- #1
tim_lou
- 682
- 1
looking at the quantum mechanical harmonic oscillator, one has the differential equation in the form:
[tex]\frac{d^2\psi}{du^2}+(\alpha-u^2)\psi=0[/tex]
when a person who doesn't know any physics sees the equation, he will try a serial solution for psi, and he will find a solution with some recursive relations on the coefficients.
letting psi be
[tex]\sum_i a_i y^i[/tex]
one gets the recursive relations:
[tex]a_{i+2}=\frac{\alpha a_i-a_{i-2}}{(i+2)(i+1)}[/tex]
but this gets no where near the usual solutions we want in physics.
When the solution method is presented in a physics book, one sees the tag
"trying a solution in the form"
[tex]f(x)e^{-y^2}[/tex]
and get another second order differential equations. At first glance, it seems that nothing is gained using this substitution, but it turns out that the series must terminated if psi is to vanishes at both infinities and we get a nice family of solutions (in closed forms too).
What exactly is the motivation behind this? is this just a elegant guess? or is there some general mathematical theory dealing with equations like these (with vanishing psi at both infinities)?
I just would like to get more information on this matter... and perhaps someone can explain how the first method fail and if anything can be done to patch things up so that the first method yield the same result with the substitution method.
[tex]\frac{d^2\psi}{du^2}+(\alpha-u^2)\psi=0[/tex]
when a person who doesn't know any physics sees the equation, he will try a serial solution for psi, and he will find a solution with some recursive relations on the coefficients.
letting psi be
[tex]\sum_i a_i y^i[/tex]
one gets the recursive relations:
[tex]a_{i+2}=\frac{\alpha a_i-a_{i-2}}{(i+2)(i+1)}[/tex]
but this gets no where near the usual solutions we want in physics.
When the solution method is presented in a physics book, one sees the tag
"trying a solution in the form"
[tex]f(x)e^{-y^2}[/tex]
and get another second order differential equations. At first glance, it seems that nothing is gained using this substitution, but it turns out that the series must terminated if psi is to vanishes at both infinities and we get a nice family of solutions (in closed forms too).
What exactly is the motivation behind this? is this just a elegant guess? or is there some general mathematical theory dealing with equations like these (with vanishing psi at both infinities)?
I just would like to get more information on this matter... and perhaps someone can explain how the first method fail and if anything can be done to patch things up so that the first method yield the same result with the substitution method.