Quantum mechanics - angular momentum problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding quantum mechanics, specifically the angular momentum operator L_z and its eigenfunctions. Participants express confusion about eigenfunctions and how to demonstrate their orthogonality, with hints provided to integrate the product of different eigenfunctions over a specified range. A specific problem is presented where an atomic electron can yield measurements of L_z at -3hbar and 3hbar, prompting questions about constructing a normalized wavefunction for this state. The conversation highlights the challenges faced with the course material, particularly the recommended textbook, and the need for clearer explanations of concepts like normalization. Overall, the thread emphasizes the complexity of quantum mechanics and the necessity for foundational understanding in solving related problems.
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 F = e^{i m_1 \phi} and G = e^{i m_2 \phi}. (These are eigenfunctions for the eigenvalues m_1 and m_2.) Now show that the integral of F*G is zero unless m_1 = m_2.

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 (C_m). 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.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top