Efficiently Solving Large Equation Systems in Particle Penetration Calculations

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nille40
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Systems
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a complex system of equations related to the probability of a particle penetrating a potential well, as described by quantum mechanics. Participants explore methods for handling large equation systems, specifically in the context of Schrödinger's time-independent equation and its implications for particle behavior at potential barriers.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant, Nille, presents a system of equations with four unknowns (R, T, A, B) and expresses difficulty in managing the complexity of the equations.
  • Another participant suggests that if the parameters m, k, a, and b are known, the system can be simplified to solve for A and B in terms of R or T, and then use those to find R and T.
  • Nille clarifies that k and m are derived from Schrödinger's equation, while a and b define the limits of the potential barrier.
  • A later reply raises concerns about the normalization of the incident wave and proposes adding a fifth equation related to the conservation of probability.
  • Another participant suggests that only three equations are necessary, emphasizing that probabilities must remain less than one and hinting at the independence of probabilities across different mediums.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the necessity of complex plane considerations, suggesting that simplifying the approach might be beneficial.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the number of equations needed and the importance of normalization in the context of the problem. There is no consensus on the best approach to solve the equation system, and multiple competing views remain regarding the handling of probabilities and the equations involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential limitations in the normalization of the incident wave and the complexity of the equations, which may affect the ability to solve the system effectively. The discussion highlights the dependence on specific definitions and assumptions related to the physical scenario.

nille40
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Hi!
I'm trying to calculate the probability for a particle to penetrate a potential well. The problem is that to calculate this, one must solve an equation system that becomes to big. I tried solving it using a matrix and inverting that, but half way, the matrix didn't even fit on my computer screen...

These are the equations:

[tex]e^{ika} + Re^{-ika} = Ae^{ima} + Be^{-ima}[/tex]
[tex]Te^{ikb} = Ae^{imb} + Be^{-imb}[/tex]
[tex]ke^{ika} - Rkae^{-ika} = mAe^{ima} - mBe^{-ima}[/tex]
[tex]kTe^{ikb} = imAe^{imb} - mBe^{-imb}[/tex]

I tried substituting some common parts, but that didn't help much. How can I solve this? What method should I use?

Thanks in advance,
Nille
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by nille40
[tex]e^{ika} + Re^{-ika} = Ae^{ima} + Be^{-ima}[/tex]
[tex]Te^{ikb} = Ae^{imb} + Be^{-imb}[/tex]
[tex]ke^{ika} - Rkae^{-ika} = mAe^{ima} - mBe^{-ima}[/tex]
[tex]kTe^{ikb} = imAe^{imb} - mBe^{-imb}[/tex]
I'm counting eight unkowns and only 4 equations. Are the m, k, a, and b given? If so, then this system is straightforward: just use either the first and third or second and last equations to solve for A and B in terms of either R or T. Then, use this expression in the remaining two equations to solve for R and T.

I'm not so sure I understand the physical situation here. Are you approximating the wavefunction in a momentum eigenstate that has a positive energy with respect to the potential at infinity?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for responding!
There are 4 unknowns.

k and m is given by a differential equation (schrödingers time independent equation)

a and b are limits for a barrier (start and end).

What I need is R, T, A and B.
Generally, it is not very hard to solve a system of 4 equations. The problem with this one is that the expressions become to big to handle.

The physical aspect of this problem is to calculate the probability for a particle to pass through a barrier (a potential well). There's a probability to find the particle before the barrier, given by Schrödingers time independent equation:

[tex]\psi (x) = e^{ikx} + R e^{-ikx}[/tex] (incoming and reflected wave)

There's a probability to find the particle in the barrier, given by [tex]\psi (x) = Ae^{ikx} + Be^{-ikx}[/tex]

And there's a probability to find the particle after the barrier, given by

[tex]\psi (x) = Te^{ikx}[/tex] (One direction only).

These three functions should be connected in x=a and x=b, so it gives a continginous function. This gives 2 equations. 2 more equations can be derived, giving 4 functions and 4 unknowns - an equation system.

So the variables that should be calculated are R, T, A and B, where [tex]|T|^2[/tex] is the probability for the particle to penetrate the barrier.

It shouldn't be that hard to solve this, but I haven't done equation systems for a while. I would really appreciate some help...

Thanks in advance,
Nille
 
OK, what I said in my previous post should solve the equation, but there seems to be something missing. I am suspicious that the incident wave is not properly normalized. Shouldn't you leave the coefficient of the incident part arbitrary at this point, and then include a fifth equation:

|I|2 = |R|2 + |T|2?

I don't remember this problem exactly, and could certainly be wrong about this, so please don't take this the wrong way. I just don't want you to do the work for nothing.
 
YOu only need those three equations.

such that each is < 1, (for probability)

remember... different mediums gives you independent probs and you can say (prob1)*(prob2)*Prob3 gives you total probability (5th equation)

such that total prob < 1

through out the complex plane, sum of forces (from physics) (its all decaying or reverse anyway, regardless of the incendent angle, remember... i haven't done the problem.

through out e, maybe use 2.5 or something -to see if the computer is messing you up.
 
I'd hate tot take to prob eq form you , but if yo can figure out how to thorw th complex plane away, it's probably all you need.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K