Finite Square Barrier Scattering Example with Reflection Coefficient Calculation

ronaldoshaky
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Hello to all,

I am looking at a scattering example in my book. A particle is incident from the left with energy E > Vo. The barrier is of width L, and located between x = 0 and x = L.

The solutions to the time-independent Schrodinger equation in eacch of the regions comprising the left and right of the barrier and inside the barrier are:

\psi(x) = G e^{ik_{1} x} + H e^{-ik_{1} x }... x < 0

\psi(x) = I e^{ik_{2} x} + J e^{-ik_{2} x }...0 \leq x \leq L

\psi(x) = K e^{ik_{1} x} + L e^{-ik_{1} x } ...x > L

The example in the book gives the transmission coefficient T = \frac{|K|^{2}}{|G|^{2}} but my question is what ratio gives the reflection coefficient?

I thought R = \frac{|H|^{2}}{|G|^{2}} but does the constant J play any part in determining the reflection coefficient?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think L = 0
G + H = I so H = I - G
I + J = K
so J = K - I

I just used the continuity of the wave function.

So reflection coefficient L = 0, H = I - G, J = K - I

right? I think its simple algebra when dealing with a single mode incoming wave.
 
Hi

I follow your algebra, but not sure I am understanding the whole picture. There is an example in my book with a finite square step and it has the reflection coefficient as

R = \frac{|H|^{2}}{|G|^{2}}

Do I need to add the contributions from H and J in the square barrier example? I think I don't get the full picture of what you are saying. Can anyone shed any light on this. Thank you again.
 
The reflection coefficient is just H. Can you scan the textbook page?
 
I'm afraid I don't have a scanner.
 
Terminology problems abound. Using your original notation:

1) the amplitude of the reflected wave is H
2) the ratio of the amplitude of the reflected wave to the incoming wave is r=H/G (often called the reflection coefficient)
3) the reflection probability is the ratio of the flux in the reflected wave to the flux in the incoming wave. (R = |r|^2 k_1/k_1) (also sometimes called the reflection coefficient)
4) the amplitude of the transmitted wave is K
5) the ratio of the amplitude of the transmitted wave the incoming wave is t=K/G (often called the transmission coefficient)
6) the transmission probability is the ratio of the flux in the transmitted wave to the flux in the incoming wave. (T = |t|^2 k_3/k_1 where k_3/k_1 is the ratio of wavevectors in the different regions) (also sometimes called the transmission coefficient)

For it to make sense, you don't want the L wave coming into the barrier from x>L. Moreover, it's crazy to use L twice in the same problem.

H,I,J,K must be determined by boundary condition matching. Once you have done that, the reflection probability is |H|^2/|G|^2 (without any reference to J).

The point is that something complicated goes on in the middle, but you don't need to look at what is going on there to determine the probability of reflection, you just count how many particles you get back, divided by how many you sent in.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...

Similar threads

Back
Top