I Assumptions made in stationary-state scattering

WWCY
Messages
476
Reaction score
14
Hi all, I recently started learning about quantum scattering in school and came across a few things I find confusing. Thanks in advance for any assistance!

1. Plane wave approximation to incident waves.

In past QM courses, I kept reading that plane waves were not "physical" since they do not normalise to unity. As such, would using them as a mathematical description for incident waves affect results? I have read that such approximations are valid if the incident waveform is much larger than the scatterer, which i can picture. However, the positional spread of the wavefunction is equal at all points in space, under what conditions would an actual scatterer encounter such a wavefunction?

2. Stationary-state solutions

A stationary-state solution to a scattering Hamiltonian would mean that we are solving a problem in which "everything" (wavefunction of incident and scattered particle) looks the same everywhere, at all points in time. Again, what sort of scattering set-up would allow for such an approximation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could anyone assist? Many thanks
 
WWCY said:
1. Plane wave approximation to incident waves.

In past QM courses, I kept reading that plane waves were not "physical" since they do not normalise to unity. As such, would using them as a mathematical description for incident waves affect results? I have read that such approximations are valid if the incident waveform is much larger than the scatterer, which i can picture. However, the positional spread of the wavefunction is equal at all points in space, under what conditions would an actual scatterer encounter such a wavefunction?
You can always consider that the incoming state is a wave packet. If you decompose it in terms of plane waves, then the result of the scattering will be a superposition of the solutions found for each plane wave, weighted by the proper coefficient. For most well-behaved potentials, the scattering result varies slowly as a function of the incoming wave vector, such that for a narrow enough wave packet in momentum space, there is no significant difference between the full solution and that obtained from a single plane wave corresponding to the peak of the wave packet.

WWCY said:
2. Stationary-state solutions

A stationary-state solution to a scattering Hamiltonian would mean that we are solving a problem in which "everything" (wavefunction of incident and scattered particle) looks the same everywhere, at all points in time. Again, what sort of scattering set-up would allow for such an approximation?
The scattering potential has to be independent of time. Otherwise, I don't think that there are any other considerations, as you can write the wave packet as a superposition of these stationary states.

You can also model the scattering process using time-dependent perturbation theory (see for instance the textbook by Sakurai).
 
Thank you for replying

DrClaude said:
You can always consider that the incoming state is a wave packet. If you decompose it in terms of plane waves, then the result of the scattering will be a superposition of the solutions found for each plane wave, weighted by the proper coefficient. For most well-behaved potentials, the scattering result varies slowly as a function of the incoming wave vector, such that for a narrow enough wave packet in momentum space, there is no significant difference between the full solution and that obtained from a single plane wave corresponding to the peak of the wave packet.

Apologies, but I'm not sure I follow here. When you mention "scattering result", what do you mean by this? Also, what does it mean to "vary slowly" as a function of an incoming wave-vector?
 
WWCY said:
Apologies, but I'm not sure I follow here. When you mention "scattering result", what do you mean by this? Also, what does it mean to "vary slowly" as a function of an incoming wave-vector?
There are different ways to represent the outcome of a scattering event, but I was thinking specifically about the scattering amplitude ##f(\theta, \phi)##, which gives the angular distribution of the scattered particle and can be used to calculate the scattering cross section. In many cases, ##f(\theta, \phi)## is a function of the wave vector ##k##, but if that function is slowly varying with respect to ##k##, then the difference between the scattering of a plane wave of wave vector ##k## and a wave packet of width ##\delta k## centered on ##k## will be minimal.
 
  • Like
Likes WWCY
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top