinite 1-dimensional well. The particle is described by an arbitrary wave function [itex]\psi(x)[/itex]. (a) For this particle, show that [itex]<E> \geq E_1[/itex]. (b) What is the condition on [itex]\psi(x)[/itex] such that [itex]<E> = E_1[/itex]?"

My solution: First of all, I'm assuming that by <E> he means <H>. But <H> = E. And E is the energy associated with the superposition of the sine waves that make up [itex]\psi(x)[/itex]. So

[tex]E = \sum_{i=1}^{\infty}c_i E_i[/tex]

where the c_i are either 1 or 0 depending on wheter or not [itex]\psi_i(x) = sin(k_ix)[/itex] is present in the Fourier expansion of [itex]\psi(x)[/itex]. This said, if [itex]\psi_1(x)[/itex] is in the expansion of [itex]\psi(x)[/itex], then [itex]E = E_1 +... \geq E_1[/itex]. If not, then [itex]E = 0\cdot E_1 + ... + 1\cdot E_j +... \geq E_1[/itex].

And for (b), the condition on psi is that psi be exactly psi_1.

That looks pretty neat to me. The only point I'm unsure of is wheter or not, it is true that the energy of a psi made up of a linear combination of other psi_i is the sum of the energy of the psi_i. Actually, this seems FALSE to me. For suppose psi_1 and psi_2 are solution of the time ind. SE with respective energy eigenvalues E_1 and E_2. Then let's see if psi = psi_1 + psi_2 is a solution with eigenvalue E_1 + E_2.

[tex](E_1+E_2)\psi = (E_1+E_2)(\psi_1 + \psi_2) = E_1\psi_1 + E_2\psi_2 + E_1\psi_2 + E_2\psi_1 = H\psi_1 + H\psi_2 + E_1\psi_2 + E_2\psi_1 = H\psi + E_1\psi_2 + E_2\psi_1 \neq H\psi[/tex]

So the energy of psi_1 + psi_2 is not E_1 +E_2. Correct? :frown: Hopefully I'm missing something.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Arg, it's assuredly wrong, for any function that requires an infinity of sine waves to be constructed will have an infinite energy. :frown:
 
quasar987 said:
Arg, it's assuredly wrong, for any function that requires an infinity of sine waves to be constructed will have an infinite energy. :frown:

Yes. If you have a wave function that is not an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, it's energy is not a precise number. What the instructor was asking for was <H>, which means the average of the energy.

If c_n are the (complex) amount of \psi_n that you have to use to make up your (normalized) wave function \psi = \sum \psi_n, then


[tex]\langle E \rangle = \langle \psi |E| \psi \rangle[/tex]
[tex]= \sum_n \sum_m c_n^* c_m \langle E_n| H |E_m\rangle[/tex]
[tex]= \sum_n \sum_m c_n^* c_m E_m \langle E_n | E_m\rangle[/tex]
[tex]= \sum_n \sum_m c_n^* c_m E_m \delta_n^m[/tex]
[tex]= \sum_n c_n^* c_n E_n[/tex]
[tex]= \sum_n |c_n|^2 E_n < \infty[/tex]

Since [tex]\sum_n |c_n|^2 = 1[/tex], you can see that the maximum that <E> could be would be the highest of the E_n, which is less than infinity.

Hope this helps.

Carl
 
I'm not used to the notation you used. What is <psi|E|psi> ?
 
quasar987 said:
I'm not used to the notation you used. What is <psi|E|psi> ?

I don't know what book you're being taught out of, but here goes:

[tex]\psi(x) = \langle x|\psi\rangle[/tex]

That is, [tex]|\psi\rangle[/tex] is just the ket associated with the state [tex]\psi[/tex].

It could be that in your book / class, they haven't covered the bra-ket formalism yet. In that case,

[tex]\langle \psi | M| \psi \rangle = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \psi^*(x) M \psi(x) dx[/tex]

for wave functions in one dimension. In the above, M is an operator.

Did this help?

Carl
 
CarlB said:
It could be that in your book / class, they haven't covered the bra-ket formalism yet. In that case,

[tex]\langle \psi | M| \psi \rangle = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \psi^*(x) M \psi(x) dx[/tex]
Now we're talking the same language! :biggrin:
 
Your way seems kinda complicated CarlB with double sums and stuff. Here's mine..

[tex]<E> = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}E_n|c_n|^2[/tex]
[tex]<E> = E_1|c_1|^2 + E_2|c_2|^2+... \geq E_1|c_1|^2+E_1|c_2|^2+... = E_1 \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|c_n|^2 = E_1[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K