About wavefunctions of Hydrogen atom

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of wavefunctions for the hydrogen atom, specifically addressing the complexity of these functions and their representation in various forms. Participants explore the implications of using real versus complex wavefunctions, particularly in the context of quantum numbers and their associated properties.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about a webpage that lists wavefunctions as real functions, questioning the typical representation involving complex functions and quantum numbers.
  • Another participant points out that the webpage incorrectly lists the 2p_x and 2p_y wavefunctions as having specific m values, clarifying that these are linear combinations of functions with m = 1 and -1.
  • It is noted that measuring L_z for the p_x and p_y functions yields +ħ and -ħ with equal probability, indicating their probabilistic nature.
  • Some participants assert that wavefunctions can indeed be real, particularly for bound states, and reference harmonic oscillator wavefunctions as examples.
  • Further clarification is provided using Cartesian coordinates to express the relationships between the wavefunctions and their spatial representations.
  • Several participants discuss the challenges of typing mathematical equations in the forum, with suggestions for using LaTeX and other software to facilitate this process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that there are complexities in the representation of wavefunctions, particularly regarding the use of real versus complex forms. However, there is no consensus on the correctness of the webpage's claims, and multiple viewpoints on the nature of wavefunctions remain present.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the limitations of the webpage's explanations, particularly regarding the definitions and representations of wavefunctions. There are also unresolved discussions about the ease of using mathematical notation in the forum.

zhangpujumbo
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Every one knows that wavefunctions are generally complex functions described by three quantum numbers n, l and m, and the number m is included in the form exp(i*m*fai). But here in the following webpage they are all real functions, I'm confused:confused: . Can anyone help me?

Thank u in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Uh, what web page? :confused:
 
That page makes a mistake in listing (for example) the [itex]2p_x[/itex] and [itex]2p_y[/itex] wave functions as having m = 1 and -1. They are actually linear combinations of the functions with m = 1 and -1. Recall that

[tex]\cos \phi = \frac{e^{i \phi} + e^{-i \phi}}{2}[/tex]

[tex]\sin \phi = \frac{e^{i \phi} - e^{-i \phi}}{2i}[/tex]

If you measure [itex]L_z[/itex] for either of these functions, you get [itex]+ \hbar[/itex] half the time, and [itex]- \hbar[/itex] half the time, randomly.

The [itex]p_x[/itex] and [itex]p_y[/itex] functions are convenient for some purposes because they have lobes along the x and y axes, just like the [itex]p_z[/itex] (m = 0) function has lobes along the z axis.
 
Wave functions can be real; typically this is the case for bound states. (Strictly speaking this holds for the radial function.) Think about harmonic oscillator wave functions -- they are real. Pretty standard stuff.
Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
 
jtbell said:
That page makes a mistake in listing (for example) the [itex]2p_x[/itex] and [itex]2p_y[/itex] wave functions as having m = 1 and -1. They are actually linear combinations of the functions with m = 1 and -1. Recall that

[tex]\cos \phi = \frac{e^{i \phi} + e^{-i \phi}}{2}[/tex]

[tex]\sin \phi = \frac{e^{i \phi} - e^{-i \phi}}{2i}[/tex]

If you measure [itex]L_z[/itex] for either of these functions, you get [itex]+ \hbar[/itex] half the time, and [itex]- \hbar[/itex] half the time, randomly.

Yes.

jtbell said:
The [itex]p_x[/itex] and [itex]p_y[/itex] functions are convenient for some purposes because they have lobes along the x and y axes, just like the [itex]p_z[/itex] (m = 0) function has lobes along the z axis.

In Cartesean coordinates it's clearer:

[tex]p_z\ \ \propto\ \ \cos{\theta}\ =\ \frac{z}{r}[/tex]

[tex]p_x\ \ \propto\ \ \sin{\theta}\cos{\phi}\ =\ \frac{x}{r}[/tex]

[tex]p_y\ \ \propto\ \ \sin{\theta}\sin{\phi}\ =\ \frac{y}{r}[/tex]

They are all the same.Regards, Hans
 
Last edited:
jtbell said:
That page makes a mistake in listing (for example) the [itex]2p_x[/itex] and [itex]2p_y[/itex] wave functions as having m = 1 and -1. They are actually linear combinations of the functions with m = 1 and -1. Recall that

[tex]\cos \phi = \frac{e^{i \phi} + e^{-i \phi}}{2}[/tex]

[tex]\sin \phi = \frac{e^{i \phi} - e^{-i \phi}}{2i}[/tex]

If you measure [itex]L_z[/itex] for either of these functions, you get [itex]+ \hbar[/itex] half the time, and [itex]- \hbar[/itex] half the time, randomly.

The [itex]p_x[/itex] and [itex]p_y[/itex] functions are convenient for some purposes because they have lobes along the x and y axes, just like the [itex]p_z[/itex] (m = 0) function has lobes along the z axis.

Yes, I agree with your opinion very much!:approve:

There must be something wrong.

Thanks a lot:smile:
 
reilly said:
Wave functions can be real; typically this is the case for bound states. (Strictly speaking this holds for the radial function.) Think about harmonic oscillator wave functions -- they are real. Pretty standard stuff.
Regards,
Reilly Atkinson

I don't mean all wavefunctions must be complex.

But thank u all the same!
 
Hans de Vries said:
In Cartesean coordinates it's clearer:

[tex]p_z\ \ \propto\ \ \cos{\theta}\ =\ \frac{z}{r}[/tex]

[tex]p_x\ \ \propto\ \ \sin{\theta}\cos{\phi}\ =\ \frac{x}{r}[/tex]

[tex]p_y\ \ \propto\ \ \sin{\theta}\sin{\phi}\ =\ \frac{y}{r}[/tex]

en, it's clearer.
 
  • #10
I don't know how to type mathematical equations here, it's too inconvenient.:cry:

How do you do that?
 
  • #12
jtbell said:

It seems that all the equations are copied piece by piece, then typying equations will be too laborious a task

Is there a shortcut?
 
  • #13
Not really. But LaTex is easy once you get past the initial shock.
 
  • #14
inha said:
Not really. But LaTex is easy once you get past the initial shock.

I think a compact software like mathtype will help greatly.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K