What Happens When a Particle Encounters a Step Potential Higher Than Its Energy?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a quantum mechanics problem involving a particle encountering a step potential that is higher than its energy. Participants explore the implications of wavefunctions in different regions and the relationship between the particle's energy and the potential height, focusing on mathematical derivations and interpretations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the wavefunctions for a particle incident on a step potential and attempts to relate the wave numbers k in both regions to the energies involved.
  • Another participant suggests re-evaluating the problem by considering the possibility of different k values in the two regions, hinting at the importance of the imaginary unit in the exponent.
  • A third participant derives a relationship leading to the conclusion that E = U/2, questioning the correctness of this result and reflecting on potential errors in their calculations.
  • Another participant expresses a belief that the derived relationship may be correct, without fully verifying the calculations.
  • A later reply comments on the nature of quantum mechanics, suggesting that it often reveals outcomes that defy classical intuition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correctness of the derived relationship E = U/2, and there are differing views on the implications of the calculations and the nature of quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the relationship between k, E, and U, as well as the implications of the wavefunction forms in different regions.

heardie
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Hi...I've come across this question on a past exam, and I can't seem to resolve it!

A particle is incident on a step potential at x=0. The total energy of the particle E, is less then the height of the step, U. The particle has wavefunctions
[tex]$\begin{array}{l}<br /> \psi (x) = \frac{1}{2}\{ (1 + i)e^{ikx} + (1 - i)e^{ - ikx} \} ,x \ge 0 \\ <br /> \psi (x) = e^{ - kx} ,x < 0 \\ <br /> \end{array}$[/tex]

Note that k is the same on both sides of the step
a) ….
b.) How must k be related to E and U on both sides of the step and determine the ration E/U

Well on the left, it is just a free wave-function where k=[tex]$k = \frac{{\sqrt {2mE} }}{\hbar }$[/tex]
On the right k= [tex]$k = i\kappa = \frac{{i\sqrt {2m(U - E)} }}{\hbar }$[/tex]
Since the k’s are equal this immediately implies that U=0, does it not? In which case the ratio E/U is infinite…
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
heardie said:
Since the k’s are equal this immediately implies that U=0, does it not? In which case the ratio E/U is infinite…
No, but you are thinking along the right lines. You have recognized that the requirement on k puts strong restriction on ... something. Attack the problem firstly as if k were different in the two regions, and then see what conditions have to be met so that the wavefunction can be put in the given form. (Biggest hint: Notice that there is an i in the exponent in one region and not in the other.)

One thing I just noticed: it appears to me that the particle is incident from the right so you may have your suggestions backwards.
 
Last edited:
Ok so if I call the region II solution k'
[tex]$k' = \frac{{\sqrt {2m(E - U)} }}{\hbar }$[/tex]

Since U > E this is complex.
[tex]$k' = \frac{{i\sqrt {2m(U - E)} }}{\hbar } = i\kappa $[/tex]

This leads to the exponential solution
[tex]$e^{ - \kappa x} $[/tex]

If I then impose
[tex]$\kappa = k$[/tex] i get
[tex]$\begin{array}{l}<br /> \frac{{\sqrt {2mE} }}{\hbar } = \frac{{\sqrt {2m(U - E)} }}{\hbar } \\ <br /> \sqrt E = \sqrt {U - E} \\ <br /> E = U - E \\ <br /> 2E = U \\ <br /> E = \frac{U}{2} \\ <br /> \end{array}$[/tex]

oh hey...i definatly did that yesterday...musta been dropping a negative somewhere!

Ok, seems my latex sucks but how is E=U/2??

Cheers!
 
heardie said:
... how is E=U/2??
That was my initial gut feeling about it. Are you asking how it is possible, or are you asking if I think this is correct? I think it is probably correct (without actually combing through your calculations).
 
Turin - I don't think I would ever ask if something is possible in QM, per se, since things that seem impossible always seem to fall out of QM! So much more to learn as well - makes me wonder what other things (classically impossible) will occur
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K