Energies and numbers of bound states in finite potential well

71GA
Messages
208
Reaction score
0
Hello I understand how to approach finite potential well. However i am disturbed by equation which describes number of states ##N## for a finite potential well (##d## is a width of a well and ##W_p## is potential):
$$
N \approx \dfrac{\sqrt{2m W_p}d}{\hbar \pi}
$$
I am sure it has something to do with one of the constants ##\mathcal L## or ##\mathcal K## defined this way:
\begin{align}
\mathcal L &\equiv \sqrt{\tfrac{2mW}{\hbar^2}} & \mathcal{K}&\equiv \sqrt{ \tfrac{ 2m(W_p-W) }{ \hbar^2 }}
\end{align}
and the transcendental equations for ODD and EVEN solutions:
\begin{align}
&\frac{\mathcal K}{\mathcal L} = \tan \left(\mathcal L \tfrac{d}{2}\right) &&-\frac{\mathcal L}{\mathcal K} = \tan \left(\mathcal L \tfrac{d}{2}\right)\\
&\scriptsize{\text{transc. eq. - EVEN}} &&\scriptsize{\text{transc. eq. - ODD}}
\end{align}

QUESTION: Could anyoe tell me where does 1st equation come from? I mean ##\tan(W)## repeats every ##\pi##, but if i insert ##\mathcal L## in transcendental equation i have ##\tan(\sqrt{W})##! On what intervals does the latter repeat itself? Does this has something to do with it? It sure looks like it... Please help me to synthisize all this in my head.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
71GA said:
QUESTION: Could anyoe tell me where does 1st equation come from? I mean ##\tan(W)## repeats every ##\pi##, but if i insert ##\mathcal L## in transcendental equation i have ##\tan(\sqrt{W})##! On what intervals does the latter repeat itself?
It's a strange question, I'm not sure to have understood it.
tan(x) is periodic with period = π; it means, for example, that tan(W) = 0 for: W = kπ where k is an integer; if it's tan(√(W)) = 0 it means that √(W) = kπ → W = k2π2.
 
lightarrow said:
It's a strange question, I'm not sure to have understood it.
tan(x) is periodic with period = π; it means, for example, that tan(W) = 0 for: W = kπ where k is an integer; if it's tan(√(W)) = 0 it means that √(W) = kπ → W = k2π2.

This did help. Thank you.
 
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...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top