Can Free Particle Scattering Be Simplified Using Sine and Cosine Functions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter splitringtail
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on simplifying the mathematical representation of free particle scattering and tunneling using sine and cosine functions instead of complex exponentials. Participants confirm that the identity e^{i\theta} = \cos\theta + i \sin\theta allows for the conversion between these forms, facilitating easier manipulation of wave functions at boundaries. The conversation emphasizes that while exponentials are common in quantum mechanics, expressing wave functions as sine and cosine can simplify boundary conditions, particularly at x=0.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, specifically free particle scattering.
  • Familiarity with wave functions and boundary conditions in quantum systems.
  • Knowledge of complex numbers and Euler's formula.
  • Basic grasp of hyperbolic functions and their relationships to trigonometric functions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the application of Fourier series in quantum mechanics for wave function representation.
  • Study the Schrodinger equation and its solutions in different potential scenarios.
  • Learn about boundary value problems in quantum mechanics and their implications on wave functions.
  • Investigate the use of hyperbolic functions in quantum mechanics and their relationship to exponential forms.
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in quantum mechanics, physicists working on scattering theory, and anyone interested in mathematical techniques for simplifying wave function analysis.

splitringtail
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Making the math easier

Homework Statement



I am doing a free particle scattering/tunneling by a well and a barrier combination. There are four regions of interest where the wave numbers are different. I have seen the solution inside the well be expressed as a linear combination of exponents or sine and cosine functions.

Now I have only seen free particles in these problems as a linear combination of exponents... can I rewrite them as a linear combination of sine and cosine. I am finding these exponent forms very very cumbersome b/c I get two terms when I match the wave functions @ x=0, if they were in a sine and cosine combination, then it would sine would be zero @ x=0




Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



This is more of a discussion and there is too much work to present here.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can use the identity
e^{i\theta} = \cos\theta + i \sin\theta[/itex].<br /> So, for example<br /> \sum_k a_k e^{ikx} = \sum_k a_k (\cos(kx) + i \sin(kx))<br /> and then you can try to rewrite this (for example, if the sum runs from -infinity to +infinity, you can use that sin(-kx) = -sin(kx) and cos(-kx) = cos(kx) to simplify).<br /> If the exponent is real, you can use<br /> e^{\theta} = e^{i(-i\theta)} = \cos(-i\theta) + i sin(-i\theta)<br /> and subsequently <br /> \sinh x = -i \sin(i\theta), \cosh x = \cos(i\theta)<br /> to write them in hyperbolic sines and cosines. <br /> <br /> Conversely, if you have a combination of sines and cosines, you can always write them in exponentials. All of this is the reason we usually write a plane wave as something like exp(i(kx - wt)) with k the wavevector and w the frequency: you can write it out in sines and cosines to say that it really &quot;waves&quot; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":smile:" title="Smile :smile:" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":smile:" />
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K