Normalize the even wave functions for the finite square well

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the normalization of even wave functions for a finite square well in quantum mechanics. Participants explore the mathematical formulation of the wave function, boundary conditions, and the implications of continuity for both the wave function and its first derivative.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the wave function and seeks to determine the constants D and F through normalization and boundary conditions.
  • Another participant emphasizes the necessity of continuity for the wave function at the boundaries of the well.
  • A different participant suggests including the continuity of the first derivative of the wave functions at the boundaries.
  • Concerns are raised about the normalizability of the term involving e^{\kappa x}, with one participant asserting it is nonnormalizable in certain intervals.
  • Questions arise regarding the number of amplitudes needed for the wave function, with a participant suggesting that symmetry reduces the number of required amplitudes.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the completeness of the wave function determined by continuity and its normalizability, referencing external sources for further verification.
  • A participant proposes a method for normalization over the entire interval, indicating that this approach, combined with boundary conditions, should simplify solving for the unknowns.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need for continuity conditions but express differing views on the implications of these conditions and the normalizability of certain terms. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the completeness of the wave function and the necessity of additional amplitudes.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential misunderstandings about the normalizability of specific terms and the assumptions made regarding the symmetry of the wave function. The discussion also highlights the complexity of applying boundary conditions in this context.

broegger
Messages
257
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to normalize the even wave functions for the finite square well. The wave function is:

[tex] \psi(x)=<br /> \begin{cases}<br /> Fe^{\kappa x} & \text{for } x< a\\<br /> D\cos(lx) & \text{for } -a\leq x \leq a\\<br /> Fe^{-\kappa x} & \text{for } x> a<br /> \end{cases}[/tex]

How can I determine D and F? When I set

[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}|\psi(x)|^2dx = 1[/tex],​

I obtain an equation in the two unknown amplitudes D and F. I could apply some boundary conditions to get more equations, but it gets rather complicated and I know there is an easier way...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We require that the wave function is continuous, so:

[tex]Fe^{-\kappa a} = D \cos(la)[/tex]

I don't think you can avoid using this, along with the normalisation condition.
 
Also, include the continuity-demand for the FIRST derivative of the wavefunctions at the "walls" of the well.

marlon
 
That [tex]e^{\kappa x}[/tex] is honestly nonnormalizable...And one more thing,the interval for this function should be:
[tex](-\infty,-a)[/tex]

Daniel.
 
dextercioby said:
And one more thing,the interval for this function should be:
[tex](-\infty,-a)[/tex]

Daniel.

Which is indeed the case

marlon
 
marlon said:
Also, include the continuity-demand for the FIRST derivative of the wavefunctions at the "walls" of the well.

marlon

Do I need this? The continuity of [tex]\psi[/tex], as James R says, gives me two equations in two unknowns.
 
How did u get those initial functions...?I mean,why aren't there 3 (a priori) different amplitudes,e.g. F,G and H...? :wink:

A little remark.I said earlier that [tex]e^{\kappa x}[/tex] was not normalizable.It would have been the case for the [tex](a,+\infty)[/tex] interval.Sure,in your case,because of the negative values that "x" takes,it is VERY NORMALIZABLE...

Daniel.
 
Last edited:
dextercioby said:
How did u get those initial functions...?I mean,why aren't there 3 (a priori) different amplitudes,e.g. F,G and H...? :wink:

Because of the symmetry of the finite square well (the well is centered at x = 0), I assume that [tex]\psi[/tex] must be symmetric (even or odd).
 
Yes,well,then that's it...Though the fact that,by imposing continuity along the real axis,you determine completely the wave function and by checking the normalizability,(i think) it will not hold...

There's something fishy.Check Davydov,Cohen-Tannoudji or Flügge...

Daniel.
 
  • #10
broegger,

When you are normalizing over the full interval, does it look something like this:

[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{-a}|\psi(x)|^2dx + \int_{-a}^{a}|\psi(x)|^2dx + \int_{a}^{\infty}|\psi(x)|^2dx = 1[/tex]

Between that and the boundary conditions stated by James R, the unknowns should be pretty easy to solve.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K