Calculating Scattering Amplitude in Born Approx.

Unkraut
Messages
30
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


I'm supposed to calculate the scattering amplitudes of some spherically symmetric potentials in the Born approximation and just trying to figure out how that works in general and what a scattering amplitude is actually.


Homework Equations


1+1=2


The Attempt at a Solution


Reading this page http://electron6.phys.utk.edu/QM2/modules/m7/born.htm, I understand the following:
With an incoming plane wave \psi_0(\vec r)=e^{ikz} and a potential V(r)=\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}U(r) the solution can be written as \psi(\vec r)=\psi_0(\vec r)+\int G(\vec r-\vec r')U(r')\psi(r')d^3r where the Green's function G takes the form G(\vec r)=G(r)=-\frac{1}{4\pi}\frac{e^{ikr}}{r} and for big r we have G(\vec r-\vec r')=-\frac{1}{4\pi}\frac{e^{ikr}}{r}e^{-ik\vec r \cdot \vec r'}.
Now \psi(\vec r)=e^{ikz}-\frac{1}{4\pi}\frac{e^{ikr}}{r}\int e^{-ik\vec r \cdot \vec r'}U(r')\phi(\vec r')d^3r'=e^{ikz}+f(\theta, \phi)e^{ikr}{r} ?
That means f(\theta, \phi)=-\frac{1}{4\pi}\int e^{-ik\vec r \cdot \vec r'}U(r')\phi(\vec r')d^3r'. But this is dependent on r, isn't it? In other sources I find rougly the same, with no explanation why this is considered independent of r. In my eyes that looks just wrong. Physics is strange.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ah, I see. It's not \vec r but \hat r, i.e. the unit vector in radial direction. I misinterpreted the notation. Right?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top