A relativistic electron in a potential box

AI Thread Summary
In a potential box with a length of 1.00 pm, an electron's relativistic speed is established using the uncertainty principle, indicating that its momentum cannot be expressed in classical terms. The allowed energy states for the electron are derived from the time-independent Schrödinger equation, leading to a formula for energy that is valid in the non-relativistic case. The difference between the relativistic and non-relativistic ground state energies is calculated, revealing that the relativistic energy is approximately 22% smaller. The discussion emphasizes the necessity of using relativistic kinetic energy for accurate comparisons. Overall, the calculations and concepts align with the principles of quantum mechanics and relativistic physics.
TheSodesa
Messages
224
Reaction score
7

Homework Statement


In a potential box (##L = 1.00pm##) an electron moves at a relativistic speed, meaning it's momentum can't be expressed as ##P = \sqrt{2mE}##.

a) Using the uncertainty principle, show that the speed is indeed relativistic
b) Derive an expression for the allowed energy states of the electron
c) By how much (in relative terms) do the relativistic and non-relativistic ground states differ from each other? Answer: The relativistic one is 22% smaller.

Homework Equations


The uncertainty principle:
Momentum and position
\begin{equation}
\Delta p \Delta x \geq \frac{h}{4\pi}
\end{equation}

Energy and time
\begin{equation}
\Delta E \Delta t \geq \frac{h}{4\pi}
\end{equation}

Time independent Shcrödinger equation:
\begin{equation}
\frac{-\hbar^2}{2m} \frac{d^2 \Psi (x)}{dx^2} + V(x)\Psi (x) = E\Psi (x)
\end{equation}

The Attempt at a Solution


a) Using the uncertainty principle (where ##\Delta x = L##):
\begin{align*}
\Delta p
&= m \Delta v \geq \frac{h}{4 \pi \Delta x} &\iff\\
\Delta v &\geq \frac{h}{4\pi m \Delta x}\\
&=57 885 643.48 m/s\\
&\approx 0.19c
\end{align*}
Since this is the minimum uncertainty (standard deviation) of a normally distributed speed, the expected value of it must be even larger. Therefore the speed must be relativistic (Not sure my logic holds here).

b) We are dealing with a potential box, which to me implies that outside of the box, and at it's edges, ##V(x) \rightarrow \infty##, and inside the box's boundaries ##V(x) = 0##.

Then the time independent Shcrödinger equation becomes:
\frac{-\hbar^2}{2m} \frac{d^2 \Psi (x)}{dx^2} = E\Psi (x)

Let's now assume that the equations are of the form: \Psi (x) = A \sin (kx) and \Psi (x) = B \cos(kx). Then by invoking the continuity requirement at ##x = 0##:
\Psi (0) = B \cos (k 0) \Rightarrow B = 0.

On the other hand,
\Psi (L) = A \sin (kL) = 0 \Rightarrow kL = n \pi \iff k = n \pi L^{-1}.

Finally, since we chose to try the functions above as the solutions, we have in both cases:
\Psi ''(x) = -k^2 \Psi (x).

Therefore ##\Psi (x)## is eliminated from the Schrödinger equation, and we have:
E = \frac{k^2 \hbar^2}{2m} = \frac{(n \pi L^{-1})^2 \hbar^2}{2m} = n^2\frac{\hbar^2 \pi^2}{2mL^2} = n^2 \frac{h^2}{8mL^2}

This should be our solution. However, isn't this for the classical case? How would I get the relativistic version?

c) Not sure what to do here, at all. If I had an expression for a relativistic energy, this would be a piece of cake. Just take the ratio \frac{E_{relativistic}}{E_{non-relativistic}}.

However, I don't have an expression for the numerator that I could use, since I don't know the actual speed of the electron.

Help would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Schrodinger equation is non-relativistic. So, you can't use it to determine the relativistic energy.

The electron is free inside the box, so you are right to treat the electron as having a definite wavelength. Your allowed values of k look good. Can you determine the relativistic energy from k?
 
  • Like
Likes TheSodesa
TSny said:
The Schrodinger equation is non-relativistic. So, you can't use it to determine the relativistic energy.

The electron is free inside the box, so you are right to treat the electron as having a definite wavelength. Your allowed values of k look good. Can you determine the relativistic energy from k?

Well, according to de Broglie:
\lambda = \frac{h}{p} = \frac{2\pi}{k} \iff p = \frac{hk}{2\pi},
and the total relativistic energy of a particle is
E = \sqrt{(pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2}<br /> = \sqrt{\left(\frac{hk}{2\pi} c\right)^2 + (mc^2)^2}<br /> = \sqrt{\left(\frac{h\frac{\pi}{L}}{2\pi} c\right)^2 + (mc^2)^2}<br /> =\sqrt{\left(\frac{h}{2L} c\right)^2 + (mc^2)^2}.<br />
I can't believe I didn't remember this before, I just did this a month ago...

Just to check, the non- relativistic case gives me:
<br /> E = 1^2 \frac{h^2}{8m_e L^2} = 6.024 794 \cdot 10^{-14}J,<br />
and the relativistic one is
<br /> E = \sqrt{\left(\frac{h}{2L} c\right)^2 + (m_e c^2)^2} = 1.287 114 \cdot 10^{-13}J.<br />

The numbers look a bit off. If I take the ratio ##\frac{E_{relat}}{E_{non-relat}}##, I get something like ##2##, which is way off.
 
The nonrelativistic energy is the kinetic energy of the particle in the box.

To compare with the relativistic case, you should compare with the relativistic kinetic energy.

(Your calculations look good.)
 
  • Like
Likes TheSodesa
TSny said:
The nonrelativistic energy is the kinetic energy of the particle in the box.

To compare with the relativistic case, you should compare with the relativistic kinetic energy.

(Your calculations look good.)

Yeah, that was it.

E = \sqrt{\left( \frac{h}{2L} c \right)^2 + m^2c^4}-mc^2. This gives the correct answer.

Thanks.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
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...
Back
Top