Undergrad Confusion with superposition of states

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of superposition in quantum mechanics, particularly regarding an electron's relaxation from an excited state to the ground state. It is clarified that during this relaxation, the electron can indeed be in a superposition of discrete energy eigenstates, influenced by the coupling to the electromagnetic field. The dynamics of this transition are governed by principles such as Fermi's Golden Rule, which describes the probability of spontaneous transitions and photon emission. The participant also notes that upon observation of the emitted photon, the wave function collapses to the ground state, indicating a very short relaxation time. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the role of eigenstates and the electromagnetic field in quantum transitions.
ntt
Messages
2
Reaction score
1
TL;DR
Can an electron be in a superposition of energy eigenstates during relaxation after excited?
Since my major is not physics. My QM knowledge is not pretty good (Mostly self study). I am sorry if this question was asked multiple times in the forum.

I've learned that wavefunction can be written as a linear combination of eigenfunctions due to completeness property.
If an electron is excited. When it is relaxing back to ground state. Can the state of the electron during relaxation a superposition of two discrete energy eigenstates?

If so, during relaxation, is there dynamical law that describes the change of coefficient of each eigenstate with time? (I've looked up the spontaneous emission but still don't have a clear idea what governs the time of relaxation like the design of laser which utilizes a metastable level)

From my understanding, when we observed photon emitted from relaxation, this means we already observe the system which the wave function then has already collapsed to the ground state and the relaxation time is very short. Is my understanding correct?

Any interpretation and correction of my concept and additional reading resources would be greatly appreciated.

Thank everyone in advance for the replies.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have to carefully distinguish about which eigenstates you talk.

Take a hydrogen atom as a concrete example. You first treat it just as an electron in the Coulomb potential of the nucleus. Then you can evaluate the energy eigenstates of this Hamiltonian. If this were the full story, and your atom is in some energy eigenstate at ##t=0##, then it would stay in this state forever.

Now, however, there's also the electromagnetic field itself, and it's a quantum field, i.e., there are quantum fluctuations, leading to a coupling of the electron to the electromagnetic field. Taking this additional part of the Hamiltonian into account, which can be done perturbatively, you'll get a finite probability for a spontaneous transition from an excited atomic state to a lower atomic state and the emission of a photon.
 
  • Like
Likes aaroman
vanhees71 said:
You have to carefully distinguish about which eigenstates you talk.

Take a hydrogen atom as a concrete example. You first treat it just as an electron in the Coulomb potential of the nucleus. Then you can evaluate the energy eigenstates of this Hamiltonian. If this were the full story, and your atom is in some energy eigenstate at ##t=0##, then it would stay in this state forever.

Now, however, there's also the electromagnetic field itself, and it's a quantum field, i.e., there are quantum fluctuations, leading to a coupling of the electron to the electromagnetic field. Taking this additional part of the Hamiltonian into account, which can be done perturbatively, you'll get a finite probability for a spontaneous transition from an excited atomic state to a lower atomic state and the emission of a photon.

Thank you very much for your reply.

Your reply lead my reading to Fermi's Golden rule which is what I was looking for.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
I am slowly going through the book 'What Is a Quantum Field Theory?' by Michel Talagrand. I came across the following quote: One does not" prove” the basic principles of Quantum Mechanics. The ultimate test for a model is the agreement of its predictions with experiments. Although it may seem trite, it does fit in with my modelling view of QM. The more I think about it, the more I believe it could be saying something quite profound. For example, precisely what is the justification of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K