Can a wave-function be a combination of states with different energies?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dRic2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy State
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of wave-functions in quantum mechanics, particularly whether a wave-function can be a combination of states with different energies. Participants explore concepts related to energy eigenstates, linear combinations of wave-functions, and the implications of measurements on these states.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that a wave-function that is an eigenfunction of the Hamiltonian describes a state of definite energy and can be expressed as a linear combination of other wave-functions.
  • Others argue that while a wave-function can be decomposed into a linear combination of energy eigenstates, an energy eigenstate itself cannot be represented as a superposition of other eigenstates due to their orthogonality.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of measurements, with some claiming that measuring an energy eigenstate will always yield the same energy value, while others suggest that the wave-function collapses to a linear combination of states upon measurement.
  • Participants explore the relationship between the coefficients in the linear combination and the probabilities of measuring specific energy values.
  • There is confusion regarding the application of different operators, such as the position operator, and how this affects the representation of states.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus. There are competing views on whether a wave-function can be a combination of states with different energies, and the implications of measurements on energy eigenstates remain contested.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions and implications of energy eigenstates, linear combinations, and the effects of different operators on wave-functions. The discussion includes references to mathematical formulations that are not fully resolved.

dRic2
Hi everyone, I was wondering if mu thinking was correct abut this argument, here is what I was thinking abut.

A wave-function that is an eigenfunction of the Hamiltonian always describes a state of definite energy. Ok now let's say the eigenvalue is discrete so the wave-function belongs to Hilbert's space. Therefore I can say that the wave-function can be described as a linear combination of other wave-functions. So, in other words, a wave-function that describes a definite state of energy can be expressed as a combination of wave-functions that describes other states of energy meaning a state of energy is the result of the probability combination of other states of energy, right? So if a particle is in a state with energy E_0, when I make a measurement I don't get E_0 because the wave-function collapses in one of its 'base' (linear-combination); then if Ido the average of all the values of E I measured (with infinite number of measurements) I get E_0. Am I correct?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
If we have an orthonormal set of energy eigenfunctions ##{u_n(x), n = 1, 2, 3\cdots}##, ##Hu_n(x) = E_nu_n(x)## for some Hamiltonian ##H##. Then for some arbitrary wave function we can write $$\psi(x) = \sum_{n}^{}c_nu_n(x)$$ i.e. as a linear combination of the functions ##u_n(x)##, where the (expansion) coefficients ##c_n## are given by $$c_n = \int_{}^{}dxu_n(x)^{*}\psi(x)$$ This sequence of coefficients is unique for the state of the system and if it is normalized the probability of making a measurement of energy is ##|c_n|^2##. Now, if the wavefunction ##\psi(x)## belongs to Hilbert space, its norm $$ \int_{}^{}dx|\psi(x)|^2$$ which is the sum to ##n## of the probability ##|c_n|^2##, is finite. So, the probability is conserved.
 
Last edited:
isn't the same of what I said?
 
dRic2 said:
Hi everyone, I was wondering if mu thinking was correct abut this argument, here is what I was thinking abut.

A wave-function that is an eigenfunction of the Hamiltonian always describes a state of definite energy. Ok now let's say the eigenvalue is discrete so the wave-function belongs to Hilbert's space. Therefore I can say that the wave-function can be described as a linear combination of other wave-functions. So, in other words, a wave-function that describes a definite state of energy can be expressed as a combination of wave-functions that describes other states of energy meaning a state of energy is the result of the probability combination of other states of energy, right? So if a particle is in a state with energy E_0, when I make a measurement I don't get E_0 because the wave-function collapses in one of its 'base' (linear-combination); then if Ido the average of all the values of E I measured (with infinite number of measurements) I get E_0. Am I correct?

No. If you have an energy eigenstate, then every measurement of energy gives the same result. The wavefunction does not change as a result of the measurement in this case.

That you can decompose an energy eigenstate into other states is irrelevant here.
 
QuantumQuest said:
If we have an orthonormal set of energy eigenfunctions ##{u_n(x), n = 1, 2, 3\cdots}##, ##Hu_n(x) = E_nu_n(x)## for some Hamiltonian ##H##. Then for some arbitrary wave function we can write $$\psi(x) = \sum_{n}^{}c_nu_n(x)$$ i.e. as a linear combination of the functions ##u_n(x)##, where the (expansion) coefficients ##c_n## are given by $$c_n = \int_{}^{}dxu_n(x)^{*}\psi(x)$$ This sequence of coefficients is unique for the state of the system and if it is normalized the probability of making a measurement of energy is ##|c_n|^2##. Now, if the wavefunction ##\psi(x)## belongs to Hilbert space its norm $$ \int_{}^{}dx|\psi(x)|^2$$ which is the sum to ##n## of the probability ##|c_n|^2##, is finite. So, the probability is conserved.

This doesn't address the question, which is about an energy eigenstate.
 
PeroK said:
This doesn't address the question, which is about an energy eigenstate.

This one in the OP

dRic2 said:
So if a particle is in a state with energy E_0, when I make a measurement I don't get E_0 because the wave-function collapses in one of its 'base' (linear-combination); then if Ido the average of all the values of E I measured (with infinite number of measurements) I get E_0. Am I correct?

was added after my post.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
PeroK said:
No, if you have an energy eigenstate, then every measurement of energy gives the same result. The wavefunction does not change as a result of the measurement in this case.

But, I can derivate that $$ <E> = ∑e_n*c_n $$. It seems to me that $$c_n$$ tells me how much $$u_n$$ "weights"" in the linear combination ( hope the english my is acceptable).

Ps: I used the notation of QuantumQuest because I'm not practical with LaTex
 
QuantumQuest said:
This one in the OP
was added after my post.

I apologize because I have a bad internet connection
 
dRic2 said:
But, I can derivate that $$ <E> = ∑e_n*c_n $$. It seems to me that $$c_n$$ tells me how much $$u_n$$ "weights"" in the linear combination ( hope the english my is acceptable).

Ps: I used the notation of QuantumQuest because I'm not practical with LaTex

Yes, but in an energy eigenstate, the wavefunction has ##c_n = 0## for all but the one eigenfunction. E.g. in the ##E_0## state, you have ##c_0 = 1## and ##c_n = 0## otherwise. In other words, this state is 100% weighted towards ##E_0##.
 
  • #10
dRic2 said:
So, in other words, a wave-function that describes a definite state of energy can be expressed as a combination of wave-functions that describes other states of energy meaning a state of energy is the result of the probability combination of other states of energy, right?
Actually, no. A system’s energy eigenstates are orthogonal to each other. You cannot represent one of them as a superposition (linear combination) of the others.

It’s exactly analogous to the fact that you cannot express one of the Cartesian unit vectors (e.g. ##\hat x##) as a linear combination of the others (##\hat y## and ##\hat z##).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis
  • #11
jtbell said:
Actually, no. A system’s energy eigenstates are orthogonal to each other. You cannot represent one of them as a superposition (linear combination) of the others.

I forgot that. Does it come from the fact that eigenvalues of Energy are discrete?

So if I change operator, will my question make more sense? For example, taking the position operator I should reach the conclusion that ##|c_n|^2 = |ψ(x)|^2##.
 
  • #12
dRic2 said:
I forgot that. Does it come from the fact that eigenvalues of Energy are discrete?

So if I change operator, will my question make more sense? For example, taking the position operator I should reach the conclusion that ##|c_n|^2 = |ψ(x)|^2##.

For the position operator, what is ##c_n##?
 
  • #13
## c_n = ψ(x) ## ?
 
  • #14
dRic2 said:
## c_n = ψ(x) ## ?

That makes no sense. For an operator with a discrete spectrum you have a sequence of eigenfunctions (for that operator). The sequence can be indexed by a whole numbers ##n##. Every state is a (finite or infinite) linear combination of these eigenstates.

The position operator has a continuous spectrum, which means two things. First, the eigenstates are not physically realisable. Second, each state is not a sum of these eigenstates but a continuous distribution of them. There are, therefore, no coefficients (##c_n##) in this case.
 
  • #15
PeroK said:
That makes no sense.
You are right. I'm a bit confused right now. I need to think about it. Tomorrow i'll be back
 
  • #16
Ok, I think I figured this out. Let's say I want to know a property (for example the energy) of a particle. I have ## <E> = ∫ψHψ dr ## (H is the operator).
Now I need to find ##ψ## so I need to solve the Schrödinger equation. As a solution I get different orthonormal functions ##ψ_n## and I combine them to find ##ψ##
like this:
$$ ψ = ∑c_n*ψ_n $$
Every ##ψ_n## represent a specific state of Energy ##E_n## and their linear combination gives me the expected values of E (<E>). When I make a measurement I don't get exactly E, but the Schrödinger equation collapse into one of the ##ψ_n## states thus the energy I measure will be ##E_n## (the eigenvalue of ##ψ_n##). This brings me to the conclusion that ##c_n## is linked to the concept of probability. Since the wave function must be normalized I get ##∑|c_n|^2 = 1##.

So, I was wrong when I wrote this:
dRic2 said:
But, I can derivate that
<E>=∑en∗cn<E>=∑en∗cn​
= ∑e_n*c_n

because $$<E> = ∑e_n*|c_n|^2$$

So ##|c_n|^2## tells me the probability to find the value ##E_n## after a measurement.

I have just one question: How can I find ##c_n##? Everywhere I find that
$$ c_n = ∫ψ*ψ_n dr $$
but I can't understand one thing: since ## ψ = ∑c_n*ψ_n ## how am I supposte to find the value ##c_n##? I need ##c_n## to find ##ψ## so how can I use ##ψ## to find ##c_n##?
 
  • #17
The wavefunction is a vector and ##c_n## are its components - in this case in the basis of energy eigenfunctions.

Just like a vector, if you know the wavefuction you can calculate the components; and, if you know the components, you know the vector.

But, if you don't know either, then you don't know the wavefunction.
 
  • #18
So, solving the Schrödinger equation is not enough to find the wave function of a particle ?
 
  • #19
dRic2 said:
So, solving the Schrödinger equation is not enough to find the wave function of a particle ?

The Schrödinger equation tells you how the wavefuction evolves over time. The wavefunction at any given time can be any square integrable function.

There is a unique solution to the Schrödinger equation given an initial wavefunction.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
6K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K