Quantum mechanics - angular momentum problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a quantum mechanics problem related to the angular momentum operator L_{z}. Participants are tasked with demonstrating the orthogonality of eigenfunctions corresponding to different eigenvalues and constructing a normalized wavefunction for a specific quantum state.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants express confusion about eigenfunctions and their relation to eigenvalues in quantum mechanics. Some attempt to apply known mathematical concepts from linear algebra to quantum mechanics. Hints are provided regarding the integral of eigenfunctions for orthogonality and the construction of a normalized wavefunction using specific eigenfunctions.

Discussion Status

Some participants have made attempts to solve the orthogonality problem by integrating specific cases, while others express frustration with the material and seek clarification on normalization. There is a mix of attempts to engage with the problem and expressions of uncertainty about the underlying concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants note a lack of clarity in their course materials and express difficulty in understanding quantum mechanics concepts, particularly in relation to angular momentum. There is an emphasis on needing to prove results for arbitrary integers rather than specific cases.

Nylex
Messages
552
Reaction score
2
Can someone help me with this please? If anyone does give me any kind of *small* hints, I'd be very grateful.

Show that the eigenfunctions of the L_{z} operator with different eigenvalues are orthogonal. I don't have a clue how to start this, I'm not even sure what an eigenfunction is. I know how to do eigenvalues with matrices, but not QM. My notes have this:

Φ(φ) = e^(im_{l}φ)

L_{z}Φ = -ihbar dΦ/dφ = m_{l}hΦ(φ)

I don't understand.

An atomic electron is in a state where measurement of L_{z} may yield the values -3hbar and 3hbar with equal probabilities. Write down a normalised wavefunction describing this state. Again I'm stuck, do I need to use Φ(φ) = e^(im_{l}φ) in some way?

The recommended book for our course (Eisberg & Resnick) is confusing me more. Grr at stupid quantum mechanics :mad:.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Nylex said:
Show that the eigenfunctions of the L_{z} operator with different eigenvalues are orthogonal. I don't have a clue how to start this, I'm not even sure what an eigenfunction is. I know how to do eigenvalues with matrices, but not QM. My notes have this:

Φ(φ) = e^(im_{l}φ)

L_{z}Φ = -ihbar dΦ/dφ = m_{l}hΦ(φ)
That second equation is the eigenvalue equation for angular momentum operator; the first equation describes the eigenfunctions, which are the solutions of the eigenvalue equation. You'll need to do some reading.

Hint: Two functions (F & G, say) are orthogonal if the integral of F*G over the range of the functions is zero. For this problem, let [itex]F = e^{i m_1 \phi}[/itex] and [itex]G = e^{i m_2 \phi}[/itex]. (These are eigenfunctions for the eigenvalues [itex]m_1[/itex] and [itex]m_2[/itex].) Now show that the integral of F*G is zero unless [itex]m_1 = m_2[/itex].

An atomic electron is in a state where measurement of L_{z} may yield the values -3hbar and 3hbar with equal probabilities. Write down a normalised wavefunction describing this state. Again I'm stuck, do I need to use Φ(φ) = e^(im_{l}φ) in some way?
The wavefunction can be expressed as a sum of eigenfunctions with appropriate coefficients ([itex]C_m[/itex]). Hint: The wavefunction in this case is the sum of only two component eigenfunctions: one corresponds to m = 3, the other to m = -3. What are those eigenfunctions? What must the coefficients of these be if the probability of measuring either eigenvalue is equal? Hit those books!
 
For the orthogonality thing, I picked m_{l} = 1 and m_{l} = 2 and then just did that integral like you said. I had to integrate between 0 and 2pi (cos of the angle) and it came out alright.

The rest of the question I just gave up on. Thanks :smile:.

The book for QM really makes no sense to me.. I can just about understand stuff on potential steps/barriers and doing the reflection/transmission coefficient stuff. Apart from that, I just get really lost. If I didn't have to do QM this year, I really wouldn't.
 
You considered a particular case.It's not enough...You need to prove for arbitrary integers "m" & "n".

As for the second,i'm sure you can solve it,it's just that u need to open the book at the right page...

What's normalization...?

Daniel.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K