Complicated delta function integral

helpcometk
Messages
71
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi guys ,please look at the integral on the attachement.Does anyone have seen this integral before ?

Homework Equations


We have the following two properties :

∫δ'(x-x0)f(x) dx =-f'(x0)


δ(x^2-a^2)= {δ(x-a) +δ(x+a)}/2a


The Attempt at a Solution


Please help ,i have studied all the physics books available and I am starting searching for the answer in books of history.Im desperate .I couldn't find this integral nowhere no matter how hard i would search.

~ONE GUESS OF MINE ~
so can one say :∫{f(x){δ'(x-a) +δ'(x+a)}/2a } dx and then split this integral in two :

∫{f(x)δ'(x-a)/2a + f(x)δ'(x+a)}/2a} dx and now we use the first property i gave above
to get:
{-f'(a)-f'(-a)}/2a =-f'(a)/a ~ this just a guess and in the last step i have assumed :

f'(a)=f'(-a) is this last property true ?

This was just a guess ,and i need a definite answer so please don't reply if you are not sure about the answer.
 

Attachments

  • gggggggggg.PNG
    gggggggggg.PNG
    898 bytes · Views: 496
Physics news on Phys.org
helpcometk said:
δ(x^2-a^2)= {δ(x-a) +δ(x+a)}/2a
Are you sure of that? I get {δ(x-a) +δ(x+a)}/4a
 
haruspex said:
Are you sure of that? I get {δ(x-a) +δ(x+a)}/4a

I'd agree with the OP.

helpcometk said:
~ this just a guess and in the last step i have assumed :

f'(a)=f'(-a) is this last property true ?

This is not true in general. For example, take f(x) = x^2. f'(x) = 2x, which does not possesses the property f'(x) = f'(-x).
 
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