fscman
- 8
- 1
I am currently reading through Griffiths Quantum Mechanics textbook, and on page 14, Griffiths proves that
\frac{d}{dt}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |\Psi(x,t)|^2 \, dx = \left.\frac{i \hbar}{2m}\left( \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial \Psi^*}{\partial x} \Psi \right) \right|_{-\infty}^{\infty}
and he claims that the right hand side evaluates to zero since \Psi must be normalizable and hence \lim_{x \to \infty} \Psi(x,t) = 0.
My question is whether \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} must also equal zero. I ask this because:
Suppose we take the function \Psi (x,t)=\frac{1}{x} \sin(x^9). Then, we can calculate \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Psi^2 \, dx = 1.14... so \Psi IS normalizable. We can find that \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}=\frac{1}{x^2}\left(9x^9 \cos(x^9)-\sin(x^9)\right)=9x^7 \cos(x^9)-\frac{\sin(x^9)}{x^2},
so if we take \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}=9 x^6 \sin(x^9) \cos (x^9) - \frac{\sin^2(x^9)}{x^3}, we find that this expression does not approach 0 as x approaches infinity (which renders Griffiths' argument using the fact \lim_{x \to \infty} \Psi(x,t) = 0 to explain why the original integral false; there are functions that tend to zero as x approaches infinity but the derivative can grow arbitrarily large). Of course, in this case, \left.\frac{i \hbar}{2m}\left( \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial \Psi^*}{\partial x} \Psi \right) \right|_{-\infty}^{\infty} happens to vanish since \Psi^*=\Psi, but if we choose some general complex function, then I would guess that \left.\frac{i \hbar}{2m}\left( \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial \Psi^*}{\partial x} \Psi \right) \right|_{-\infty}^{\infty} might not vanish if we do not set \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} equal to zero. However, I have never seen this condition in quantum mechanics textbooks. Is there something wrong with my analysis, or is \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}=0 an implicit assumption physicists make? Thanks.
\frac{d}{dt}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |\Psi(x,t)|^2 \, dx = \left.\frac{i \hbar}{2m}\left( \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial \Psi^*}{\partial x} \Psi \right) \right|_{-\infty}^{\infty}
and he claims that the right hand side evaluates to zero since \Psi must be normalizable and hence \lim_{x \to \infty} \Psi(x,t) = 0.
My question is whether \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} must also equal zero. I ask this because:
Suppose we take the function \Psi (x,t)=\frac{1}{x} \sin(x^9). Then, we can calculate \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \Psi^2 \, dx = 1.14... so \Psi IS normalizable. We can find that \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}=\frac{1}{x^2}\left(9x^9 \cos(x^9)-\sin(x^9)\right)=9x^7 \cos(x^9)-\frac{\sin(x^9)}{x^2},
so if we take \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}=9 x^6 \sin(x^9) \cos (x^9) - \frac{\sin^2(x^9)}{x^3}, we find that this expression does not approach 0 as x approaches infinity (which renders Griffiths' argument using the fact \lim_{x \to \infty} \Psi(x,t) = 0 to explain why the original integral false; there are functions that tend to zero as x approaches infinity but the derivative can grow arbitrarily large). Of course, in this case, \left.\frac{i \hbar}{2m}\left( \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial \Psi^*}{\partial x} \Psi \right) \right|_{-\infty}^{\infty} happens to vanish since \Psi^*=\Psi, but if we choose some general complex function, then I would guess that \left.\frac{i \hbar}{2m}\left( \Psi^* \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial \Psi^*}{\partial x} \Psi \right) \right|_{-\infty}^{\infty} might not vanish if we do not set \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x} equal to zero. However, I have never seen this condition in quantum mechanics textbooks. Is there something wrong with my analysis, or is \lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}=0 an implicit assumption physicists make? Thanks.
Last edited: