Converted Cartesian coordinates to polar coordinates

touqra
Messages
284
Reaction score
0
I don't know where have I gone wrong...
I converted Cartesian coordinates to polar coordinates:

\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} +\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial y^2}= \frac{1}{2}(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2 }{\partial y^2})\Psi^2 - \Psi(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2})\Psi<br /> =\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial r^2}+ \frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial \Phi^2}

But on the left hand side (the Cartesian components) is just the Laplacian in 2D, but the final answer I got for the polar components is not equivalent to the Laplacian for polar coordinate system.
I'm missing the term \frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial r}
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You are misunderstanding something here.

{\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}\Psi^2<br /> = \frac{\partial}{\partial x}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\Psi^2<br /> = \frac{\partial}{\partial x}( 2\Psi \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x})<br /> = 2 ({\frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial x}})^2 + 2\Psi \frac{\partial^2 \Psi}{\partial^2 x}

That doesn't seem consistent with your (wrong) equation.
 
Last edited:
\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} +\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial y^2}= \frac{1}{2}(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2 }{\partial y^2})\Psi^2 - \Psi(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2})\Psi=\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial r^2}+ \frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial \Phi^2}

Ooops, I typed the wrong stuffs. I'm sorry.
It should read:

(\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial x})^2 +(\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial y})^2= \frac{1}{2}(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2 }{\partial y^2})\Psi^2 - \Psi(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2})\Psi

Next, I plug in the Laplacian for the polar coordinates, essentially cylindrical coordinate, with z constant, and I end up with:
(\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial x})^2 +(\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial y})^2= (\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial r})^2+ \frac{1}{r^2}(\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial \Phi})^2

Next, I am required to get the Euler Lagrange equation for a system. The above is just the potential part. The time derivative kinetic is just \frac{1}{2}m\dot{\Psi}^2
Taking the Euler Lagrange for the Cartesian, I end up with an expression from the potential part:
\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} +\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial y^2}
And this is just a Laplacian.

But when taking the Euler Lagrange for the polar coordinates, I end up with an expression \frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial r^2}+\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial \Phi^2}
and this is not equal to the Laplacian for the polar coordinates.
I am missing \frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial r}
 
Last edited:
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