Two independent particles in an infinite square well

In summary, the conversation discusses how to calculate the expectation value of the square distance for distinguishable particles, and provides equations and integrals to solve for this value. Additionally, the conversation touches on constructing symmetric and antisymmetric spatial wave functions and mentions the difficulty of evaluating certain integrals.
  • #1
gfd43tg
Gold Member
950
50

Homework Statement


upload_2015-5-3_22-26-25.png


Homework Equations


upload_2015-5-3_22-26-39.png

upload_2015-5-3_22-26-55.png


The Attempt at a Solution


a) For this part, I know for distinguishable particles, the expectation value of the square distance

$$\langle (x_{1}^{2} - x_{2}^{2}) \rangle = \langle x^{2} \rangle_{2} + \langle x^{2} \rangle_{3} - 2 \langle x \rangle_{2} \langle x \rangle_{3}$$

This just gets really ugly...
$$\langle x^{2} \rangle_{2} = \int \psi_{2}^{*}x^{2}\psi_{2} dx = \frac {2}{a} \int x^{2} sin^{2}\Big (\frac {2 \pi}{a} x \Big ) dx $$
Using the equation given in the problem (is that even right? It seems suspicious that it is independent of ##n##)
$$\langle x^{2} \rangle_{2} = \frac {2}{a} \Big [ \frac {\pi^{3}}{6} - \frac {\pi}{4(\frac {2 \pi}{a})^{2}} \Big ] $$
$$\langle x^{2} \rangle_{2} = \frac {2}{a} \Big [ \frac {\pi^{3}}{6} - \frac {a^{2}}{16 \pi} \Big ] $$
$$ = \frac {\pi^{3}}{3a} - \frac {a}{8 \pi} $$

Similarly for ##\langle x^{2} \rangle_{3}##
$$\langle x^{2} \rangle_{3} = \frac {2}{a} \Big [ \frac {\pi^{3}}{6} - \frac {\pi}{4(\frac {3 \pi}{a})^{2}} \Big ]$$
$$\langle x^{2} \rangle_{3} = \frac {2}{a} \Big [ \frac {\pi^{3}}{6} - \frac {a^{2}}{36 \pi} \Big ] $$
$$=\frac {\pi^{3}}{3a} - \frac {a}{18 \pi}$$

For ##\langle x \rangle_{2}##
$$\langle x \rangle_{2} = \int \psi_{2}^{*}x \psi_{2} dx$$
$$\langle x \rangle_{2} = \frac {2}{a} \int x sin^{2}(\frac {2 \pi}{a} x) dx $$
From the equation given in the problem statement
$$\langle x \rangle_{2} = \frac {2}{a} \frac {\pi^{2}}{4} = \frac {\pi^{2}}{2a} $$
The same goes for ##\langle x \rangle_{3}##
$$\langle x \rangle_{3} = \frac {2}{a} \int x sin^{2}(\frac {3 \pi}{a} x) dx$$
$$\langle x \rangle_{3} = \frac {2}{a} \frac {\pi^{2}}{4} = \frac {\pi^{2}}{2a}$$

$$\langle (x_{1}^{2} - x_{2}^{2}) \rangle = \langle x^{2} \rangle_{2} + \langle x^{2} \rangle_{3} - 2 \langle x \rangle_{2} \langle x \rangle_{3}$$
$$\langle (x_{1}^{2} - x_{2}^{2}) \rangle = \Big (\frac {\pi^{3}}{3a} - \frac {a}{8 \pi} \Big ) + \Big (\frac {\pi^{3}}{3a} - \frac {a}{18 \pi} \Big ) - 2 \Big (\frac {\pi^{2}}{2a} \Big ) \Big ( \frac {\pi^{2}}{2a} \Big ) $$
$$\langle (x_{1}^{2} - x_{2}^{2}) \rangle = \frac {2 \pi^{3}}{3a} - \frac {13a}{72 \pi} - \frac {\pi^{4}}{2a^{2}} $$
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) For this problem, I am basically looking at this webpage
http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/symmetry/Symmetry.html

symmetric:
$$\psi_{23} (x_{1},x_{2}) = A sin \Big (\frac {2 \pi}{a} x_{1} \Big ) cos \Big (\frac {3 \pi}{a} x_{2} \Big ) $$
Not sure how to get A, but anyways
For symmetric
$$ \psi_{23}^{S} = \frac {1}{\sqrt{2}} \Big [ sin \Big (\frac {2 \pi}{a} x_{1} \Big ) cos \Big (\frac {3 \pi}{a} x_{2} \Big ) +sin \Big (\frac {3 \pi}{a} x_{1} \Big ) cos \Big (\frac {2 \pi}{a} x_{2} \Big ) \Big ]$$

For antisymmetric
$$ \psi_{23}^{A} = \frac {1}{\sqrt{2}} \Big [ sin \Big (\frac {2 \pi}{a} x_{1} \Big ) cos \Big (\frac {3 \pi}{a} x_{2} \Big ) - sin \Big (\frac {3 \pi}{a} x_{1} \Big ) cos \Big (\frac {2 \pi}{a} x_{2} \Big ) \Big ] $$

This is slightly different from my notes, which had two sine terms instead of a cosine term, and I am not sure if that is because this time it has electrons. I am just so confused...
upload_2015-5-3_23-57-20.png

upload_2015-5-3_23-57-38.png
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
For part (a), note that your potential well extends from x = 0 to x = a. Thus, you will integrate from x = 0 to x = a. Note, though, that Griffiths' integrals extend from 0 to ##\pi##. So, a change of integration variable will be required if you want to use Griffiths' integrals.

For part (b), the website that you link to assumes that the well extends from x = -L/2 to x = L/2. That causes some of the wavefunctions to be cosine functions. But, in your case where the well extends from x = 0 to x = a, all of the wavefunctions will be sine functions.
 
  • #3
The answer you got in part (a) can't be correct because the units don't work out.

You should review how to construct the symmetric and antisymmetric spatial wave functions. It's pretty straightforward how to do so. You shouldn't need to copy a result off of a webpage.
 
  • #4
I just posted my new work since writing out all the latex and editing it until it is right can take over an hour. But for part (a), I got

$$\langle (x_{1} - x_{2})^{2} \rangle = \frac {a^{2}}{27} - \frac {5a^{2}}{72 \pi^{2}}$$

At least the units are correct for this answer
ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1430714949.829527.jpg


(b) for part i. and ii.
upload_2015-5-4_12-56-20.png


part iii. looks mathematically brutal =(
 

Attachments

  • ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1430714973.395573.jpg
    ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1430714973.395573.jpg
    29.3 KB · Views: 451
Last edited:
  • #5
Is this the correct integral to evaluate for part iii? This looks brutal

upload_2015-5-4_13-25-13.png
 

Attachments

  • ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1430717022.168788.jpg
    ImageUploadedByPhysics Forums1430717022.168788.jpg
    28.7 KB · Views: 420
  • #6
Maylis said:
I just posted my new work since writing out all the latex and editing it until it is right can take over an hour. But for part (a), I got

$$\langle (x_{1} - x_{2})^{2} \rangle = \frac {a^{2}}{27} - \frac {5a^{2}}{72 \pi^{2}}$$

At least the units are correct for this answer

I don't believe your answer is correct. Note, for example, that in calculating ##\left <x^2 \right >_2## your change of variable led to an integral from 0 to ##2 \pi##. But Griffiths' integrals are from 0 to ##\pi##.
 
  • #7
True, but that's why I just multiplied by 2, because the function is even, so I should be able to just double my answer, and mulitplied by 3 for the integral from 0 to ##3 \pi##
 
  • #8
According to Mathematica, the expectation value in part (i) works out to ##\frac{a^2}{6}\left(1-\frac{13}{12\pi^2}\right)##.
 
  • #9
Then it has something to do with my limits of integration. I went to the prof's office hours and he said to just double what you would get integrating from 0 to pi since it is an even function. I assumed the same for tripling.
 
  • #10
Your prof must not have looked at your integral carefully. Changing Griffiths' limits of [0, ##\pi##] to [0, ## 2\pi##] will not double the result. A sketch of the integrand would help see that. I agree with vela's result (also using Mathematica).
 

Related to Two independent particles in an infinite square well

1. What is an infinite square well potential?

An infinite square well potential is a theoretical model used in quantum mechanics to describe the behavior of a particle confined within a potential well with infinite potential barriers on each side. It is often used as a simplified model for a particle confined to a small region, such as an electron in an atom.

2. What are two independent particles in an infinite square well?

Two independent particles in an infinite square well refer to two particles (such as two electrons) that are confined within the same infinite square well potential. These particles are independent in the sense that their behavior is not affected by the presence of the other particle.

3. What is the significance of studying two independent particles in an infinite square well?

Studying two independent particles in an infinite square well can provide insights into the behavior of two particles in a confined space, such as in a molecule or solid material. It can also help us understand how particles interact and behave in different energy states.

4. How do the energy levels of two independent particles in an infinite square well compare to those of a single particle?

The energy levels of two independent particles in an infinite square well are different from those of a single particle. While a single particle in an infinite square well has discrete energy levels, the energy levels of two independent particles are spread out and overlap due to the interaction between the particles.

5. What is the relationship between the energy levels and the probability of finding two independent particles in an infinite square well?

The probability of finding two independent particles in an infinite square well is directly related to the energy levels. As the energy levels of the particles increase, the probability of finding them in a particular energy state also increases. This relationship is described by the Pauli exclusion principle, which states that no two identical particles can occupy the same quantum state simultaneously.

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
612
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
959
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
19
Views
883
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top