Crossing nodes of wavefunction

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DeShark
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nodes Wavefunction
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of probability density in quantum mechanics, specifically regarding a particle in a one-dimensional box in the n=3 state. Participants explore the implications of having zero probability density at certain positions and the nature of particle movement in stationary states.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how a particle can move across positions where the probability density is zero, indicating confusion over the implications of stationary states.
  • Another participant clarifies that in stationary states, the concept of movement differs from classical physics, suggesting that the wavefunction should not be interpreted as a classical trajectory.
  • Some participants discuss the idea of interference, with one suggesting that the zero probability density might relate to the particle's self-interference, similar to phenomena observed in the double-slit experiment.
  • A later reply challenges the notion that electrons interfere with each other in the double-slit experiment, emphasizing that interference patterns can emerge even when electrons are sent through one at a time.
  • Another participant introduces the idea that changing the potential of the well over time could affect the locations of the zeros in the wavefunction, suggesting a dynamic aspect to the probability density.
  • One participant expresses frustration, questioning whether their confusion indicates a lack of intuition for quantum mechanics, while another agrees with the sentiment that the question reflects a deeper understanding of quantum behavior.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of understanding regarding the implications of zero probability density, with some agreeing on the nature of stationary states while others remain uncertain about the interpretation of quantum behavior. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the nature of the question posed or the implications of the wavefunction.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their understanding of quantum mechanics, particularly regarding the interpretation of probability density and the behavior of particles in stationary states. There is also mention of the potential for dynamic changes in the wavefunction based on external influences.

DeShark
Messages
149
Reaction score
0
Hi all, a couple of weeks ago, I was reading a book (Eisberg and Resnick) in which one of the questions asked was:

In the n=3 state, the probability density function for a particle in a box is zero at two positions between the walls of the box. How then can the particle ever move across these positions?

Basically, the book doesn't give the answer and I don't know it. I also can't work it out, despite the past two weeks of wracking my brain over this problem. Can anyone offer a resolution? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First of all, in a stationary state, nothing "moves" in the sense of "changes".
Next, the notion of trajectory has a totally different meaning in quantum physics than it has in classical physics.

As such, you shouldn't picture a stationary state (described by the wavefunction you mention) as a kind of density of "presence" of a classical particle moving around on a certain trajectory, which is what is implicitly assumed in this question.
 
vanesch said:
First of all, in a stationary state, nothing "moves" in the sense of "changes".
Next, the notion of trajectory has a totally different meaning in quantum physics than it has in classical physics.

As such, you shouldn't picture a stationary state (described by the wavefunction you mention) as a kind of density of "presence" of a classical particle moving around on a certain trajectory, which is what is implicitly assumed in this question.

So, the purpose of the question is to make me realize what a stupid question it is..?
It seems very bizarre that there would be these locations in the potential where there is zero probability density. Is this merely because I have no intuition for quantum situations like this? Is it anything at all to do with the particle interfering with itself, thus in a way (I know this isn't quite the best way of looking at it) creating the standing waves found as solutions? In the same way that electrons, unobserved, passing through young's slits "interfere" with each other and create minima of the wave function...

I read somewhere on here that it is this same "interference" which causes probability densities for electons around nuclei to have high values here and low values there.
 
DeShark said:
In the same way that electrons, unobserved, passing through young's slits "interfere" with each other and create minima of the wave function...

The electrons do not interfere with each other. You get an interference pattern even if you shoot one electron through the apparatus at a time, for a long enough period of time that you get a large number of total hits on the "screen" or whatever detector you're using.
 
DeShark said:
Hi all, a couple of weeks ago, I was reading a book (Eisberg and Resnick) in which one of the questions asked was: In the n=3 state, the probability density function for a particle in a box is zero at two positions between the walls of the box. How then can the particle ever move across these positions? Can anyone offer a resolution? Thank you!
An example: particle in the one dimensional well.
1. If we don't change the well in time, the situation is stationary and particle doesn't "move".
2. If we change the well or change the potential in time, then the "zero's" can move or even "zeros" could come to an end (psi function may by complex function in general case).

For example when we change the length of the well specifically in time we can get as a result 1 zero function (cooling) or 3 zero function (heating). "Zeros" will be borned or killed at the boundaries of the well.

Zero probability means nothing. We can have FLOW of probability in time from the left and from the right and they may kill each other.
 
DeShark said:
So, the purpose of the question is to make me realize what a stupid question it is..?
It seems very bizarre that there would be these locations in the potential where there is zero probability density. Is this merely because I have no intuition for quantum situations like this? Is it anything at all to do with the particle interfering with itself, thus in a way (I know this isn't quite the best way of looking at it) creating the standing waves found as solutions?

I'd say so, yes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
6K