I Constraints on potential for normalizable wavefunction

Gfunction
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
We know that in one dimension if ##E>V(\infty)## or ##E>V(-\infty)## then the resulting wave function will not be normalizable. The basic argument is that if ##E>V(\infty)##, then a stationary solution to the Schrodinger equation will necessarily have a concavity with the same sign as the solution itself for all ##x## greater than some value ##a##. So if the resulting wavefunction was positive after ##a##, then the wavefunction would also be concave up and curve away from the x-axis. Then the integral of the squared wavefunction would tend towards infinity since the wavefunction would never again go to ##0##. A similar argument can be made if the wavefunction was negative after ##a## and again for ##E>V(-\infty)##. We don't have this problem with the infinite square well or simple harmonic oscillator because the potentials go to infinity at ##\pm \infty##.

In short, my question is this: What are necessary and sufficient conditions for a potential to generate normalizable solutions?

I would prefer to keep things simple with a one-dimensional treatment that doesn't need to be as rigorous as say a functional analysis proof (so maybe constrain ourselves to potentials that are at least C2). But after that's accomplished, I definitely wouldn't mind a more advanced discussion.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The necessary and sufficient conditions for a potential to generate normalizable solutions are that the potential must be bounded from below, meaning that the potential must have a finite limit as x approaches infinity, and also that the potential must have an upper bound, meaning that the potential must have a finite limit as x approaches negative infinity. In addition, the potential must have properties that allow the wavefunction to fall off to zero at infinity, such as having a non-zero gradient at the boundaries, or having a periodicity that allows it to repeat in a way that it reaches zero at infinity. This is because the integral of the square of the wavefunction must be finite for the wavefunction to be normalizable.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top