Understanding the Quantization of Azimuthal Wavefunctions in Quantum Mechanics

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the azimuthal wavefunction in quantum mechanics, specifically addressing the requirement for the quantum number q to be an integer. Participants explore the implications of wavefunction periodicity and normalization within the context of angular momentum.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants examine the periodicity condition of the wavefunction, questioning how it leads to the conclusion that q must be an integer. They discuss the normalization process and the limits of integration involved.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the conditions that q must satisfy, while others are clarifying their understanding of the implications of sine and cosine functions in this context. There is an ongoing exploration of the reasoning behind the integer requirement for q.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of the Condon-Shortley convention and the periodic nature of the azimuthal angle in their discussions. There is an acknowledgment of the potential confusion surrounding the assumptions made about sine and cosine values.

Nylex
Messages
552
Reaction score
2
I have a question that I'm struggling with a bit.

The azimuthal part of the wavefunction of a particle is

[tex]\Psi(\phi) = Ae^{-iq\phi}[/tex] where [tex]\phi[/tex] is the azimuthal angle. Show that q must be an integer. By normalising the wavefunction, find the value of A. What is the value of L_z for this particle?

Ok, I know that [tex]\Psi(\phi) = \Psi(\phi + 2\pi)[/tex] because [tex]\phi[/tex] and [tex]\phi + 2\pi[/tex] are the same angle.

So, [tex]Ae^{-iq\phi} = Ae^{-iq(\phi + 2\pi)}[/tex]

and [tex]Ae^{-iq\phi} = Ae^{-iq\phi}e^{-iq2\pi}[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow e^{-iq2\pi} = 1[/tex]

How does this imply that q is an integer? This was the way it was done in lectures, but we were just told that this shows q is an integer. I thought it was something to do with [tex]e^{ix} = \cos x + i\sin x[/tex], but I'm not sure.

For the normalising bit, I know I need to use [tex]\int \Psi^* \Psi d\phi = 1[/tex] but I'm not sure about the limits. This is what I've done:

[tex]\int \Psi^* \Psi d\phi = 1[/tex]

[tex]\int_{0}^{2\pi} Ae^{iq\phi}Ae^{-iq\phi} = 1[/tex]

[tex]A^2 \int_{0}^{2\pi} d\phi = 1[/tex]

So [tex]A = \sqrt{ \frac{1}{2\pi} }[/tex]

Is this correct? As for the angular momentum component, I'm working on it.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sure,that's the Condon-Shortley convention.Actually the wave function is a phase factor;so other one would be superfluous.

[tex]e^{-iq2\pi}=\cos\left(-q2\pi\right)+i\sin\left(-q2\pi\right)=1[/tex]

So when is the cosine =1 ...?(Don't worry,the sine in those points is automatically 0)

Daniel.
 
That's where I was getting confused. How do you know sine is 0 there? I know [tex]\sin n\pi = 0[/tex] where n is an integer, but if you don't know n is an integer in the first place, how can you assume that those sine terms are 0?
 
If the cosine is "+1" (as it should be),then automatically the sine is 0,because we know that

[tex]\sin^2 x+\cos^2 x=1 \, \ x\in\mathbb{R}[/tex]

Daniel.

P.S.As i said,don't worry about the sine.
 
Here's another way to look at it: [itex]q[/itex] must satisfy both of the following conditions:

[tex]\cos (-q2 \pi) = 1[/tex]

[tex]\sin(-q2 \pi) = 0[/tex]

If we start with the first condition, that eliminates all values of [itex]q[/itex] except the + and - integers, and zero. These remaining values of [itex]q[/itex] all satisfy the second condition, so we're done.

Alternatively, we can start with the second condition. In this case, we eliminate all values of [itex]q[/itex] except the + and - integers and half-integers, and zero. Now we apply the first condition to those remaining values, which eliminates the half-integers, and gives us the same final result as before.
 
Ahh ok, thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K