Calculate the number of states for a particle in a box

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the number of states for a particle in a box, focusing on the relationship between energy, momentum, and the multiplicity of states. Participants explore both mathematical formulations and the underlying physical interpretations, with references to quantum mechanics and classical intuition.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the multiplicity of states is proportional to the volume of the box and the surface area of momentum space, questioning the physical implications of this relationship.
  • Others argue that the states referred to are steady-state solutions, not involving any traveling, which raises questions about the interpretation of momentum in quantum mechanics.
  • A participant expresses confusion about why higher energy would imply more directions for a particle, suggesting a mix of classical and quantum perspectives.
  • One participant describes the density of states in different dimensions, illustrating how the number of eigenstates increases with the size of the system.
  • Another participant notes that the transition from quantum mechanics to classical mechanics is not always intuitive, particularly in the context of the particle in a box.
  • Several participants reflect on their own difficulties with the concepts, indicating a shared experience of confusion regarding the derivation and implications of the mathematics involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of momentum states and the implications of energy on the number of possible states. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing interpretations and no consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made regarding classical versus quantum particles, and the discussion highlights the complexity of transitioning between these frameworks without clear resolution of the underlying principles.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in physics, particularly those exploring quantum mechanics, the concept of states in a particle system, and the mathematical foundations of these ideas.

Higgsono
Messages
93
Reaction score
4
The multiplicity of states for a particle in a box is proportional to the product of the volume of the box and the surface area of momentum space.

$$ \Omega = V_{volume}V_{momentum}$$

The surface area in momentum space is given by the equation:

$$p^{2}_{x}+ {p}^{2}_{y}+{p}^{2}_{z} = \frac{U}{2m}$$

But this seem rediculous to me. It says that, "the number of possible directions a particle can travel in is proportional to the total energy of the particle". I don't understand this, why would the particle have more directions to choose from when it have higher energy? I know what the mathematics says, but the physics of it I don't understand.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Higgsono said:
It says that, "the number of possible directions a particle can travel in is proportional to the total energy of the particle".
No it doesn't. The states are steady-state solutions and there is no traveling involved.
 
BvU said:
No it doesn't. The states are steady-state solutions and there is no traveling involved.

Doesn't answer my question.

What do you mean? Being in a moment state means it has a certain momentum.
 
Higgsono said:
Doesn't answer my question
I'm sorry about that.
Higgsono said:
Being in a moment state means it has a certain momentum
Yes, but you mix up a classical mindset with terms used in quantum mechanics. The expectation values for the momentum are all zero for the momentum states.
Higgsono said:
I know what the mathematics says, but the physics of it I don't understand.
Stick to the math.
 
Higgsono said:
why would the particle have more directions to choose from when it have higher energy?
I can almost imagine a particle being there in that box and making is choices ... :rolleyes:

In 1D the density of states is a constant. You can imagine dots on a half-line. A line segment length ##l## starting at 0 has ##l## dots (eigenstates). Increase ##l## with ## {\sf d}l## and you get ##{\sf d}l## more eigenstates.

In 2D same - imagine dots on a grid. In a circle with radius ##r## on that grid there are ##\pi r^2## possible eigenstates. An increase of ##r## with ##{\sf d}r## gets you ##2\pi r\;{\sf d}r## more of them.

In 3D you get a sphere and with radius ##r## on that 3D grid there are ##{4\over 3}\pi r^3## possible eigenstates. An increase of ##r## with ##{\sf d}r## gets you ##4\pi r^2\;{\sf d}r## more grid points.

But you know the math.
 
And you are definitely not the only one who wonders about this. cf @JohnnyGui here
(warning:154 posts :nb) ! )
( I hope JG doesn't mind my referring to the thread - I remember it well )

And wondering about things is a good habit for physicists !
 
Thanks for your answers! Maybe some of the confusion lies in my assumption that we are dealing with classical particles. In that case, intuition tells me that there should be a continnum of directions regardless of the energy of the particle.
 
Well, the name Quantum Mechanics itself already suggest quantization effects ...

The transition from QM to classical (usually by means of ##\hbar\downarrow 0##) requires a delicate approach, not always intuitive. And for the particle in a box I don't even know.
 
BvU said:
And you are definitely not the only one who wonders about this. cf @JohnnyGui here
(warning:154 posts :nb) ! )
( I hope JG doesn't mind my referring to the thread - I remember it well )

And wondering about things is a good habit for physicists !

I don't mind it at all :oldbiggrin:. I remember having difficulty understanding some aspects of the derivation of the continuous MB distribution, and I was too stubborn to truly nail it down in my head, hence the huge thread.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 153 ·
6
Replies
153
Views
16K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
758
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K